Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!wuarchive!usc!apple!bionet!synoptics!unix!hplabs!hpl-opus!hpnmdla!roger
From: roger@hpnmdla.HP.COM (Roger Petersen)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: X11R5 wish: better sound
Message-ID: <990004@hpnmdla.HP.COM>
Date: 7 Aug 90 05:49:45 GMT
References: <990003@hpnmdla.HP.COM>
Organization: HP Network Measurements Div, Santa Rosa, CA
Lines: 37

In comp.windows.x, john@acorn.co.uk (John Bowler) writes:

> >Right now, there's the XBell() and XChangeKeyboardControl() functions,
> >which allow setting the pitch, duration, and volume, and then generating
> >the sound.
> 
> But which give absolutely no guarantees that the server will be able
> to do this and, worse, there is no way of finding out what the server will
> do.
> The more you ask for, the less likely you are that any server can
> do it... 

True.  But *if* the server can perform these functions, it shouldn't take
much more to perform the same function using an array for input.  And if the
server can't deal with sound, it can ignore/alter the array commands just
like it does the existing sound commands.


>                                            The extension gives
> considerable freedom to the server (eg, the sounds won't necessarily
> be played one after the other, the server might even stop doing
> anything else while playing the sound, you may not get any choice
> about sample rate and so on).

I wouldn't have guessed that generating the sounds in the proper order would
have been the main difficulty.  If anything, I guessed that generating them
in a single, fluid, continuous stream would have been the challenge.

A command that accepts an array of tones for input wouldn't be required
to generate them smoothly and synchronously.  However, a server that had
a good, smooth XSound()/whatever command would allow for some impressive
musical programs.


So now let's talk about handling multiple voices, noise, sustain, decay... :-)

Roger Petersen