Re: [LAU] Time of music in a seqennser

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: <paul@...>
Cc: A list for linux audio users <linux-audio-user@...>
Date: Saturday, March 15, 2008 - 12:48 pm

Paul Davis wrote:

VST plugins (especially soft synths) are designed to be limited.
Especially those who emulate old synthesizers are mostly all the same.
The only difference is in the GUI (and obviously in the limited set of
oscillators, filters and so on of that particular synth).

I can only speak for myself, but I guess that most people using open
source software are not interested in such kind of tools. There's no
reason to limit possibilities in the open source world because you don't
have to sell the same synth again and again.

I thought a lot of times about starting to write a soft synth similar to
those available in the VST world. But - again, at least for me - there's
no motivation, since I can fire up csound and create any kind of sound I
would imagine with a bunch of lines. Of course I don't have the shiny
graphical interfaces with rendered knobs. Instead I have unlimited
possibilities (as much oscillators as I want, connected in any possible
way, filters, effects, and so on).

It's all about marketing.

Yes, there are also commercial modular synthesizers which are versatile
as well. But, again, I can express much more (and more quickly) with a
bunch of lines in csound than using virtual patch cords. The main reason
to have virtual patch cords is marketing.

Moreover, even if we had VST plugins working perfectly on Linux, most
people wouldn't switch anyway. Linux is free, so it can't be as good as
an o.s. that costs money. Most musicians don't pay for software anyway,
but they perceive commercial software as better, because of its value in
money.

This is less true for a web browser, for instance. Everybody like
Firefox. But it's crucial for most kinds of software. Especially in art
and music - where a lot has to do with irrationality and subjective
perception - most people don't trust open source software.

Just my 2 cents.

-c.

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user

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

Messages in current thread:
[LAU] Time of music in a seqennser, Guus, (Wed Mar 12, 6:31 pm)
Re: [LAU] Time of music in a seqennser, Hartmut Noack, (Wed Mar 12, 10:16 pm)
Re: [LAU] Time of music in a seqennser, Paul Davis, (Thu Mar 13, 2:29 am)
Re: [LAU] Time of music in a seqennser, Hartmut Noack, (Thu Mar 13, 9:17 pm)
Re: [LAU] Time of music in a seqennser, Paul Davis, (Fri Mar 14, 2:06 am)
Re: [LAU] Time of music in a seqennser, Hartmut Noack, (Fri Mar 14, 1:34 pm)
Re: [LAU] Time of music in a seqennser, david, (Sat Mar 15, 6:50 am)
Re: [LAU] Time of music in a seqennser, Paul Davis, (Fri Mar 14, 1:55 pm)
Re: [LAU] Time of music in a seqennser, Cesare Marilungo, (Sat Mar 15, 12:48 pm)
Re: [LAU] Time of music in a seqennser, Dan Easley, (Sat Mar 15, 7:24 pm)
Re: [LAU] Time of music in a seqennser, Hartmut Noack, (Sat Mar 15, 3:08 pm)
Re: [LAU] Time of music in a seqennser, Darren Landrum, (Sat Mar 15, 4:45 am)
Re: [LAU] Time of music in a seqennser, Hartmut Noack, (Fri Mar 14, 3:00 pm)
Re: [LAU] Time of music in a seqennser, Mark Knecht, (Fri Mar 14, 2:51 am)
Re: [LAU] Time of music in a seqennser, Dave Phillips, (Thu Mar 13, 11:46 am)
Re: [LAU] Time of music in a seqennser, Robin Gareus, (Fri Mar 14, 1:27 pm)