[LAU] First impressions of MusE 2.0

[Hartmut Noack]

Am 13.09.2012 18:00, schrieb Dan MacDonald:
> Hi Hartmut!
> 
> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 4:08 PM, Hartmut Noack <zettberlin at linuxuse.de> wrote:
>> Thanks for the informative text Dan!
> 
> You're (and Ralf) welcome!
> 
>>
>> Am 10.09.2012 21:47, schrieb Dan MacDonald:
>>
>>>
>>> the full-on icon overload of Rosegarden.
>>
>> While I agree that in terms of aesthetics RG is not the crown of
>> creation I still think, that it is better to have a lot of icons to
>> handle a lot of functionality than to be confronted with a good-looking
>> concept of a UI-designer who actually believes, he/she knows what I want
>> to do and how in any "reasonable" scenario ;-)
> 
> In most scenarios I only want to see icons for the most commonly used
> stuff. I'm normally happy if I can bind keys to the stuff I use - in
> fact thats  often better than an icon for me. Ideally apps should be
> able to be fully used just with the mouse or just with the keyboard
> and have a customisable GUI to resolve any such arguments

+1
Absolutely! The more complex the app the more customizable the GUI
should be.

> 
>>
>>> A3 also currently lacks the ability
>>> to set gradual changes in tempo
>>
>> Well, that is not quite correct. Yo can set as many tempo-changes as
>> needed for gradual changes resolution only limited by BPM-ticks. This
>> method can be a bit crummy if you want to slide tempo frequently in a
>> track but it is in fact working OK. The only thing one could miss
>> regarding tempo in A3 would be some "swing/humanize" automagic I'd say...
> 
> Of course you can probably get your calculator out and make numerous
> tempo changes to simulate a gradual change - I realise that but I
> don't want to do that. Sequencers are supposed to make the job of
> creating music easier and I don't call that workaround easy.

That is correct, to get a gradual change or frequent changes this method
is not the most easy one ...

> I'm sure
> Paul or someone will correct me if its no longer the case but last
> time I checked you could only change tempo on the first beat of a bar

you can set it to the other beats too but not between them, thank you
for pointing me to that fact...

> under A3 so if thats still the case then you may not even be able to
> fake a reasonably rapid tempo change well.
> 
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Enough about MIDI, what about audio? Reading the Ardour forums and
>>> having spent much time in its irc channel, I know that one of the most
>>> frequent feature requests is integrated wave editing
>>
>> To be frank: I do not understand, why this feature seems to be in so big
>> need for some Ardour users. The non-destructive editing in A3s regions
>> easily competes with any wave-editor not only in the Linux-camp.
>> Export/consolidation-automatisms add a lot of the feel of a destructive
>> editor too. In a word: I use A3 as my main wave-editor already whenever
>> I need more than just a fast cut of a fieldrecording. The only editors I
>> also really use are MHWaveedit (unbeatable lean and stable) and yeah...
>> well forget... ;-)
>>
>>> and I'm sure Rui
>>> has had more than a few requests for such a feature in qtractor too so
>>> I'd say one of the biggest selling points of MusE is that it would
>>> seem to be the only Linux DAW to offer integrated audio editing.
>>
>> really?
>>
>> To be frank once more: the audiotracks of both Muse and RG are 1995 at
>> best. And I did not see big progress in that field in both in many
>> years. Though Robert himself makes great recording of hand-played music
>> with Muse I still think that the audiotracks in Muse are barely usable.
>> Try to cut regions and loop them, try to cut and arrange some 12-16
>> tracks as it can be easily done in Qtractor and the same as easy and
>> with even much more extra-powers in Ardour.
> 
> I never said MusE outclasses Ardour and nor did I say it comes close
> to providing all the features of Ardour as far as audio is concerned
> because it certainly does not. MusE seems more mature than A3 as a
> sequencer though and if I was using external MIDI sound modules I
> would likely be using MusE now as my Linux sequencer.
> 
> However, not everyone needs the high-end audio features Ardour offers
> so if you do more sequencing and only make light use of audio then
> MusE could be a better choice for such users than Ardour is.

Again: this is correct. But I really think, the audiotracks in Muse are
not much more than simple players for a vocaltrack or so. Thas why I
compared them to those in Orion: they where just that, simple Players.
Compared to the very nice possibilities, that Muse offers on the
MIDI-tracks, they are quite behind, I must say.

> We're all
> free to choose what software we use to record with. I'm very happy we
> have a choice of Linux DAWs and with a few of them getting seriously
> good now too.

Choice is always good. I place high hopes in Qtractor. It is sad, that
Traverso seems not to be active at the moment...

best regards
HZN

>