Hi,

They're not deprecated, I just added a note that the newer fluid
opcodes are recommended, since they are more stable or at least better
maintained (if I remember correctly, there was some issue with
imcompatiblity with the doubles version).

I think this coversation came up before, and it is more a problem of
the fluid engine. Is that right?

Cheers,
Andrés

On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 4:45 PM, Aaron Krister Johnson
 wrote:
> Hi developers,
>
> Any chance that future Csound versions could have the fluidsynth opcodes
> having access to tuning tables?
>
> Another question--I'm using the old csound fluidsynth opcodes (e.g. sfplay)
> for microtonality (their flexibility with pitch which is entirely absent in
> the newer fluidsynth opcodes). Is their deprecation more an issue that the
> old ones aren't actively developed anymore....or are the old ones buggy in
> some way? I hope there are no plans to remove them, unless some flexibility
> with pitch is introduced into the newer fluidsynth opcodes in their
> stead....like having an extra 'xfreq' or 'xkeynum' optional parameters stuck
> onto the end....
>
> Best,
> AKJ
>
> Aaron Krister Johnson
> http://www.akjmusic.com
> http://www.untwelve.org
>
>



-- 


Andrés


Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"

It's not a question of deprecation. The old ones just use soundfonts for raw synthesis and the new ones use them as they are designed to be used, as 'samplers'. Both uses are valid.

MKG from cell phone

On Mar 23, 2010 12:55 PM, "Victor Lazzarini" <Victor.Lazzarini@nuim.ie> wrote:

sfplay does not use fluidsynth. It uses its own soundfont implementation. 

I was not aware these were deprecated. I don't think they need to be;  a number of fixes made them more useful and less likely to break.

Victor

On 23 Mar 2010, at 16:45, Aaron Krister Johnson wrote:

> Hi developers,
>
> Any chance that futur...