On Thu, 03 Sep 2009 23:18:39 +0200
Hartmut Noack wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
here's the problem: in your eagerness to spite these people you think are bad
musicians, you would also thwart good musicians who have no interest in sound
design. and this is even though the only negative consequence of an abundance
of presets is that people may use them to make bad music, which you aren't
forced to listen to and so isn't really any of your business.
> Jaron Lanier (I know, he is controversal and I do not consider him a
quasi-religious conclusion aside, it's a spurious analogy given that the violin
is a simple instrument without enough modifiable parameters to benefit from any form of presets.
in fact, the violin is analogous to the preset, not to the underlying virtual
instrument. (with the obvious and not altogether flattering consequences for your
analogy). you play the violin as you would play a given preset, well or badly. but
few would suggest you should be required to construct or modify a violin before you
are entitled to play it.
> get the whole story:
no, there really isn't. you confuse software capability with user intent.
the difference stems from the user of those presets not the presets themselves.
i dont think many people seriously believe you should be able to program a synth before you can use it.
people are just lamenting that the inevitable consequence of making it easier
to make music is the proliferation of bad music. imho, it's enough to say that
while its certainly NOT true that musicians must also be engineers, it is true
that engineering skills can help in that regard.
the only reason i'm bitching about this is because a lack of presets excludes
those musicians without a particular technical inclination and so limits the
audience for that software. which in our case, harms the cause of linux as a
presets are a net gain people. we shouldn't screw the good musicians simply
to spite the bad ones.
Linux-audio-user mailing list