[LAU] [RFC] A “poor man’s”, yet professional level studio setup

[Francesco Napoleoni]

> For what you describe below, netjack, rtpmidi are probably the best open and
> available right now options.

Well, for me this is the real challenge: if I can get things done with an 
inexpensive network, why in the world should I buy Dante or similar stuff?

In other words I want to demonstrate that a carefully designed setup using 
entirely or mostly FLOSS s/w can rival in many ways its commercial 
counterparts at a fraction of the cost, and without bothering about licensing, 
obsolescence and so on. If I had (that much) money, I’d rather give it to 
admirable developers like those among you.

> Ok, so you wish to use many (for some definition of many) soft synths, one
> or two per computer to be easy on cpu use and use network instead of audio

Exactly. Indeed I am already running this kind of network, and I can see more 
and more ways to expand the current configuration as I go on with my tests. 
That’s why I want to share my ideas with the community. ;-)

> excelent utility). There is someone doing something like this with four
> computers using netjack but I forget his name and webpage. At least one of
> his boxes is a windows box and the rest are Linux.

If you ever recall that someone, please let me know.

> Yes that could be done... the same thought had crossed my mind, though I
> am not sure why two jacks per machine (or more) would be better than one.
> Jack2 already uses all the cores/threads it can find if it can (routing
> allows).

Nor do I. I think the explanation he gives on his page about performance is 
not really convincing, nevertheless the idea he came up with reminds me a bit 
of LADISH concept of “room”, but somewhat more flexible.

> For those in advertizing out there... I have a word for this kind of
> music: "channel changer" If anyone reading this advertizes on a radio
> station playing computer generated music with the teenager of the week
> singing karaoke over top, maybe find a different radio station to
> advertize on. This is about "popular" (pop) music but unfortunately that
> is my first thought when I see the last paragraph. One hopes you are
> creating something better.
> 
> With current marketing trends that are individualized where each view or
> listen is counted, our choice of what we deign to watch or listen to can
> push things one way or the other.

I agree with you in general terms, but we all have to face the fact that we 
are living in an age of advertising dictatorship: in extreme simplification, 
the bigger voice you have, the most you can influence people, usually in a 
totally amoral way. But that’s another story...