Virtual eurorack modular synthesizer vcv
Looks interesting but what sort of free open source software requires you to register and login to use it?
They can stick that NWO bullshit where the sun don't shine as far as I'm concerned.
The Code of the Modules is Open Source , so they could be integrated in the firmware maybe too..
I like the Concept, nice to play around with, though many modules are missing,
NWO? Harsh words for a startup.....
If you need to register and then login to a central server to use an application it's hardly free and open is it?
What do you think Richard Stallman would say about such an egregious invasion of privacy?
It's so totally against the spirit of open source software.
They are probably in breach of the licenses on the software they are using by doing it as well.
they are clearly displaying licenses, and also providing full source code.
I don't see any evidence when looking at the source code of license infringement, and its why they are avoiding GPL'd code.
looks like registering is for ease of distribution and installation for users (and later for sales of modules), but looks like you can avoid if you wish by editing files.
That may be a trivially easy thing for you but for not for the average user.
I don't want to have to anyway.
I wouldn't want to use software developed by people that would put that sort of crap in their software anyway.
It's intrusive, totally unnecessary and totally unrelated to the purpose of the software.
Having used VCV Rack.. it does NOT require login after initial install. Editing, saving and loading all work. 
yeah, its getting a lot of attention, with mostly very positive feedback.
(SonicTalk featured it yesterday, and they were heaping lots of praise on it)
Im actually quite interested in it due to the code they have open sourced.
I also read the 'open source' tag line a little different , many basically read open source = free.
But I dont, and I dont think thats what VCV is either... I think VCV rack has a different 'dream'.
I think the idea is, because its open source, ANY developer can create new modules for it... its an open API.
This I think is much more interesting ... to have virtual modulars take off in way similar to eurorack, we need:
- an API, similar to VST, that is free, and available to any developer(big or small) to build new modules.
- an API, allows developers to potentially develop other HOSTs (again like VSTs)
- the API, needs to not be 'owned' by a company (as other companies don't like this much)
I think this is what VCV meant by it being open source, the rack and modules are just implementations, but they can be taken in other directions by others... alternative implementations.
sure this is perhaps not interesting to any one except developers until 3rd party developers starting adopting and create additional modules or rack implementations ... thats when users get the pay-off.
of course, that may not happen, again the nature of open source, 1000's of proposals/idea, and only a few stick, perhaps this will be successful, or perhaps it will just inspire something that will be 'the thing'
... this IS the spirit of open source, its not about free, its about sharing, its about allowing software/hardware to live in alternative forms, even if the original developer becomes uninterested. the software has its own life.
I think your idea about an open standard for audio modules like a virtual eurorack is a great idea.
Although I object to the need to register with VCV the code seems clean and well organised.
I still don't like the having to register but after playing with it for a while I have to admit I really like it.
I've been looking at the code at it's very clean and simple, very well written C++.
Even I can understand it and can find where to start to build my own modules and the whole project is under a hundred files, nice work.
It uses openGL and other standard cross platform libraries which I also really like.
From the look of it building new modules seems as simple as taking an existing fundamental one and editing it and adding it to the list of fundamental objects. Nice.
I'm with you on this, though I don't see it as big of a problem.
I'm sure you can edit that out of the software and implement your own way of adding the extension modules (they are open as well, so really only the installation mechanism is what you need that password for). So, just go ahead and make your own fork of the software. I'm sure you can use a git repo or some other free cloud storage thing as a software repository to add a simple "package manager" in the spirit of linux. Or, just make debain packages for the vcv rack and each of its extensions. Its all open, there is nothing stopping anyone, which I think is great!
On looking at the code it doesn't seem to be to difficult to edit out the login function.
I had expected an impenetrable mess of thousands of files and endless pages of obscure undocumented code but have am very pleasantly surprised at how simple, small and clean the code is.
I'm busy for the next few days but hope to get round to loading it up in an ide and seeing if i can't get it to compile from source and run and then try making some add on modules late next week if i can find time.
please keep on-topic about the product, and do not branch off into 'meta' discussions.
there are better forums on the internet to discuss open source and its ethics.
(this is not aimed particular at any user... its a general notification)
background/update on moderation guidelines:
after a spate of recent post/topics that we deemed unacceptable, @Johannes and I discussed moderation and ways to prevent a repeat, to ensure the forum was not filled with in-fights.
unfortunately, we decided, for now, it was best that discussions should be kept to what brings most users here, that is topics related to Axoloti, dsp, etc... and to minimise the 'meta' discussions.
we are not minimising the importance of these types of discussion, rather saying there are better places to have them... places where users go to read/discuss them.
guidelines:
- posts which branch off into meta or political discussions, offensive language, name calling, will be removed
- moderators posts are not 'up for discussion' - if you want to discuss them , do this via PM with @Johannes and myself
- if you find a post offensive, report it do not respond to it. (we do not care 'who started it!')
- also we don't want to spend large amounts of time moderating (rather developing), so if a topic goes off-course, we will just remove it from the start, taking good n' bad posts alike.
- repeat offenders will be given a 'timeout'
So if there's no need to register to use it, does anyone know if it will work on a Raspberry Pi3 running the ubuntu MATE distro (or any distro really as long as it's on the Pi3)?
I think I already know the answer, but I'm asking just in case!
I didn't see any ARM binaries on the site, but if you compile it from source, then I don't think you'll have any trouble getting it to run.
Id be interested to hear how it performs....
some on PCs/Macs are claiming its got high cpu usage, so that does not bode well for a rPI3.
on the other hand the MI code is optimised for ARM, but not SSE
(though the non MI modules are not optimised for ARM)
its using OpenGL for the UI, so be interesting to hear how that performs on the rPI3.
Thankyou both, but they're the dreaded words I was hoping I wouldn't hear 'to build it from source' 
I only tried it twice with other stuff, but it never worked either time. If there's a step-by-step on what to type, or something guaranteed to make me understand the process, I'll definitely give compiling it for ARM a go, but I'd need to see something solid that looks simple enough to understand and follow first.
As with Mark, I'm interested in the performance too, cause while the Pi3 isn't exactly a powerhouse, it still might make a nice little standalone gadget even if it could only handle a small amount of modules.