[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Tue, 25 Sep 2001, Michael Stutz wrote: > although i'd love to find the time and energy to play with the new > software i hear about by lurking on the linux-audio-dev mailing > list.
Or assimilating all the info going out on the new linux-audio-user list... > > I'm finally committing to Ogg for audio, losing MP3. > > sounds like a good move - is the sound quality better now? Keeps getting better all the time. My attitude now is that it's good enough for the purpose -- cheap, fast dissemination. Neither format sounds as good as the original recordings which are either raw audio or WAV formats, but are easier to manage. > > But that raises the question of what kind of free software extensions > > are useful to artists. Anyone find these things useful? What sort of > > things would you like to see? ... > so my point is that artist's tools needn't be different from any other > computer users tools... a good tool doesn't dictate the intention, and if > a software extension is useful to anyone, it's useful to an artist. > > i don't mean to sound negative - but it's very hard to suggest what kind > of things should go in that section, when the scope is so huge. Well, it's true. We all cat the same, all use vi or emacs like anyone else -- the question is whether certain extensions, like an emacs novel-mode or script-mode say, might be useful ... and then perhaps maybe not? Most useful thing to me is this discussion, finding out what people are doing out there and what they're using to do it.
