[LAU] chord in trackers

[rosea grammostola]

Yes thanks.

For the NON modular way, you don't need that many tools today, knowing that
Carla hosts all plugin formats. With Non-Session-Manager you've everything
in one session folder, just like in a DAW. Non-Timeline is reliable imo,
you won't loose data with it. Too bad non-sequencer is not finished today
and offers only a pattern based solution. Qtractor, Ardour, AMS,
Zynaddsubfx, Carla etc. has NSM support.

But you didn't choose Qtractor or Ardour either ...


On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 11:42 PM, Atte <atte at youmail.dk> wrote:

> On 04/16/2014 10:40 PM, rosea grammostola wrote:
>
>>
>> "I'd rather not this turns into critique of specific FLOSS software."
>>
>> I think it's interesting to know why you end up using Windows software
>> on Linux. Critique is not bad imho.
>>
>
> Ok, let me take it from another angle: I'd much prefer FLOSS, if that's
> not possible then a linux native commercial solution. So why am I
> considering reaper through wine? Because it offers me something that I
> found nowhere else.
>
> 1) I need something that'll work as a "traditional DAW" (real musicians
> generating audio tracks) *and* something to work with electronic music.
> Could be two different programs, would be nice if it was one.
>
> 2) I need something that I can rely on. Something that opens up just like
> I left it *every time*.
>
> 3) Although I find it attractive, the linux-way-of-small-tools-
> handling-a-small-part-of-a-larger-job doesn't really seem practical in
> audio *to me*. I prefer the old-fashion model of a host for different
> reasons: Better/tighter integration, one project-file (or project folder)
> and simpler/more safe upgrade path.
>
> 4) I need something that's well rounded (like renoise), but also allows me
> to experiment, even go cracy some times.
>
> As for reaper, I strongly encourage everyone here that hasn't tried it
> yet, to spend a few days in it. You might like it, you might hate it, but
> you'll sure have broadened your perspective!
>
> You get seamless timestretch (add marker and move it around to stretch),
> most commonly used effects included, recording in any format I ever heard
> of, an app taht is very light on the CPU and extremely configurable. And I
> just discovered JS, reapers native plugin format; write and debug your own
> plugins right from within reaper, took me bout an hour to write something
> that emulates renoise B0 (reverse playback) effect. And as a bonus, you get
> to choose from *alot* of free and (I'm sorry to say) pretty good vsts. Ever
> tried synth1? I hadn't, but wow, what an awesome synth!
>
> So as I said, I'd love to use FLOSS, I'd even be more than happy to lower
> my standards quite a bit. But the comparison is just not fair, at least
> from where I sit. Note that I haven't settled on reaper just yet (I did buy
> a license, though), and even if I do, I still consider myself a
> linux-audio-user.
>
> Did that answer your question?
>
>
> --
> Atte
>
> http://atte.dk   http://modlys.dk
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxaudio.org/pipermail/linux-audio-user/attachments/20140417/f321f8f7/attachment.html>