18 Jun
2005
18 Jun
'05
3:29 p.m.
[fons adriaensen]
On Sat, Jun 18, 2005 at 04:04:11PM +0200, Jay Vaughan
wrote:
The difference in hardware quality exists, yes. Although one feels
tempted to argue that in terms of audio quality and latency the
difference is constantly narrowing down, but let's not go into that
for the moment.
More importantly, the essential benefit of the 'digital revolution' is
that it brings professional quality tools to the masses; certainly so
with Linux and everything that builds on it.
No doubt that these tools are not always used as proficiently as their
design warrants. But that's not the point; they are there for everyone
to try and learn, skillfully or otherwise.
Dividing computed audio into a 'professional' and an 'amateur' camp
only serves to defend obsolete categories and the arbitrary borders
inbetween.
Cheers, Tim
there should just be 'working audio',
whether your app is a desktop
app, a sound-synth, or a DAW. why should there be a difference?
Why are the terms 'consumer' and 'professional' used to denote two
different worlds ? Because the requirements, expectations, price
tags, and potential consequences are different for both types of
user. As a professional, I may be inclined to pay some k$ for
something that will enhance my business. As a professional I
may be prepared to work to imposed quality standards, even if
that is less entertaining or practical and requires discipline.
Denying that this difference exists is a postmodern trend, but is
misguided (IMHO).