soundhdack

I'm using PluggoJr 354 and I have a nice set of free Pluggo plugins that I've scooped up from around the Web and Internet. According to AudioUnitScan two of them have the same ID. Sonicreducer from the GleetchPlug bundle and RhythmGuidedEffects from the Collideascope Plugin Collection for Pluggo are the ones bumping heads. Is there a way to change one of the IDs? Thanks!

I'm using PluggoJr 354 and I have a nice set of free Pluggo plugins that I've scooped up from around the Web and Internet.  According to AudioUnitScan two of them have the same ID.  Sonicreducer from the GleetchPlug bundle and RhythmGuidedEffects from the Collideascope Plugin Collection for Pluggo are the ones bumping heads.  Is there a way to change one of the IDs?  Thanks!


pluggos-bumping-heads

Lots of views but no replies? Am I being stupid even asking the question? I mean, surely this has happened before... Anybody have any answers at all?

Lots of views but no replies?  Am I being stupid even asking the question?  I mean, surely this has happened before...  Anybody have any answers at all?


>Lots of views but no replies? Am I being stupid even asking the 

>question? I mean, surely this has happened before... Anybody have 

The reason they collide is that the person who created the plug-ins

gave them uniqueid numbers that collide, either by accident or by

inattention. The persons who created the original plug-ins would have

to change a line that lives inside the plugconfig object in the plug-in's

source code and remake the plug-in with a new uniqueid. You should

be contacting *them* about this, and, in the interim, decide which of the

on the floor there's a long wooden table/on the table there's an open book/

on the page there's a detailed drawing/and on the drawing is the name I took

>Lots of views but no replies?  Am I being stupid even asking the 
>question?  I mean, surely this has happened before...  Anybody have 
>any answers at all?

The reason they collide is that the person who created the plug-ins
gave them uniqueid numbers that collide, either by accident or by
inattention. The persons who created the original plug-ins would have
to change a line that lives inside the plugconfig object in the plug-in's
source code and remake the plug-in with a new uniqueid. You should
be contacting *them* about this, and, in the interim, decide which of the
two you would prefer to have around.
-- 
on the floor there's a long wooden table/on the table there's an open book/
on the page there's a detailed drawing/and on the drawing is the name I took
Gregory Taylor http://www.rtqe.net


Ok, thanks, I'll do that. The plugs were made by different people, though. I did read something here in the forum about plugconfig assigning random IDs, but I guess randomness isn't perfect. Thanks again.

Ok, thanks, I'll do that.  The plugs were made by different people, though.  I did read something here in the forum about plugconfig assigning random IDs, but I guess randomness isn't perfect.  Thanks again.


>Ok, thanks, I'll do that. The plugs were made by different people, 

>though. I did read something here in the forum about plugconfig 

>assigning random IDs, but I guess randomness isn't perfect.

No, it's *far* more likely that the persons in question just started by

duplicating an existing plug-in patch [say, from the Developer's Guide,

as the most obvious place to start], in which case it would keep

the uniqueid number it had. About a squillion people have done that,

although it's a bit more likely that they ask the Max forum why one of

their plug-ins passes AU scan and another one doesn't....

>Ok, thanks, I'll do that.  The plugs were made by different people, 
>though.  I did read something here in the forum about plugconfig 
>assigning random IDs, but I guess randomness isn't perfect.

No, it's *far* more likely that the persons in question just started by
duplicating an existing plug-in patch [say, from the Developer's Guide,
as the most obvious place to start], in which case it would keep
the uniqueid number it had. About a squillion people have done that,
although it's a bit more likely that they ask the Max forum why one of
their plug-ins passes AU scan and another one doesn't....
-- 
on the floor there's a long wooden table/on the table there's an open book/
on the page there's a detailed drawing/and on the drawing is the name I took
Gregory Taylor http://www.rtqe.net


At 8:11 PM -0600 12/17/06, Gregory Taylor wrote:

>>Ok, thanks, I'll do that. The plugs were made by different people, 

>>though. I did read something here in the forum about plugconfig 

>>assigning random IDs, but I guess randomness isn't perfect.

