KVR Audio

whyterabbyt · Post by **whyterabbyt** » Fri Nov 06, 2009 3:03 pm

eduardo_b wrote:How many hours do you suppose it takes to code a DAW from scratch -- even a modest one?

about as long as making this here bit of string, and just as relevant to the debate.

whyterabbyt · Post by **whyterabbyt** » Fri Nov 06, 2009 3:06 pm

oh, unless its an American DAW, in which case Ive been told I dont have the 'right' to make comments on it.

eduardo_b · Post by **eduardo_b** » Fri Nov 06, 2009 3:08 pm

whyterabbyt wrote:
eduardo_b wrote:How many hours do you suppose it takes to code a DAW from scratch -- even a modest one?
about as long as making this here bit of string, and just as relevant to the debate.

Didn't say it was relevant.

whyterabbyt · Post by **whyterabbyt** » Fri Nov 06, 2009 3:12 pm

eduardo_b wrote:Didn't say it was relevant.

That would probably be because its not.

deraudrl · Post by **deraudrl** » Fri Nov 06, 2009 3:18 pm

MCnoone wrote:Sorry to go OT.

+1.

Re: Reaper
As I've had occasion to say on several forums, "Just because your religion involves <on-topic subject> doesn't mean it's not a religion."

I'm still trying to find a host I actually like: bashing the ones I don't just wastes time that could be better spent looking for a better one. OTOH, bitch-slapping idiots on a Internet forum is a lot cheaper than buying yet another host.

My apologies, continue with your whatever.

debra1rlo · Post by **debra1rlo** » Fri Nov 06, 2009 3:26 pm

deraudrl · Post by **deraudrl** » Fri Nov 06, 2009 3:38 pm

A lot of what is called "bloat" these days is simply a case of long-time users getting ready to install version N+1 and saying, "WTF?!? A DVD? Didn't this thing used to come on two floppies?"

(A phenomenom not helped at all by the tendency of software companies to include a copy of Acrobat Reader on every freaking installation disk, just so the three people in the known universe that don't already have it installed can read the two-page release notes.)

shogger · Post by **shogger** » Fri Nov 06, 2009 3:47 pm

debra1rlo wrote:

Nice one!

Shogger

eduardo_b · Post by **eduardo_b** » Fri Nov 06, 2009 3:56 pm

whyterabbyt wrote:
eduardo_b wrote:Didn't say it was relevant.
That would probably be because its not.

Except of course that the more code there is, the greater the need for optimization, all of which is time-consuming. What was apparently not obvious enough in my question is that the growing numbers of hours might reduce the incentive to optimize, and new versions would build on this code.

BennyG · Post by **BennyG** » Fri Nov 06, 2009 3:57 pm

ModuLR wrote:
audiobot202 wrote:
ModuLR wrote:I just bought my license last week. It's come a long way, and it runs fine on my macbook. Granted I've been using Live for a bit, but I really wanted to get back to that Tracktion'esque focus on editing. I started reworking all the shortcuts to tracktion shortcuts (or as close as possible, which is really close). I then simplified the menus, in addition to, removed much of their wordiness. Snagged Unempty's Kontra theme, and I've been good since. At this point, it's pretty fantastic for what I want. On top of that, it's got double duty in that it's better than any wave editor on OSX. Enjoying it, indeed.
You know what..if you could put this down into a PDF manual or something..step by step...there are many who might thank you for it.
One of the things I hate the most is the workflow.
What I discovered is a lot of the workflow is actually there. It just requires digging thru the options to get it to the point of familiarity. Also the menus are just way to verbose and can be streamlined for your purposes. I'm still re working the context menus. Maybe it would be worthwhile to dump it into a pdf.

Just wanted to add my +1 to this again, in case it's been totally forgotten beneath all the crap.

Cheers.

whyterabbyt · Post by **whyterabbyt** » Fri Nov 06, 2009 4:08 pm

eduardo_b wrote:Except of course that the more code there is, the greater the need for optimization, all of which is time-consuming.

Are you under the impression that the total amount of code in an application is in use at all times or something? Because that's the only circumstances under which the direct causal relationship you're suggesting would be true.

What was apparently not obvious enough in my question is that the growing numbers of hours might reduce the incentive to optimize, and new versions would build on this code.

