Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | TheRealPomax's comments login

> As a standalone app, Audiocube offers tools, workflows, and processes that go beyond the capabilities of VST plugins.

But does it support VST/AU in order to load instruments rather than "samples"?


There is currently no VST/plugin support, although this is something I would like to include later on.

It's just too much development work at this stage - not only the VST integration itself, but building a full MIDI sequencer timeline, editor, etc to support instruments.

Other DAWs do this perfectly well so I'm focusing on the 3D virtual environment moreso than tradtional DAW functions. Audiocube isn't a tool to compete with the likes of Ableton and Logic, but something to run on the side.

Although, if I had a big enough team I would love to give it all of these features. I'm just doing it solo at the moment, so I need to have a narrower focus.


"Why You Should Not Write a DAW" (ADC 2024)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMlnh6_9aTc


Yeah this is an interesting talk. A full DAW is maybe over ambitious for one developer, but I don’t think vst plugins would be able to achieve what I wanted. For example vsts can easily spatialise individual sounds, but there is no way to then easily move the listening position through the scene, without a disgusting amount of automation - hence building a virtual 3d environment daw with more placement flexibility

... or start with an open source DAW that already has all the rest, and add the placement flexibility you want ...

But I'm speaking out of self-interest here, and anyway for now your output is limited to binaural stereo which is not really a viable target for production workflows at this point.


That's the thing: if you have VST or ReWire support, you don't need to implement any of that. That's now something someone can use a VST/ReWire bridge for, taking all that work off your plate. "If you need MIDI sequencing, or multi-pattern input, or randomized pattern generation, just connect your DAW of choice as input".

(And of course, "and if you then want to consume the result in another DAW, you can". Chaining up multiple DAWs because they're all good at different things is one of the more fun things to do ;)


Exactly. Some kind of audio bridge is one of the main priorities for me. I think this will really open up options, and almost make it like a virtual studio space/echo chamber for reamping stuff.

It's just a matter of working out the best way to enable multi-channel input, and connect to DAWs, I'm researching it and I've had some basic success but I think I need to go deeper into the programming grind to achieve it.


"Commercial jet collides with helicopter during landing", while not the article title, would be far more accurate.

Will this finally have a proper datetime formatter, too?

it'll work with Intl.DateTimeFormat

By understanding that it'll take over a decade, maybe multiple decades, to break even (because it's not a tech company) and planning accordingly.

Is it even "crack" when what you're actually doing is "just reading plain text requests and responses"? Maybe if you squint the whole "trying to find a valid email address" is cracking, but that's a bit like calling poking at doors to see which one swings open and then walking through it "forced entry".

Unfortunately he had no idea how to bake, let alone bake cookies, and his recipe made no sense at all. It was kind of a waste of money.

> It was kind of a waste of money.

Isn't that the entire point of everything done? Crazy wild ass things nobody in their right mind would try, but getting to watch someone else do it drives those views.


Usually the expectation is that this someone knows what they're doing, and it was weird how in this particular video that just didn't apply, at all. It was like watching him do chemistry video without having any idea what amounts of base chemicals to use or what steps to follow and just making it up in order to conclude "this doesn't work, the base chemicals are clearly bad" at the end of it =)

Yeah his recipe was very odd. That sort of cooking is very fiddly. I rubbished a whole batch of cookies a few weeks ago just by cooking them ~2 mins too long. Sweats seem to be very exacting one what you need to do to make them come out correctly. Other kinds of cooking you can +/- a lot of things and still get something good. Sweats on the other hand. You better get it 'just right'.

Cooking is art, baking is science.

Can confirm. Baking by mass, cooking by eyeballing amounts into the pan and constant tasting.

About the only time my cooking is science is candy. Every degree matters, percentage matters so much, etc. A few degrees means crystals are radically different.


Imo both cooking and baking are "science" until you have the requisite experience to mess around, then they both become art. You can absolutely guess your way into a great cake recipe based on feel.

I think the two important differences are that the results of bad cooking tend to be slightly more edible than the results of bad baking, so many people don't even realize they can't cook. And many more people are forced into cooking via necessity, so the average skill level is higher.


Having a temperature preference for steak is just that, preference. Saltiness is a preference. As is most things in cooking.

Raw dough is always raw dough. You can't fake rising, etc.

Not to mention, if you watch cooking/baking shows, you'll see just how much overlap there really is. Some challenges in Masterchef involves baked goods, cakes, macaroons, etc. Some challenges in the Great British Baking Show involves cooking things. Either to make savory pies or to make compotes or jams, etc.


It's certainly true that there is plenty of science in cooking and plenty of art in baking. My comment is very reductive.

That said, cooking is generally far more forgiving that baking. If you put some amount of chicken in an oven set to a temperature of "very hot", you'll eventually have cooked chicken.

If you mix some amount of flour, water, and yeast, let it sit for some amount of time, and then put it in a "very hot" oven, you're unlikely to end up with what anyone would call "bread". It may not even really be that edible unless you were to grind it back into a power and mix it with water.


I'll back you up here. While i don't do a lot of baking, I've done enough over my life to get a feel for what the ingredients do. I adjust enough that I think most folks would describe it as "not following the recipe".

I will often reduce sugar, add things (cocoa, nuts and so on). As an example if you add cocoa you need to add fluid to compensate. More butter (or oil) leads to a "wetter" crumb and so on.

It takes more experience than regular cooking to do this though, and th feedback cycle is slower.


That's on the package publishers, not NPM. They give you an `.npmignore` that's trivially filled out to ensure your package isn't full of garbage, so if someone doesn't bother using that: that's on them, not NPM.

(And it's also a little on the folks who install dependencies: if the cruft in a specific library bothers you, hit up the repo and file an issue (or even MR/PR) to get that .npmignore file filled out. I've helped folks reduce their packages by 50+MB in some cases, it's worth your own time as much as it is theirs)


It's much better to allowlist the files meant to be published using `files` in package.json because you never know what garbage the user has in their folder at the time of publish.

On a typical project with a build step, only a `dist` folder would published.


Not a fan of that one myself (it's far easier to tell what doesn't belong in a package vs. what does belong in a package) but that option does exist, so as a maintainer you really have no excuse, and as a user you have multiple MR/PRs that you can file to help them fix their cruft.

> On a typical project with a build step, only a `dist` folder would published.

Sort of, but always include your docs (readme, changelog, license, and whatever true docs dir you have, if you have one). No one should need a connection for those.


No, despite what you might personally feel, ASML and the Dutch government really do align with the US when it comes to the matter of "making sure ASML can keep existing".

It was never about that balance. It was always about populism.

They're not "meant to be hard", they're just normal texts. The question is literally "can you read this?" because if you can: "Cool! Want to help transcribe it because the constraining factor when it comes to digitizing cursive is literally how many humans we can get to help out".

Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: