[LAU] Bitwig at long last...?

[Lorenzo Sutton]

On 24/01/2014 00:14, Atte wrote:
> On 01/23/2014 09:46 AM, Lorenzo Sutton wrote:
>
>> Some features look rather similar to LMMS some others to Seq.
>
> I find this a little bit funny.
>
> I hope you're not suggesting that a company of 8 people spending two
> years developing a DAW

As I stated in my original message I haven't had a chance to try it.
That said, I'm not sure the target (market) nor the overall concept here 
is 'DAW' (regardless of the developing effort). Actually I think Ardour 
(on linux) is fully sufficient as a DAW (unless we are considering a 
'DAW' differnet things...). Clearly this is a personal opinion

1) are not likely to have a product that can
> out-perform (in features, completeness, roundedness and stability) the
> mostly one-man hobby projects (no offence, I love you all) that make up
> most of our eco system and

I see your point. But I'm not sure it's easy to define 'out-perform' in 
the music creation domain. I'll try to explain: from my point of view 
choice of audio/music related software (and related features) should 
respond first of all to artist's (creative) needs.
For example I personally love the way I can work with audio material in 
Ardour, the way I can quickly record stuff to it from other jack-enabled 
software etc. I guess this has an aspect of personal workflow, but 
essentially what I'm suggesting is that the process should be buttom-up: 
i.e. start from the musical idea/concept and then select the tools.

So if this new software will offer features which Linux musicians really 
need to complete their creative process (which are currently unfulfilled 
by any other software or combination of software): hurray!!! :D - we 
shall see


2) are not expected to put a price tag on the
> product?

I don't think I ever mentioned or criticized pricing.

Kindly
Lorenzo.