>No, it's *far* more likely that the persons in question just started by

>duplicating an existing plug-in patch [say, from the Developer's Guide,

>as the most obvious place to start], in which case it would keep

>the uniqueid number it had. About a squillion people have done that,

>although it's a bit more likely that they ask the Max forum why one of

>their plug-ins passes AU scan and another one doesn't....

I just spent a few minutes using Resorcerer (Mac OS X) to go through 

some of my own pluggos, to see if I could find a way to locate the 

uniqueid within the pluggo itself. No go. I'm surprised, as I would 

think the number (or "uniqueid") would be embedded somewhere within 

the final product... It must be transmogrified in some way...

Maybe a C74 rep could comment? Or perhaps they don't want us mucking 

around with uniqueid's of existing pluggos... :-)

202 Hack / PC-1600 User / VSTi Host / OMS Convert / Jack OS X

At 8:11 PM -0600 12/17/06, Gregory Taylor wrote:
>>Ok, thanks, I'll do that.  The plugs were made by different people, 
>>though.  I did read something here in the forum about plugconfig 
>>assigning random IDs, but I guess randomness isn't perfect.
>
>No, it's *far* more likely that the persons in question just started by
>duplicating an existing plug-in patch [say, from the Developer's Guide,
>as the most obvious place to start], in which case it would keep
>the uniqueid number it had. About a squillion people have done that,
>although it's a bit more likely that they ask the Max forum why one of
>their plug-ins passes AU scan and another one doesn't....

I just spent a few minutes using Resorcerer (Mac OS X) to go through 
some of my own pluggos, to see if I could find a way to locate the 
uniqueid within the pluggo itself.  No go.  I'm surprised, as I would 
think the number (or "uniqueid") would be embedded somewhere within 
the final product... It must be transmogrified in some way...

Maybe a C74 rep could comment?  Or perhaps they don't want us mucking 
around with uniqueid's of existing pluggos... :-)

Dan
-- 
Dan Nigrin
Defective Records
202 Hack / PC-1600 User / VSTi Host / OMS Convert / Jack OS X
http://www.defectiverecords.com
http://www.jackosx.com


On Dec 18, 2006, at 7:39 AM, Dan Nigrin wrote:

> At 8:11 PM -0600 12/17/06, Gregory Taylor wrote:

>>> Ok, thanks, I'll do that. The plugs were made by different 

>>> people, though. I did read something here in the forum about 

>>> plugconfig assigning random IDs, but I guess randomness isn't 

>> No, it's *far* more likely that the persons in question just 

>> duplicating an existing plug-in patch [say, from the Developer's 

>> as the most obvious place to start], in which case it would keep

>> the uniqueid number it had. About a squillion people have done that,

>> although it's a bit more likely that they ask the Max forum why 

>> their plug-ins passes AU scan and another one doesn't....

> I just spent a few minutes using Resorcerer (Mac OS X) to go 

> through some of my own pluggos, to see if I could find a way to 

> locate the uniqueid within the pluggo itself. No go. I'm 

> surprised, as I would think the number (or "uniqueid") would be 

> embedded somewhere within the final product... It must be 

> Maybe a C74 rep could comment? Or perhaps they don't want us 

> mucking around with uniqueid's of existing pluggos... :-)

Hacking the resources of plug-ins is definitely not supported. The 

unique id is located in multiple places (used in different 

situations) and hacking just one of them is bound to foul up your 

> At 8:11 PM -0600 12/17/06, Gregory Taylor wrote:
>>> Ok, thanks, I'll do that.  The plugs were made by different  
>>> people, though.  I did read something here in the forum about  
>>> plugconfig assigning random IDs, but I guess randomness isn't  
>>> perfect.
>>
>> No, it's *far* more likely that the persons in question just  
>> started by
>> duplicating an existing plug-in patch [say, from the Developer's  
>> Guide,
>> as the most obvious place to start], in which case it would keep
>> the uniqueid number it had. About a squillion people have done that,
>> although it's a bit more likely that they ask the Max forum why  
>> one of
>> their plug-ins passes AU scan and another one doesn't....
>
> I just spent a few minutes using Resorcerer (Mac OS X) to go  
> through some of my own pluggos, to see if I could find a way to  
> locate the uniqueid within the pluggo itself.  No go.  I'm  
> surprised, as I would think the number (or "uniqueid") would be  
> embedded somewhere within the final product... It must be  
> transmogrified in some way...
>
> Maybe a C74 rep could comment?  Or perhaps they don't want us  
> mucking around with uniqueid's of existing pluggos... :-)

Hacking the resources of plug-ins is definitely not supported.  The  
unique id is located in multiple places (used in different  
situations) and hacking just one of them is bound to foul up your  
plug-in in unexpected ways.

