[TylerE]

I doubt that. Audio software needs to run with as low a latency as possible... so you want to be really close to the metal.

[joeyrobert]

I agree. High-end audio manipulation will remain native, but I think for a simplified use-case (composition, lower quality renders) the browser is a good sell.

That and the tooling is almost here with MIDI.js[1], Web Audio[2] and Web MIDI[3] as a working draft.

[1] https://github.com/mudcube/MIDI.js/

[2] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Web_Audio_A...

[3] https://webaudio.github.io/web-midi-api/

[cocoggu]

Hey! I'm head of audio and MIDI at Flat.

In fact, latency and audio quality (because of file sizes for sampling and because of available resources for synthesis) are two big limitations in a browser.

We have big expectations about the upcoming Audio Workers ( https://github.com/WebAudio/web-audio-api/issues/113 ) to release advanced synthesizer.

Also, we want to enjoy the capabilities of the MIDI output features, in order to route MIDI signals to Virtual Instruments on the computer (through virtual MIDI ports)

[hanniabu]

Curious because this isn't my field...is Python close enough? If not python, what about Rust? Lua? All of above?

[PabloOsinaga]

we've done it - http://bandhub.com

[koide]

On mobile at least, it sucks (trying to force sign up, being presented with a page saying just 'unauthorized' on a link offered when you have not signed up). Also, from what I gathered, this is not an online daw or composition tool, is it?