24 Feb
2011
24 Feb
'11
2:07 p.m.
On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 2:43 PM, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
There's no doubt that many users or potential
users want the
'all integrated' DAW combining audio, sequencing, invasive
effects, etc. required to produce a particular type of music
(and some other content, e.g. ads) that happens to have a
wide audience. And consequently a large number of people
wanting to be involved in making it.
That sounds like an intentionally badly hidden sarcasm.
OTOH, this does not mean that some other people (who
may be
a minority) can't have other needs, nor does it provide good
reasons to imply that they are in some way retarded, out of
sync with their time, old-fashioned or whatever.
MIDI tracks in A3 are not forced to users at knife-point.
Also, 'ignoring the bits you don't need'
is not always as simple
as it may seem. The simple fact that these things _are_ provided
has consequences on the overall design, they _do_ distract, they
_have_ to be checked and disabled (often each time again), they
_do_ take resources and they _do_ impact reliability. And they
are not compile time options.
The question I'm inclined to ask is whether you ever saw A3 live.
Because, really, until you choose to add a MIDI track, the related
functionality barely exposes itself.
And the most perverse consequence of preferring
complex apps
to complex systems is that it becomes near impossible to modify
them to individual or 'minority' needs.
http://createdigitalmusic.com/2011/02/the-79-virtual-analog-console-now-on-…
"Coming from the rarified world of high-end audio systems, we
recognized a lot of the same qualities in Ardour. Some examples:
<snip> “customization on a truly deep level is important for
enterprise-class facilities” …. stuff like that."
You had it coming, Fons.
Alexandre Prokoudine
http://libregraphicsworld.org