Audiounits, the beginning of the end! Options

[BusError]

adc is definitely not free!
the basic "x" kit is only $20, but all other sdk's are $700-$1200.
codewarrior does support cocao, and it is of course a "c" derivation.
$700 for codewarrior and a further $700 for apples' cocoa sdk will buy you into audio unit developement.
only dragans' knowledge to accumulate and we're winning...
m£r!e!

No AudioUnits development is free.

Apple developer tools are provided with the OS (10.2) and was always available both for download (free) and even installed as a disk image on QuickSilver towers.

With that, you have ProjectBuilder, and you can write whatever component in whatever language you want. That include Kernel extensions, drivers, audiounits (samples are available) cocoa & carbon applications, and command line tools of course.

So, get going

[damann]

thanks BusError.
i will be publishing a list of online resources for dsp coding soon.
i am a member of adc.
any rookies interested here should check out codewarrioru.com,
dspguru.com, richard dobsons' home page, numerical recipes...
as i said, a list coming soon!

[damann]

oh yeah, i should have mentioned that the sdk comes with 10.2 when you buy it...

[shahasad]

Since the Core Audio Framework is written in Objective-C, and uses NS Objects and classes, can one write an app in C++ that takes full advantage of Core Audio and Audio Units?
or
Does one have to write a program in Objective-C?

Apple seems to be pushing developers in the Obj-C direction...

[shahasad]

Apple Audio

Harmony-Central's Programming Section

These sites have tons of useful info and sample code & algorithms for audio....


Hope this helps

[shahasad]

SampleCode

Core Audio Swiki

These are the sites I meant to post...

Sorry

[damann]

thanks shahasad,
if you're writing something from the ground up, it's best to use objective c++.
existing code can of course be re-compiled , there's lots of literature around, it's all pretty standard stuff, c++ really...
"you'll just feel a small prick" seems to be the relevant quote.
i WILL post that list soon, thanks for reminding me!

[peterkirn]

Hang on a second!! Are Audio Units Cocoa ONLY? That could be a major roadblock to developers porting OS 9-based VSTs. Carbon would make development faster. That makes me even more confused about the AU kit Emagic is touting to make switching easier.

Hang on a second!! Are Audio Units Cocoa ONLY? That could be a major roadblock to developers porting OS 9-based VSTs. Carbon would make development faster. That makes me even more confused about the AU kit Emagic is touting to make switching easier.

No I believe you can use Java and Carbon to create Audio Units.

Conventional Wisdom backs this up because Emagic is claiming to offer a simply library tool to port Carbon VST's to Audio Unit which undoubtedly means Audio Units can and will be based on Carbon for the forseeable future.

[shahasad]

The only drawback to using the Carbon Library to port apps is that it is not as optimized for OS X. It was initally intended as a quick fix for developers to use in the meantime until they get their apps ported to Cocoa. The foundation frameworks and NS object classes (As weel as core audio and other Cocoa frameworks) operate at the lowest level of the OS. Carbon does not. Carbon apps can import classes from these, but it is not the same as writing a stright cocoa app.


As for Java, I would never use a Java-based recording app as java is not written for any particular hardware platform and does not contain any low-level memory managent and would be deathly slow.

Internet Explorer is a carbon app. Take that how you will.