dednikko wrote:It was roughly one year ago I began lamenting that I can only use the envelope follower in LMMS to create the reactive filtering that I use in my music. Unfortunately this is STILL the case, as I am apparently too obtuse to suss out the instructions for getting a functional x64 lv2 for Infamous Envelope Follower out of this.
I very much appreciate your efforts, and look forward to using these tools when I manage to figure out the steps necessary.
Just to make sure, I am not missing a compiled lv2 somewhere on those pages, am I? Or perhaps in the KXStudio repos?
Sorry dednikko, there are users of all levels here (as it should be) and I often assume everyone is comfortable with using the terminal (which is a bad assumption). Falk has packaging this on his todo list, but I have no idea when he'll get to it. To install you just need to download and extract the tarball (if you don't care about the distortion go to the downloads section on my sourceforge project, otherwise click the button in the code section that says "Download snapshot." This will download a tarball which you must extract (use file-roller or whatever tool of choice). Navigate a terminal to that folder. Using thunar you can just right click the folder and select open a terminal here. Otherwise just start a terminal and use
Code: Select all
cd Directory/that_it_downloaded_to/infamous_plugins-codeblabla
to get there. From there you only need to run the install script using
. If you have qmake and the lv2-dev headers it should compile just fine and install into your lv2 directory. Come back and let me know if you have any issues. I'll help as much as I can.
linuxdsp wrote:Looked that way to me (only a quick look at the code) - in some cases this can provide optimizations above using conventional floating point math, but normally only in very specific cases (which should require detailed knowledge of the architecture and / or compiler). The main danger with these things in "generic" code is always that (even if they are commented with dire warnings etc) they can get picked up and used in other code ad hoc (often without proper appreciation of the technical issues). A lot of waveshaper algorithms can be better optimized with relatively simple (rearrangement of the) maths and in most cases something which is specifically designed as a waveshaper will need oversampling / upsampling too (which will be by far the greatest drain on CPU resources making this kind of optimization almost irrelevant in that case).
Yes, I'm manipulating the float through type punning. So the only float operations are the assign to a union and to the output, the other operations are integer manipulations. Heck, here it is straight from the source:
Code: Select all
//this bitfield punning buisness is bad form and you're a bad developer for
//even looking at code like this. But it works with gcc on x86 so I did it.
typedef union
{
float f;
struct
{
union val
{
uint32_t num : 31;
struct ieee
{
uint32_t significand : 23;
uint32_t exponent : 8;
} ieee754;
} value;
uint32_t sign : 1;
} parts;
}float_dissector;
...
void pluginRun(CHEAP_DISTORTION * plugin)
{
float_dissector f;
uint8_t index = (uint8_t)*plugin->Host.In[LV2_AGGRESSION];
while (plugin->Host.Begin < plugin->Host.End)
{
f.f = *(plugin->Host.AudioIn[0] + plugin->Host.Begin);
f.parts.value.num = (f.parts.value.num)>>index;
f.parts.value.ieee754.exponent += plugin->scale[index];
*(plugin->Host.AudioOut[0] + plugin->Host.Begin) = f.f;
++plugin->Host.Begin;
}
}
I meant the math isn't done using the fpu. I ought to look at the dissasembly. So its very architecture dependent, assuming the ieee754 implementation and endianness and everything is the same. My install script at least uses gcc, reducing the risk of other compilers being used but I understand someone might pull the code out and try to use it elsewhere, and with other architectures all bets are off. I mostly did it out of curiosity and personal desire. If its preferred by the community I can keep it in the devel branch and never include it in the releases (I prefer not to distribute binaries for something like this anyway). It has some artifacts because of the lack of oversampling or anything, but I like to think it gives it character.
Besides, I never said whether it was cheap for the processor time or just the quality of the plugin
I suppose this will cast a dark light on my project. Its already infamous.... just give the word I'll take it out of master if you think it best.