Well, I don't want to turn this into a bitch and moan session but it would be cool if there was an easy way to to change the uniqueids of Pluggos when they conflict. Maybe AudioUnitScan could do it, only asking for permission first before doing so, that way users are kept at a distance. It's not likely that either developer is going to change the uniqueid for either plugin for me, let alone send me the source.

Two different plugins made by two different people that I want to use together but can't. Bummer.

Well, I don't want to turn this into a bitch and moan session but it would be cool if there was an easy way to to change the uniqueids of Pluggos when they conflict.  Maybe AudioUnitScan could do it, only asking for permission first before doing so, that way users are kept at a distance.  It's not likely that either developer is going to change the uniqueid for either plugin for me, let alone send me the source.

Two different plugins made by two different people that I want to use together but can't.  Bummer.


>>Maybe a C74 rep could comment? Or perhaps they don't want us 

>>mucking around with uniqueid's of existing pluggos... :-)

>Hacking the resources of plug-ins is definitely not supported. The 

>unique id is located in multiple places (used in different 

>situations) and hacking just one of them is bound to foul up your 

Good to know, thanks for the official low down Tim!

>>Maybe a C74 rep could comment?  Or perhaps they don't want us 
>>mucking around with uniqueid's of existing pluggos... :-)
>
>Hi Dan,
>
>Hacking the resources of plug-ins is definitely not supported.  The 
>unique id is located in multiple places (used in different 
>situations) and hacking just one of them is bound to foul up your 
>plug-in in unexpected ways.

Quote: soundhdack wrote on Mon, 18 December 2006 14:01

----------------------------------------------------

It's not likely that either developer is going to change the uniqueid for either plugin for me, let alone send me the source.

> Two different plugins made by two different people that I want to use together but can't. Bummer.

Have you tried asking ? I think you may be surprised. 

Most of us who make (3rd party) Pluggo's, do so for the fun of it and are pretty approachable. Changing the unique ID is a trivial task, and as the most likely cause is that the author has copied part of another Pluggo (the probability of it being a coincidence is minute) it's probably a good thing that the developer's attention be drawn to it,

Quote: soundhdack wrote on Mon, 18 December 2006 14:01
----------------------------------------------------
  It's not likely that either developer is going to change the uniqueid for either plugin for me, let alone send me the source.
>
> Two different plugins made by two different people that I want to use together but can't.  Bummer.
----------------------------------------------------

Have you tried asking ? I think you may be surprised. 
Most of us who make (3rd party) Pluggo's, do so for the fun of it and are pretty approachable. Changing the unique ID is a trivial task, and as the most likely cause is that the author has copied part of another Pluggo (the probability of it being a coincidence is minute) it's probably a good thing that the developer's attention be drawn to it,
cheers
Roger


Yes, roger, I did send a request to both developers. So there's only just waiting now. Might be better for my health if I don't hold my breath, though. ;)

Yes, roger, I did send a request to both developers.  So there's only just waiting now.  Might be better for my health if I don't hold my breath, though.  ;)


>Yes, roger, I did send a request to both developers. So there's 

>only just waiting now. Might be better for my health if I don't 

Perhaps not. Welcome to "the gift economy."

>Yes, roger, I did send a request to both developers.  So there's 
>only just waiting now.  Might be better for my health if I don't 
>hold my breath, though.  ;)

Perhaps not. Welcome to "the gift economy."
-- 
on the floor there's a long wooden table/on the table there's an open book/
on the page there's a detailed drawing/and on the drawing is the name I took
Gregory Taylor http://www.rtqe.net


Quote: Gregory Taylor wrote on Mon, 18 December 2006 11:01

> >Yes, roger, I did send a request to both developers. So there's 

> >only just waiting now. Might be better for my health if I don't 

> Perhaps not. Welcome to "the gift economy."

