linuxaudio.org

On Sun, February 10, 2013 7:21 am, Al Thompson wrote:
> One glaring difference is that with analog equipment, it is fast and

quoted text
> easy to get sound recorded.  You can unbox it, and you will be able to

> record and playback almost immediately.  It may take you time to learn

> how to get GOOD sounds recorded, but that is a different topic.  He can

> learn about degaussing at a later time.  He can learn head alignment at

> his leisure.  He can still record, just maybe not at the highest quality

> yet.

>

> With computer audio, and Linux more than some, even if you follow one of

> the step by step instructions which can be found on the net, it still

> may not work.

Apples to apples.... For what most people expect out of Linux The analog

side would include not just a tape machine, but also at least a 24channel

mixer, a stack of effects boxes as high as your head, an empty rack with a

pile of bits all of which require wiring of some sort, Setting each piece

of equipment to the correct level (default)... even the mixing console a

lot of people used to use required wiring (soldering) before you ever even

hit the power switch.
To compare linux to what your example of analog, install just about any

linux distro, plug a mic into the internal sound card and speakers into

the audio out, start audacity, hit record and go. No jack, no ardour, no

learning... good clean sound. The user can learn about jack and ardour

later, but he can record sound right now. Instead of going and finding a

tape machine which when analog was big would be hundreds of dollars (even

for cassette based setups), they only need a mic... $30
--

Len Ovens

www.OvenWerks.net
_______________________________________________

Linux-audio-user mailing list

Linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org

http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user