An absence of any context is certainly what I'd call 'not obvious enough', yes.

And I really dont see how having to optimise more code reduces the incentive to do so. The only assumption you could safely make is that it takes proportionally longer (in man-hours) to carry out the optimisation of a larger body code, and that can be mitigated by applying more resources (people, in other words) to the task. Notwithstanding the fact that if you add X amount of new code that doesnt actually mean that all your existing code needs re-optimised.

So no, that 'might' is probably at a fairly low level of probability in a well-managed project.

skipkent · Post by **skipkent** » Fri Nov 06, 2009 4:10 pm

PFRfan wrote:As a Pentecostal Bible-thumping pastor, I'd like to say the Reaper is sweet for the money. I can't get away from T3, though. The interface is just dead-on perfect. Except for the missing wiggly arrows from T2.

Amen to that, pastor. Preach ON!

Hink · Post by **Hink** » Fri Nov 06, 2009 4:10 pm

dawmaster wrote:
koolkeys wrote:
dawmaster wrote:ok guys when you are done finger banging your egos
OUR EGOS? You mean, WE are the ones with egos, Mr. "I have every host and all the great plug-ins because I can afford them. You are just mad that you can't, blah blah blah"?

I think you need a reality check.

i think you would agree i made a valid point..that not all code is equal as per sound processing.
Ummmm, no we don't agree. Why? Because proof has been provided for our view. You have provided zero.

granted its all ones and zero's but there is alot behihnd the coding in audio processing and there are newer albeit more cpu intensive processes' that software like protools, cubase 5 and yes even studio one pro are now utilizing within the realm of 64 bit data calculation.if you are like me you might remember the first daws with their 16 bit awesomeness...look how far we have come.look lets not get personal. i know i embellish for dramatic effect but cmon...it makes for good reading along with our technical jargon!!
I fail to see any real point in this entire quote.

Brent
i will kindly leave you and this forum to its own devices...i am sure i am not the first you have run off with your lord of the flies mentality...but in the interest of dignity and my precious studio time i wish you well...may god bless you and yours..i know when i am not wanted. thank you for your time and allowing me to speak on your forum.

no one is running you off you shouldn't leave, what does that do? It doesn't matter what your first posts were, instead of leaving stay and learn. It's okay to be wrong, when I'm wrong I learn something new (which means I learn a lot). We're not bullies here, I don't think anyone has been disrespectful to you but if you don't keep it real you're going to get called on it. I hope you change your mind about leaving

skipkent · Post by **skipkent** » Fri Nov 06, 2009 4:20 pm

sys2074 wrote:Ah host turf wars! always entertaining!

The really interesting question is: How did the Reaper-guys manage to write such a slick, efficient application where other big companies fail immensely with this task and write bloatware instead?!

With much less to lose, the Reaper guys can move quickly, recklessly even, if they so choose. They don't have legacy customers built up over ten years or more to please (or at least not disappoint too drastically). The Reaper guys don't have shareholders invested in the success of their product. They don't have strategic alliances with other companies. Reaper devs can move quickly on their own product design in response to perceived benefits or short-comings of other, more mature products.

Many, many good reasons why Reaper is both lean and successful. Like someone said, low overhead, good product sold at a great price is a win for them.

...But not necessarily a loss for anyone else. The 'big dogs' have their work cut out for them, but have name recognition and user loyalty and such in their favor. There will definitely be a thinning of the heard, but there will always be room for many audio apps and DAWs.

fandango · Post by **fandango** » Fri Nov 06, 2009 4:22 pm

whyterabbyt wrote:
eduardo_b wrote:Except of course that the more code there is, the greater the need for optimization, all of which is time-consuming.
Are you under the impression that the total amount of code in an application is in use at all times or something? Because that's the only circumstances under which the direct causal relationship you're suggesting would be true.

Yeah, I think this is probably the most common misconception that appears to pervade the userbase. Just because new icons or new menu entries appear in an application, somehow it's believed that these are taking up CPU cycles by their very presence. Most features (or 'bloat', if people prefer) tend to be "on demand" things. One-off processes that are called when needed.

One man's bloat is another man's bread & butter. The wealth of manipulation options in larger apps like Sonar or Cubase tend to be the first things I miss in other apps.

How does REAPER do it?