This guyCrackbaby wrote:Who is?pc999 wrote:
Given who is doing the intruments and fx they are probably quite good!
http://www.vemberaudio.se/
This guyCrackbaby wrote:Who is?pc999 wrote:
Given who is doing the intruments and fx they are probably quite good!
Sorry didn't noticed.glokraw wrote:So which linux got the honour?
pc999 wrote:Sorry didn't noticed.glokraw wrote:So which linux got the honour?
Just "plain old" Ubuntu, maybe if I go seriously into recording or audio in Linux (which I am using Windows for, at this the time) I will try a real time kernel, but for now I am pretty happy with Ubuntu only.
Maybe Bitwig will change that, plus there is a few "interesting rumors" about Tracktion returning and the main guy is the one who does Juce (instant W,Mac,Linux,iOS,Android cross platform).
I have wayyyy too much freetime.jkworks wrote:I would love to use Linux. But when are the big boys (Steinberg, Ableton, Logic(no chance!), Presonus and Cakewalk) going to support it?
What do you mean "base our DAW" for a particular flavor of Linux ? Ardour, MusE, Rosegarden, Traverso, all work on all three of the systems I run here (Arch, Ubuntu, Debian).ret wrote: Lets do a very fictional Q&A for a *add name here* big name company thinking porting their daw to linux. Just some really basics.
Q: If we build and base our daw for lets say ubuntu... Does it work on all linux systems?
A: Sadly no. In fact if you build it around just ubuntu there is a good chance it does not even work on ubuntu deriatives such as lubuntu or kubuntu, let alone other totally different popular distros like opensuse, arch or mageia.
We have LADSPA, LV2, DSSI, and native VST, about seven fewer "standards" than exist in the Win/Mac world.Q: Does linux have similar kind of widely used and accepted plug-in standard as windows and mac have?
A: Sadly no. We have many plug-in standards and currently every native linux daw seems to be supporting different set of plug-in standards and most of them have even created new plug-in systems on their own instead of using the existing ones.
Wow. Ret, before you go further, do some more homework. I mean no offense, but you've thrown unrelated systems together to make a situation far more complicated than it really is.Q: Does linux have similar kind of widely used, simple and working pro audio supported audio system as windows and mac have?
A: Sure. We have alsa, pulseaudio, oss. freebob, gstreamer, jack, jack2, dbus, sdl, wineasio... What was the question again?
Again, no offense intended, but from my POV it would be a more helpful exercise if you had more experience with the system. If you ask me, your fictional company is talking to the wrong guy.This Q&A could go on and on...
Look the system requirements for forthcoming Bitwig. It says "Ubuntu 12.04". Now that doesn't really bring much faith, doesn't it?What do you mean "base our DAW" for a particular flavor of Linux ?
How about other way around. Companies who now do windows and mac software don't have to deal with 200-500 different versions of osx or windows. Could that be one of the main real life reasons why linux is not very attractive platform to release something.In this world developers don't typically target a single distro for their work.
With windows and mac there are VST and AU. We can argue but in real life those two cover 99% of mac and windows plug-in needs. It's a good thing that linux finally comes to it senses but it seems to be taking forever and may still be too little too late. This unholy mess of plug-in's is one of the biggest reasons why linux audio is so much behind of it's competitors.We have LADSPA, LV2, DSSI, and native VST, about seven fewer "standards" than exist in the Win/Mac world
Again, my post was not meant to be taken too seriously but don't be surprised if these mysterious terms are quite a turn off for someone new to linux audio, let it be a user or developer.Wow. Ret, before you go further, do some more homework. I mean no offense, but you've thrown unrelated systems together to make a situation far more complicated than it really is.
Don't worry, I dont mind. I have used linux since red hat 4 and been (atleast trying to) making music with it from somewhere around the times when ubuntu 6 came so no need to break down alsa or explain how jack works. I just randomly threw together some linux audio related words just for the fun of it.Again, no offense intended, but from my POV it would be a more helpful exercise if you had more experience with the system.
Probably. I was only on my second cup of coffee.ret wrote:I think you took my post way too seriously.
Come on, you're making a point with vaporware, what's to have faith in ? Like I said, the crews at Pianoteq and Renoise got it right.Look the system requirements for forthcoming Bitwig. It says "Ubuntu 12.04". Now that doesn't really bring much faith, doesn't it?What do you mean "base our DAW" for a particular flavor of Linux ?
With regards to audio software, I don't think so. The user base is still too small to have much attraction. The proportions are clear as glass, we need only look at the listings here on KVR. It grows, but it seems to me to be far from critical mass.How about other way around. Companies who now do windows and mac software don't have to deal with 200-500 different versions of osx or windows. Could that be one of the main real life reasons why linux is not very attractive platform to release something.In this world developers don't typically target a single distro for their work.
No argument here re: VST/AU domination in the Win/Mac worlds.With windows and mac there are VST and AU. We can argue but in real life those two cover 99% of mac and windows plug-in needs. It's a good thing that linux finally comes to it senses but it seems to be taking forever and may still be too little too late. This unholy mess of plug-in's is one of the biggest reasons why linux audio is so much behind of it's competitors.We have LADSPA, LV2, DSSI, and native VST, about seven fewer "standards" than exist in the Win/Mac world
Again no argument. There's a mess, it needs to be cleared away, and it's getting cleared away. But I wonder sometimes if it's just bound always to be a mess, that by its nature Linux is something chaotic that militates against conformity, even when that conformity could be of great value at the level of the normal user's experience.Again, my post was not meant to be taken too seriously but don't be surprised if these mysterious terms are quite a turn off for someone new to linux audio, let it be a user or developer.
I should have amended my statement, sorry. As you can see, I'll get up on my hind legs now & then. It tires the old dog, but keep the posts coming, ret, the exercise helps keep him lively.... I have used linux since red hat 4 and been (atleast trying to) making music with it from somewhere around the times when ubuntu 6 came so no need to break down alsa or explain how jack works. I just randomly threw together some linux audio related words just for the fun of it.
I'm sure Bitwig gets released someday. Maybe. Do I have massive faith for it changing linux audio as we know it? No.Come on, you're making a point with vaporware, what's to have faith in ? Like I said, the crews at Pianoteq and Renoise got it right.
For linux being interesting enough platform for plug-in developers to start releasing their commercial plug-ins in linux. That is crucial if we want more users and especially pro users to linux.But wrt Linux plugins: "Too little too late" for what ?
People on KVR, maybe. Majority, certainly not : see (and hear) GPLed music sites.ret wrote:Now majority of people saying they use linux for making music actually use windows software with wine because native linux audio sofware still misses lots of even the most basic features needed for the platform to be usable. It's sad but it's the ugly truth of how things are.
You might want to bring more 'solution oriented' topics,ret wrote:I think you took my post way too seriously.
© KVR Audio, Inc. 2000-2024
Submit: News, Plugins, Hosts & Apps | Advertise @ KVR | Developer Account | About KVR / Contact Us | Privacy Statement