[LAD] Non-daw, non-sequencer (fork?)

[rosea grammostola]

rosea grammostola wrote:
> rosea grammostola wrote:
>> Danni Coy wrote:
>>> I am kind of work till after midnight every day in my day job busy 
>>> at the moment. I would like to get back into open source development 
>>> when I have a bit of breathing room.
>>>
>>> I like the modular approach taken by non daw... I would like to see 
>>> the pro audio infrastructure in linux get to the point where it can 
>>> support an application like this really well. I have in mind perhaps 
>>> a few small improvements and I would like to see it be able to use 
>>> the new LADI infrastructure...
>>>
>>> I took a quick peak at the sequencer (sequencers are not normally 
>>> part of my workflow - or rather I haven't found one that really 
>>> suits me yet).
>>>
>>> With regards to not being able to put in out of scale notes  it 
>>> seems you can get around that by choosing a chromatic scale type.
>> Ah I was thinking about such a solution, but it's already there, cool.
>>
>>
>> \r
>>
> and in View use can choose for 'compacted', which makes the notes 
> outside the scale visible/invisible.
>
>
> Non-daw doesn't work here with recent jack1 and jack2
Sorry for the flood.... I'm just brainstorming ;)

Non-Daw:
Paul Davis says that the Ardour backend is independent of it's gui. With 
other words, you can make Ardour as simple as you want.

I don't know how non-daw is build, but I can imagine the fast and simple 
interface on a Ardour backend...

Non-Sequencer:
Recording midi seems to be ok. I'm not sure if or how quantize works.


About the 'fork'... don't know if we would need another name or other 
project... Maybe 'we' can just work on the existing project, cause the 
starter of this project was pretty open for contributions afaik. A 
problem might be that we can't get contact with the author...


\r