Re: hardour (headless ardour)
Paul Davis <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.audio.ardour.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAFa_cKkwHZPj9tGyOBDmFmZ7vrQC895Zd8+Q0mfE_gCp9xoJ2w@mail.gmail.com> |
On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 4:01 AM, David Santamauro <[email protected] > wrote: > > > On 07/07/2014 06:26 AM, Paul Davis wrote: > >> >> On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 6:16 AM, David Santamauro >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> Paul, >> On 02/24/2014 08:06 PM, Paul Davis wrote: >> >> git, in the cairocanvas branch, now contains a standalone, >> command line >> program that loads and runs an Ardour session. It has no GUI and >> is not >> interactive via the terminal. >> >> What is the use-case for something like this? >> >> (1) a working example of the code required to load and run an ardour >> session >> (2) building standalone systems based on ardour that are controlled by >> means other than a GUI (MIDI, OSC, etc) >> > > Very interesting. What do you see as communication protocol between this > headless ardour and some future client application if not MIDI or OSC? It isn't something I'm thinking about. Various people ask from time to time about a non-GUI version of Ardour, so I took some work Carl Hetherington had done, cleaned it up just a little bit, and put it into the repository as a build target. MIDI (Mackie Control, probably) and OSC are the obvious choices, but in an ideal world there are better protocols like Euphonix stuff that one could consider. > Is the ultimate goal seeking functionality like these? > > http://www.soundcraft.com/apps/visi-remote.aspx?pid=176 > http://www.behringer.com/en/products/x32.aspx > I guess so, but I have way too much else on my plate to be thinking about this. _______________________________________________ ardour-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ardour.org/listinfo.cgi/ardour-dev-ardour.org