[LAU] Proposal: OpenDAWS (long)

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: <linux-audio-user@...>
Date: Wednesday, June 6, 2007 - 3:16 pm

Wonderfully, the linux audio opensource field has become nicely populated.
Opensource means freedom of choice. One is not tied to that $400 proprietary
bloated DAW program. Comes jack and one can dissect the functionality and
network smaller pieces (if one's system can handle the multiple processes).
Trememdous freedom of choice.

Problem is: No DAW program, opensource or otherwize, interoperates with any
other. Cakewalk works with Cakewalk, Cubase with Cubase, Ardour with Ardour,
etc. Each has its strengths and each has its adherents. Never the 'twain do
meet. (Lash is fine but the restriction remains.)

Proposal: OpenDAWS.

Just as Sun's Openoffice is not using what they call an open document format,
we need a open digital audio work-stations format. Such would enable us to
work in Ardour when this suits us, Rosegarden or Muse or LMMS or Traversa or
Qtractor or whatever works best for the song. It slso opens doors [SIC] for
collaboration with those using another program with no regrets.

Base it on XML, easy to parse with any number or os parsers around. Something
like:

.......

....

....

....

Step 1: Specify the XML DTD.

Step 2: Subclass a C++ XML Parsor (and Java--would look more or less the
same).

Step 3: A bare open room -- program to read and play such an animal using
jack. No GUI, no editing, just read and play to demonstrate concept. Do
plugins get set up here or manually using some jack patchbay? Both (if in the
xml, do them, but I can easily enough plug in others)?

Step 4: Get opensource (and proprietary) authors to support this format and
even go over to it.

What say you?

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[LAU] Proposal: OpenDAWS (long), David Baron, (Wed Jun 6, 3:16 pm)
Re: [LAU] Proposal: OpenDAWS (long), Adam Sampson, (Thu Jun 7, 1:26 pm)
Re: [LAU] Proposal: OpenDAWS (long), Paul Davis, (Wed Jun 6, 3:31 pm)
Re: [LAU] Proposal: OpenDAWS (long), Nick Copeland, (Wed Jun 6, 4:22 pm)
Re: [LAU] Proposal: OpenDAWS (long), Paul Davis, (Wed Jun 6, 5:06 pm)
Re: [LAU] Proposal: OpenDAWS (long), Rob, (Wed Jun 6, 7:25 pm)
Re: [LAU] Proposal: OpenDAWS (long), David Baron, (Thu Jun 7, 12:53 pm)
Re: [LAU] Proposal: OpenDAWS (long), Paul Davis, (Thu Jun 7, 1:51 pm)
Re: [LAU] Proposal: OpenDAWS (long), Nick Copeland, (Thu Jun 7, 2:56 pm)
Re: [LAU] Proposal: OpenDAWS (long), Paul Davis, (Thu Jun 7, 6:06 pm)
Re: [LAU] Proposal: OpenDAWS (long), Nick Copeland, (Thu Jun 7, 8:58 pm)
Re: [LAU] Proposal: OpenDAWS (long), David Baron, (Sat Jun 9, 7:40 pm)
Re: [LAU] Proposal: OpenDAWS (long), Paul Davis, (Thu Jun 7, 10:08 pm)
Re: [LAU] Proposal: OpenDAWS (long), Julien Claassen, (Thu Jun 7, 9:36 pm)
Re: [LAU] Proposal: OpenDAWS (long), Nick Copeland, (Wed Jun 6, 6:47 pm)
Re: [LAU] Proposal: OpenDAWS (long), Paul Davis, (Wed Jun 6, 7:49 pm)
Re: [LAU] Proposal: OpenDAWS (long), David Baron, (Thu Jun 7, 12:47 pm)
Re: [LAU] Proposal: OpenDAWS (long), Marc-Olivier Barre, (Thu Jun 7, 12:53 pm)
Re: [LAU] Proposal: OpenDAWS (long), David Baron, (Wed Jun 6, 4:48 pm)
Re: [LAU] Proposal: OpenDAWS (long), David Baron, (Wed Jun 6, 4:15 pm)
Re: [LAU] Proposal: OpenDAWS (long), Paul Davis, (Wed Jun 6, 4:20 pm)