>jj >Note) Also, i think that in the future, the actual internal "MIDI channel
>to output buffer" hard coded mapping should be replaced by an API.
>
>Tom>Shouldnt be the user in charge of properly mapping any multichannel
>rendered output?
I prefer thinking of "MIDI channels mapping" (done i
> You mean 5.1 (i.e 6 channels)
> Sorry i dont' understand this index 5 ?.Does Surround could follow any others
> know buffers ?
I think each audio channel should receive the full spectrum. fluidsynth
shouldnt be in charge of rendering the subwoofer channel. But these are
implementation details
>In fact I believe that no matter how many output buffers the user calls it
>with, fluid_synth_process should always render all playing voices to those
>buffers (provided that nout >= 2).
yes, this is what fluid_synth_process() actually does (apart the internal
mapping "MIDI channel to ouput bu
> fluid_synth_process() behaves like fluid_synth_nwrite_float()
Except for the fact that it doesnt handle fx channels.
> Consequently nout and out array must be set to sufficient size (nout >= 2 x
> synth->audio_channels).
Not necessarily. I think fluid_synth_process() should also be usable for
