Hi, On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 8:28 AM, S. Christian Collins < s.chriscoll...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I've downloaded them all... every single SoundFont-compatible VSTi I > could find, and not a single one of them comes anywhere close to the > accurate SoundFont reproduction of FluidSynth. Apparently, nobody else > bothers to support SoundFont 2.1 modulators. > > I want to give high praise to all of the programmers and contributors > who have made FluidSynth such a terrific SoundFont synth. To my > knowledge, FluidSynth and the Sound Blaster Audigy series stand alone as > the most perfect implementations of the SoundFont spec. The Live! never > had proper 2.1 modulator support and the X-Fi synth had so many bugs, it > was unusable! > > I have been using SoundFonts for all of my custom sampling work for > years (since 1994), and I have tried a lot of SoundFont-capable hardware > and software. As the hardware solutions are going the way of the dodo, I > think it is safe to proclaim FluidSynth as the current king of all > SoundFont synths! > > Unfortunately, most people will never get to use it for one simple > reason: FluidSynth does not exist in a popular plugin form such as VST. > I understand the licensing issues that have prevented the creation of a > VST instrument based on FluidSynth, but I am running into the hard, cold > reality that there are no good SoundFont synths available in VST form to > use in my music production workflow. Most of my music projects now must > be accomplished in Windows, and trying to use FluidSynth (or Qsynth) as > standalone applications alongside my music software is painful, to say > the least. I am having to consider other sampling platforms because of > this. > What do you think about CoolSoft's VirtualMIDISynth? http://coolsoft.altervista.org/en/virtualmidisynth The page mentions your GeneralUser soundfont, so I assume you already know about this program. Is there any chance that the developers of FluidSynth would be > interested in modifying the license to allow a VST to be an option, > perhaps something like what LinuxSampler does? I think it would do a lot > for the long-term viability of the FluidSynth project. In its current > state, it is simply too cumbersome to use in my workflow, and many > others will feel the same way and never give it the time of day. This is > a terrible shame for such a wonderful synthesizer. > I don't think that VST and LGPL could be mixed in a (legally) safe way, but I may be wrong. If that is possible, I am not against adding the clause, but this is only my own personal opinion. > These are my thoughts at 2:23 in the morning... :) > -~Chris > > _______________________________________________ > fluid-dev mailing list > fluid-dev@nongnu.org > https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/fluid-dev >
_______________________________________________ fluid-dev mailing list fluid-dev@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/fluid-dev
