On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 6:43 AM, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
i don't agree with you that its about a type of music. it is about the
difference between some different ways of producing music, and not
just two of them. there are certainly approaches to making music that
are not well served by a DAW. but they are approaches to the
production of music, not kinds of music.
> OTOH, this does not mean that some other people (who may be
of course not. but the question still remains whether that particular
group of people would rather deal with a complex app that is tuned to
their needs or a complex system that can, optionally, be tuned to
their needs. the question doesn't change. there are people who are far
happier to deal with PD or Max than with a collection of plugins
inside a modular host - its the same kind of distinction.
> It's also foolish to suggest that the 'all inclusive universal
i think you're wrong. its not that a DAW represents one particular
musical culture, it just reflects some cultures of music production
and not others. the notion that there is ever "one tool" for a task as
incredibly varied as producing music is absurd. nobody with half a
brain suggests that any DAW can be that tool.
> Also, 'ignoring the bits you don't need' is not always as simple
i think you over-estimate the impact of this, although i agree that
its not zero.
> And the most perverse consequence of preferring complex apps
i return to my earlier points above. why would you imagine that
tinkering with "the all inclusive universal DAW" is ever going to
produce the right tool for each individual or minority need. the whole
concept is just misformed.
> learning all of it. I'm at the mercy of its developers, and
not to be mercenary about it, but the difference is that if your needs
were that important and not being met by anything available to an
intolerable degree, you could (or some organization could) choose to
pay to have your needs met and not face any licensing/access issues in
doing so.. the open source nature of ardour, like the open source
nature of emacs and firefox and linux, doesn't mean that its going to
cater to everyone's needs as-is. the difference with protools is that
you can't even consider this as an option. is that a big difference?
it depends on whether a tool like ardour stands any hope of being the
solution. for people who like to make music with renoise or with
ensembles of cassette players and violins played with pencil erasers,
it very well may not be.
Linux-audio-dev mailing list