Hey there, Daisy enthusiasts!
Let me take a moment to introduce myself and share why I’m here.
I’m currently in a musical computation doctorate program at the University of São Paulo, Brazil (USP). I have joined a free software course, which has ignited my passion for open-source projects and the boundless creativity that emerges from collaborative programming. As part of my coursework, I’ve been assigned the task of contributing to a free and open-source project. While my course primarily focuses on larger open-source projects like React, I was able to make a case to my course teacher about the potential of Daisy. Consequently, I secured the opportunity to contribute to this project. Since I already have experience with Daisy Seed board, I’m looking forward to applying it to enhance the project.
Based on topic such as:
in Daisy Forum, I believe that a contribution focused on flexible parameterizable players would be welcomed by the Daisy community.
At this juncture, I am contemplating two distinct directions for my contribution, and I’d love to gather insights from the experienced members of this community to make an informed decision.
Option 1: Simplicity with a Class like Pure Data ‘tabread4~’
One approach I’m considering is implementing a straightforward class akin to ‘tabread4~’ in Pure Data. This would provide users with a simple and efficient means of wavetable reading, making it accessible to those who prefer a more direct and hands-on approach to audio programming. While this approach may lack some of the advanced features, it can serve as a robust foundation for basic wavetable synthesis and granular players.
Option 2: A High-Level Granular Player
On the other hand, I’m also contemplating a more high-level approach – the creation of a granular player. This player would come equipped with a plethora of parameters, such as grain size, spectral lock (allowing pitch-independent playback), grain envelope shaping, and more. Such a versatile tool would cater to those seeking a more intricate and versatile wavetable reading solution, offering a range of creative possibilities for sound design and manipulation.
My aim is to align my efforts with the broader needs of the Daisy community. So, I’d love to hear your thoughts on these two directions. Which option do you believe would be more beneficial and impactful for the Daisy project and its users? Your valuable insights and feedback will guide my contribution, and I’m excited to embark on this journey together with you all! 
Yes, I am aware of pd2daisy, plugdata, and other software for converting PD patches into Daisy programs. I have tried them, and they are really great and useful. As you already mentioned, I am aiming to contribute to the DaisySP repository specifically. I was trying to figure out if such a “port” of this object to DaisySP would be useful for the community or if it would be too “simplistic.” So, I thought about coding a higher-level module that could be considered a “granular player” offering control over parameters such as the ones mentioned above. This way, users could use it and skip all the necessary implementation for granular manipulation.
My uncertainty revolves more around whether a “class similar to Pure Data’s tabread4~” would be too simplistic and have limited value for the community. In that case, a higher-level granular player with control over granular parameters, like the ones mentioned earlier, could be more useful. Such an approach would still be based on the techniques used in tabread4~ but might not offer as much versatility, as it would primarily be used for granular manipulation rather than, for example, as a wavetable oscillator.