I just received the source from Gregory Kellum who made the RhythmGuidedEffects plugin. All I have to do now is come up with something and pass it along to help keep the economy stable. :)

Quote: Gregory Taylor wrote on Mon, 18 December 2006 11:01
----------------------------------------------------
> >Yes, roger, I did send a request to both developers.  So there's 
> >only just waiting now.  Might be better for my health if I don't 
> >hold my breath, though.  ;)
>
> Perhaps not. Welcome to "the gift economy."
----------------------------------------------------

I just received the source from Gregory Kellum who made the RhythmGuidedEffects plugin.  All I have to do now is come up with something and pass it along to help keep the economy stable.  :)


> I just received the source from Gregory Kellum who made the RhythmGuidedEffects plugin. All I have to do now is come up with something and pass it along to help keep the economy stable. :)

That should be easy. Just change the uniqueid

number, recompile, and post for download.

> I just received the source from Gregory Kellum who made the RhythmGuidedEffects plugin.  All I have to do now is come up with something and pass it along to help keep the economy stable.  :)

That should be easy. Just change the uniqueid
number, recompile, and post for download.


>Figuring that one isn't exactly Rocket Science, is it?

-- 
on the floor there's a long wooden table/on the table there's an open book/
on the page there's a detailed drawing/and on the drawing is the name I took
Gregory Taylor http://www.rtqe.net


It was fun. (Hope you enjoyed my original response.) :-)

It was fun.  (Hope you enjoyed my original response.)  :-)


I just came across this old review of Pluggo 3: "...some of the plug-ins are the sonic equivalent of leaving a Fillet o' Fish in the glove box for a week or two—they can really stink up your track and render it virtually unusable." See, I would never even think that these days. ;)

http://www.macaddict.com/issues/2002/11/reviews/pluggo

I just came across this old review of Pluggo 3:  "...some of the plug-ins are the sonic equivalent of leaving a Fillet o' Fish in the glove box for a week or two—they can really stink up your track and render it virtually unusable."  See, I would never even think that these days.  ;)

http://www.macaddict.com/issues/2002/11/reviews/pluggo


Quote: soundhdack wrote on Tue, 19 December 2006 20:07

you is the last one here who did not have his source. :P

Quote: soundhdack wrote on Tue, 19 December 2006 20:07
----------------------------------------------------
> Haha!  I knew you'd say that.
----------------------------------------------------

you is the last one here who did not have his source. :P


Quote: Roman Thilenius wrote on Thu, 21 December 2006 12:22

> Quote: soundhdack wrote on Tue, 19 December 2006 20:07

> ----------------------------------------------------

> you is the last one here who did not have his source. :P

Yeah, well, I wouldn't really know. He told me that he was meaning to release the source publicly, clearly he hasn't yet. He also said that many effects in the collection needed work, have you made improvements to any of them?

Quote: Roman Thilenius wrote on Thu, 21 December 2006 12:22
----------------------------------------------------
> Quote: soundhdack wrote on Tue, 19 December 2006 20:07
> ----------------------------------------------------
> > Haha!  I knew you'd say that.
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
>
> you is the last one here who did not have his source. :P
>
----------------------------------------------------

Yeah, well, I wouldn't really know.  He told me that he was meaning to release the source publicly, clearly he hasn't yet.  He also said  that many effects in the collection needed work, have you made improvements to any of them?


> > you is the last one here who did not have his source. :P

> Yeah, well, I wouldn't really know. He told me that he was meaning to release the source publicly, clearly he hasn't yet. He also said that many effects in the collection needed work, have you made improvements to any of them?

no not yet, but i am very interested in his work.

some of them are very similar to some of my unreleased

plug-ins ... similar thinking structure at least, not

talking of the code layout, thats sometimes the

> > you is the last one here who did not have his source. :P
> >
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
> Yeah, well, I wouldn't really know.  He told me that he was meaning to release the source publicly, clearly he hasn't yet.  He also said  that many effects in the collection needed work, have you made improvements to any of them?
----------------------------------------------------

no not yet, but i am very interested in his work.
some of them are very similar to some of my unreleased
plug-ins ... similar thinking structure at least, not
talking of the code layout, thats sometimes the
harder part when sharing or cooperating.

Pluggos bumping heads...