> Rui Nuno Capela wrote:
I completely understand. However logically this leads to a slower work
flow and far higher disk space for those of use that buy loops and
have a large library:
Library 1 recorded at 136 BPM
Library 2 recorded at 128 BPM
Library 3 recorded at 124 BPM
Session A tempo 118 BPM
Session B tempo 140 BPM
With Acid I keep one Library directory on disk. When I drop the loop
into the session they are resampled for tempo (not pitch) on the fly.
Fast and easy.
With the flow qtractor currently has (and every other Linux loop
friendly app I know of) I have to do this:
1) Resample Libraries 1, 2 & 3 to 118 BMP
2) Resample Libraries 1, 2 & 3 to 140 BPM
3) Point Session A to the 118 BPM directory
4) Point Session B to the 140 BPM directory
Backup require that I either back up every tempo or resample libraries
again in the future after a drive problem.
What happens when I decide that 140BPM wasn't quite right and my video
producer needs or just wants 142 BPM? With Acid I up the tempo 2 BPM
and I'm done. What do I do with this flow? (A lot of work I think, and
when he tells me "Sorry, I meant 143 BPM I shoot him or lose my gig.)
What will qtractor require of me if I do tempo changes within the
song, even if it isn't supported today? Resample at every BPM from 140
BPM down to 120BPM in 0.1 BPM increments and place these into the
session by hand? I shudder!
Please note I'm not trying to pick on anyone or any ideas here. It's
just that I've used these Windows loop programs for years and have a
pretty good idea of the pitfalls of trying to live long term with the
current qtractor flow. I think it will be harder for the creative
process. Acid is probably the most 'fun' program I've used over the
years. I'd love to have as much 'fun' with qtractor someday.
Linux-audio-user mailing list