******************************************** 2010/4/26 Jörn Nettingsmeier <[email protected]>
> On 04/26/2010 08:47 AM, Louigi Verona wrote: > > Hey guys! > > > > I was wondering about the following. > > On Windows we have lots and lots of plugins and synthesizers and effect > > racks. On Linux the selection is much less variable. > > > > However, am I correct in understanding that the variety of the Windows > > synths and plugins merely means that people take several core modules and > > just rearrange them into different GUIs? > > Am I correct in understanding that there are only several major > algorithms > > for things like filters, delays, reverbs and choruses? > > in my view, the situation is mixed. there is a lot of utter bullshit > going on, eqs and "mastering" compressors seem to have the greatest > voodoo factor. then some people sell you simple convolvers as > oh-so-great emulators of vintage stuff... i think it's justified to say > that these basic building blocks are widely understood, with little room > for ground-breaking improvements. > > it's either in great user interfaces or cutting-edge (and patented) > technology that proprietary stuff kicks our collective asses (which is > fine in my book). > > there are many truly revolutionary algorithms and interface designs that > have no free software equivalent, nor will they for the forseeable > future. stuff like ableton live or the waves reverbs come to mind, or > (gasp!) melodyne. or advanced restauration tools like really good > denoises and declickers. then there's adaptive convolvers that can > tackle non-linear stuff (like the "liquid" gear marketed by focusrite) - > no ready-to-use free equivalents exist for this. whether you need it or > not is another question. as it stands now, we can't emulate an UREI, the > closed source folks can. but sampo s. is hot on their tracks :) > > the audio fundamentals (controlling spectrum, delay, frequency response, > and space), i.e. the basic things you mentioned that you need to get a > mix done, is all there, in varying degrees of usability and slickness, > and i have never looked back. > > then again, i'm not tied into a workflow that needs maximum efficiency. > stuff like protools does have its uses - it's hard to envision an > environment where a seasoned engineer could be faster and more > productive. but often, all that you get for your money is a fake brushed > aluminum widget with huge, wasteful and incorrectly modelled VU meters > and fake rack ears... caveat emptor. > > but in all fairness, open source is covering ground in this area, too. :-D > > best, > > jörn > > > ****************************** > HI jörn I totally agree here. We can, and do produce music that is a s good as any thing in the comercial sector. We may work a different way to some of the more commercial offerings but we still achieve the same level of professional sounding music. Cheers Bob _______________________________________________ > Linux-audio-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev >
_______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
