linuxaudio.org

On 2/24/06, Rob  wrote:

quoted text
> On Fri February 24 2006 11:36, Arnold Krille wrote:

> > Yes, it is: Rosegarden doesn't need KDE (at least if the

> > programmers did their job). It just needs kdelibs which is

> > much smaller and faster to compile/install than whole KDE.

>

> I don't know whether this means the programmers did their job or

> not, but when I fire up rosegarden on my machine, it launches

> kdeinit, dcopserver, and all that other cruft if it's not

> already running.

>

> So even if you're running GNOME or IceWM or whatever, you are

> also running KDE while you're running Rosegarden, just not the

> desktop, panel, et al.

>

> I personally have no problem with that, because (1) I run KDE

> already and (2) Rosegarden has never been advertised as a

> lightweight anything, but I see their point.  I doubt other

> full-featured sequencer apps are much lighter.

>

> Rob

Well, I don't think that it can be labeled as full-featured as

Rosegarden et al, but seq24 does a decent job, although it is not so

much linear as it is pattern-based. It seems pretty light to me, and

if you're using a light desktop/wm, you probably don't mind missing

some features, I would think... I don't know, I had a lot of issues

with Rosegarden and the way it manages the instruments and how it

never remembered them if I re-open the file again at a later date, but

I think it's a great application just the same. But I'll likely use

seq24 myself, as it seems more like my hardware-based sequencer/synth.

So, to the OP, there's an option to look into if you can deal with

loop/pattern-based sequencers.
Dana