64-bit Fluidsynth?

Post a reply

Smilies
:D :) :( :o :shock: :? 8-) :lol: :x :P :oops: :cry: :evil: :twisted: :roll: :wink: :geek: :ugeek: :!: :?: :idea: :arrow: :| :mrgreen: :3: :wub: >:( :blergh:
View more smilies

BBCode is OFF
Smilies are ON

Topic review
   

Expand view Topic review: 64-bit Fluidsynth?

Re: 64-bit Fluidsynth?

by Major Cooke » Sun Jan 17, 2016 11:59 am

No. Randi already did it for us. There's no need qsynth.

Re: 64-bit Fluidsynth?

by sinl99966 » Sun Jan 17, 2016 12:24 am

What about next sites https://sites.google.com/site/qsynthwindows/ and https://sites.google.com/site/qsynthwindows/fsw64?
This site shows how to compile x64 FluidSynth and Qsynth
Does anyone tried this on?

Thanks.

Re: 64-bit Fluidsynth?

by Major Cooke » Fri Apr 03, 2015 12:48 pm

Thanks a ton, Randi. I appreciate it! I've updated the wiki to include the download link too.

Re: 64-bit Fluidsynth?

by Graf Zahl » Fri Apr 03, 2015 1:21 am

randi wrote:An interesting project to try sometime might be to "fix" it so it can use native Windows API calls instead of glib so that it can be built more easily for Windows systems.

Definitely. But I'd never expect something like this from developers who are this Unix-centric. Often they do not even understand where the problems with Windows lie.

Re: 64-bit Fluidsynth?

by randi » Thu Apr 02, 2015 9:01 pm

Here: FluidSynth in 64-bit glory

Compiled with the default VS2013 toolchain, so it only works on Vista and up. Turns out I should have paid attention to the warnings instead of assuming they were benign (since the majority were about ptrdiff_t -> int truncation). It wasn't using config.h, so <math.h> was not getting included, which meant all the fp math routines were using the default prototypes that returned ints. Disaster ensued.

Building in 64-bit also revealed a minor problem I had with the original 32-bit build, so I redid that. Anybody using it might want to redownload it.

An interesting project to try sometime might be to "fix" it so it can use native Windows API calls instead of glib so that it can be built more easily for Windows systems.

Re: 64-bit Fluidsynth?

by randi » Wed Apr 01, 2015 10:19 pm

Guess what! I built a 64-bit Fluidsynth DLL. Unfortunately, all it produced for sound was a loud high-pitched buzzing that drowned out all other sounds. (Maybe the scaling is way off?) No idea what I did wrong. Maybe I'll try again later.

Oh, and for posterity: The dependencies I needed were win-iconv, libintl, and glib.

Re: 64-bit Fluidsynth?

by VGA » Sun Mar 22, 2015 9:18 pm

I use Coolsoft Virtualsynth :-D

Although there is a little lag when a song is starting because it's preloading the 64mb soundfont I use I think.

Re: 64-bit Fluidsynth?

by randi » Mon Mar 09, 2015 4:28 pm

No, Windows uses PE, Mac uses Mach-O, and Linux uses ELF. They're not compatible with each other. And even if they were, the dependencies of the dll/dynlib/so would be different on the different systems.

Re: 64-bit Fluidsynth?

by Major Cooke » Mon Mar 09, 2015 12:29 pm

Wondering if there's a universal one where any of the three versions can just produce a re-usable dll by windows, mac or linux. If so, perhaps, in that case mental, you could provide?

Re: 64-bit Fluidsynth?

by _mental_ » Mon Mar 09, 2015 11:42 am

NeuralStunner wrote:
Edward-san wrote:No linux or mac? Your argument is invalid.
I don't think he uses either of those. Regardless, a win32 fluidsynth.dll is going to be just as worthless on those systems.
It's quite easy to build Fluidsynth on Linux, and with some minor difficulties on Mac. Only Windows version requires very complicated setup to do so.

Re: 64-bit Fluidsynth?

by NeuralStunner » Mon Mar 09, 2015 11:00 am

How's it any different from using any other system synth? But that's fine. I was just giving Major Cooke a tip to begin with.
Edward-san wrote:No linux or mac? Your argument is invalid.
I don't think he uses either of those. Regardless, a win32 fluidsynth.dll is going to be just as worthless on those systems.

Re: 64-bit Fluidsynth?

by Graf Zahl » Mon Mar 09, 2015 10:55 am

Of course you wouldn't. I prefer solutions that don't include system features that may become broken in the future. The MIDI stuff already fell victim to this once.

Re: 64-bit Fluidsynth?

by NeuralStunner » Mon Mar 09, 2015 10:11 am

Graf Zahl wrote:But then you'd have to worry about a SYSTEM DRIVER!
One that's stable and works in any other MIDI-capable program, yes. I don't see the problem.

Re: 64-bit Fluidsynth?

by Edward-san » Mon Mar 09, 2015 4:48 am

BASSMIDI
No linux or mac? Your argument is invalid.

Re: 64-bit Fluidsynth?

by Graf Zahl » Mon Mar 09, 2015 1:57 am

NeuralStunner wrote:Personally I'd recommend switching to the BASSMIDI driver. It's got great sound and I think performs better than Fluidsynth. You also then wouldn't have to worry about an extra library for 64-bit ZDoom builds.

But then you'd have to worry about a SYSTEM DRIVER!

Top