[LAD] LV2 "isn't well thought out ?" LV2 in the Reaper sequencer

[Thorsten Wilms]

On Tue, 2008-01-22 at 12:25 -0500, Darren Landrum wrote:
> I thought we were all on the same side?

There might be tendencies, but it's not one side.

> * Ardour looks, behaves, and has almost the exact same feature set as it 
> did two years ago. (Nobody in the commercial world is still using a 
> 32-bit mixing engine, not even Pro-Tools.)

You haven't looked closely enough. What's wrong with 32 bit floating
point or Ardour's "mixing engine"?

> You can go ahead and tell me to leave if I don't like it, but the truth 
> is, I like the spirit of the Free Software world, and if I feel I can 
> contribute something worthwhile, then I will. It's just too bad that  we 
> can't seem to work together on some issues.

Some do work together on some issues. Not everyone's pulling in the same
direction. Never will.

> I came to here from Reaper, hoping to have seen the whole idea of audio 
> production on Linux advance. And it has, to a point, but now you're at a 
> crossroads: Do you want an elite club, or do you want to see the world 
> of Linux audio spread far and wide?

There's no single we, not even one road.

> If Justin doesn't want to implement LV2 in Reaper, that's his choice.

No one claimed different.


> So the 
> choice becomes, do you want LV2 to stay elite, or do you want an 
> industry standard?

Industry standard? Call it that if Steinberg and Apple adopt it ;)


> Open source doesn't do anybody any good if nobody wants to use it.

See, it's rather that some don't want to use anything else.


> As for me, my interest is in DSP and coding plug-ins. I got started 
> playing around in Reaper's Jesusonic. Now I want to grow my skills in a 
> useful direction. Is that going to be LV2, or VST3? I wish I knew.

Think about who you would want to be able to use your plugins under
which circumstances.

-- 
Thorsten Wilms

thorwil's design for free software:
http://thorwil.wordpress.com/