If you are very focused on VST plugins and want an easy way to have everything, check this distro/respo. Comes with ArdourVST 32 and 64bit and tons of plugins:
http://kxstudio.sourceforge.net/ 2010/7/22 Johnny Ferguson <[email protected]> > I can somewhat see the analogy, but I dislike this view as it almost > assumes that linux audio is somehow impervious to flaws. When it's not > flawed though, it's somehow golden. > > I disagree with his statement that VST doesn't offer much. For effects he > could be right, but in terms of VSTi he's quite wrong. (and on that, I > question how much he understands VST). Until we get LV2, we'll be forced to > rely on WINE hacks, or to scramble through source code intended for windows > hosts. In the end, I don't see VST as relevant any more, and it's a waste of > effort to get it working on linux. The standard was only ever intended for > effects, and the implementation of instruments is a mess. I only defend VST > in any capacity because it works extremely well on the platforms it was > intended for, regardless for my feelings towards its implementation. Until > LV2 comes around, it's the best available. (Though JACK-Rack has some pretty > good effects as well, I love the saturator effects, and arctan distortion is > pure bliss) > > I also don't share his situation as I'm rather familiar with computers. > I've been using them for a little over 16 years now, have done programming, > have studied computer science at the university level (which was loaded with > a little too much theory for my liking). I know how computers work. I've > written working code in languages from Assembly to Scheme. > > Despite that, I don't think any level of technical brilliance can save > programs from bad design (this is from a usability perspective). A trait my > other technical friends find me kind of odd for, but I'm a big picture kind > of guy. > > I don't feel so strongly for linux audio that I lose any sleep over it. I > paid 75 EUR for a copy of renoise, and it's been sitting on my hard drive > unused. I associate more with the artist personality, so I don't feel > compelled to write code every time I feel like being expressive. Nor do I > feel like reading through 20 pages of documentation that is unmaintained to > see how I can cobble things together that through historical precedent, > could be achieved in easier ways. > > I think when linux audio becomes usable, I'll hear about it. For what it's > worth, it will stomp that crap out of windows and mac. I have yet to give > qTractor a try, so I may revise earlier opinions, but if my experience has > shown anything, it's that the screenshots usually look quite impressive, but > you load the program and it runs for about 2 minutes before the sound cuts > out for some unimaginable reason, or you can't find the function you need. > > When you use a tool, you should focus on the task said tool performs, not > the tool itself. The tool should be transparent. If I had to consider the > workings and parameters of the guitar each moment I played it, the thing > would never make a sound. > > This of course is my own view of creativity and how linux offerings bear on > that process. People are welcome to their rosy opinions, but I'm getting to > the point where I'd rather work with analog modulars and a tape deck than > try to coax something expressive out of linux audio. > > Not sure how relevant this discussion is to the LP mailing list though. I > have to praise LP as the one piece of music-related OSS that isn't a piece > of junk, and manages to be flexible while still usable. The documentation is > also quite comprehensive, and the snippets database is a terse and effective > goldmine. > > -Johnny > > > On 07/22/2010 09:20 AM, Dave Phillips wrote: > >> Greetings, >> >> An interesting take on an experience similar to Johnny Ferguson's : >> >> http://www.linuxmusicians.com/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=2591#p11388 >> >> Best, >> >> dp >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> lilypond-user mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user >> > > > _______________________________________________ > lilypond-user mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user >
_______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
