[LAU] Bitwig: what we can learn from it

[Simon Wise]

On 04/04/14 20:59, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 04, 2014 at 10:58:17AM +0200, Tim Blechmann wrote:
>
>>> Where anyone can publish anything of course the user needs to do a fair
>>> bit of work filtering the worthwhile from the useless.
>>
>> replace 'useless' by 'broken' ... if you use have an unstable filter in
>> your fx chain, you could either destroy your speakers or even worse:
>> your ears.
>
> or someone else's speakers or ears.
>
> And having to do 'a fair bit of work' separating the crap from the
> usable isn't going to improve a potential user's workflow either,
> nor his first impression of what Linux Audio has to offer.
>
> It's not just filters oscillating. I've seen delay lines blow
> up, compressors going to infinite gain, and all sorts of things
> producing loud bangs when connected, activated or coonfigured.
> And those are just the potentially destructive 'features', we
> are not even discussing basic processing quality.
>
> Yet all this stuff gets distributed, listed on helpful websites
> (look ! hundreds of plugins !), and nobody feels the need to
> weed out the crap. Wonder why some people don't take Linux
> Audio seriously ?

there is a certain amount of weeding done, there have been media focussed 
distributions, and parts of distributions ... but no-one is in a position to 
stop rubbish being published. A walled garden is OK if it happens to have 
everything you need, you can afford the upkeep and you aren't the type of person 
who always wonders what else is possible. But linux audio as a whole can never 
be that ... a tightly controlled DAW could, and it could run on linux, but 
paying the gardeners isn't always so easy, and for some the wild places are more 
interesting anyway.

Simon