[LAD] General question: Components of Music Software

Frank Smith frsmith at gmail.com
Mon Apr 26 17:50:02 UTC 2010


2010/4/26 Jörn Nettingsmeier <nettings at folkwang-hochschule.de>

> On 04/26/2010 08:47 AM, Louigi Verona wrote:
> > Hey guys!
> >
> > I was wondering about the following.
> > On Windows we have lots and lots of plugins and synthesizers and effect
> > racks. On Linux the selection is much less variable.
> >
> > However, am I correct in understanding that the variety of the Windows
> > synths and plugins merely means that people take several core modules and
> > just rearrange them into different GUIs?
> > Am I correct in understanding that there are only several major
> algorithms
> > for things like filters, delays, reverbs and choruses?
> in my view, the situation is mixed. there is a lot of utter bullshit
> going on, eqs and "mastering" compressors seem to have the greatest
> voodoo factor. then some people sell you simple convolvers as
> oh-so-great emulators of vintage stuff... i think it's justified to say
> that these basic building blocks are widely understood, with little room
> for ground-breaking improvements.
> it's either in great user interfaces or cutting-edge (and patented)
> technology that proprietary stuff kicks our collective asses (which is
> fine in my book).
> there are many truly revolutionary algorithms and interface designs that
> have no free software equivalent, nor will they for the forseeable
> future. stuff like ableton live or the waves reverbs come to mind, or
> (gasp!) melodyne. or advanced restauration tools like really good
> denoises and declickers. then there's adaptive convolvers that can
> tackle non-linear stuff (like the "liquid" gear marketed by focusrite) -
> no ready-to-use free equivalents exist for this. whether you need it or
> not is another question. as it stands now, we can't emulate an UREI, the
> closed source folks can. but sampo s. is hot on their tracks :)
> the audio fundamentals (controlling spectrum, delay, frequency response,
> and space), i.e. the basic things you mentioned that you need to get a
> mix done, is all there, in varying degrees of usability and slickness,
> and i have never looked back.
> then again, i'm not tied into a workflow that needs maximum efficiency.
> stuff like protools does have its uses - it's hard to envision an
> environment where a seasoned engineer could be faster and more
> productive. but often, all that you get for your money is a fake brushed
> aluminum widget with huge, wasteful and incorrectly modelled VU meters
> and fake rack ears... caveat emptor.
> but in all fairness, open source is covering ground in this area, too. :-D
> best,
> jörn
> ******************************

HI jörn

I totally agree here.

We can,  and do produce music that is a s good as any thing in the comercial
We may work a different way to some of the more commercial offerings but we
still achieve the same level of professional sounding music.


> Linux-audio-dev mailing list
> Linux-audio-dev at lists.linuxaudio.org
> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxaudio.org/pipermail/linux-audio-dev/attachments/20100426/407a2545/attachment.html>

More information about the Linux-audio-dev mailing list