8 Jun
2004
8 Jun
'04
5:47 a.m.
Lately, while looking at screenshots of a few VST(i) plugins, i began to
wonder what makes them different from LADSPA plugins. Not technically,
but from the philosophical point of view.
VST plugins tend to be rather complex, offering tons of features and
eyecandish GUIs, while LADSPAs usually offer limited functionality, no
GUI at all(hosts usually provide simple ones to control the parameters).
But what's interesting is that each LADSPA plugin usually implements
exactly one type of DSP technique, for example, an oscillator, or a
delay. This basically leads to a situation where a certain DSP technique
is 'isolated' in a separate plugin.
Now if we look at an arbitrary VST plugin we'll see that it's fairly
complex, and that there's a large amount of creativity involved both
visually and featurewise. But if you look at it closer, you'll recognize
that each such plugin is actually a bunch of DSP techniques put together
in a creative way.
Let's look at JAMin. What makes JAMin interesting is that it's
basically(although probably not entirely, haven't looked at the code) a
collection of LADSPA plugins where each of those plugins implements a
DSP technique dedicated to improve the characteristics of a sound in a
certain way. So JAMin tends to "package" these DSP techniques into a
standalone JACK effect client.
Now imagine you'd replace the gtk+ based GUI with a 3d eyecandish GUI.
What would you get? A typical audiomastering VST plugin. Except - it's a
JACK client.
So LADSPA becomes LA-DSP-A and each such plugin becomes a basic building
block for a complex JACK effect or synth.
The benefits i see:
1. It unifies the way audio is routed from/to/through daws, effects,
synths and other audio applications. The VST(i) vs. Rewire situation
becomes one - JACK.
2. If offers unlimited flexibility (together with MIDI over JACK) - for
example controlling a synth with a DAW via a midi track while letting
the DAW record the output of the synth.
3. It simplifies the notion of handling effects, synths etc in hosts for
the users. No need for insert vs. send.
4. No need for a GUI standard. Simply write your own Gtk+/Qt frontend
whether widget or pixmap based.
5. Allows developers to design complex 'plugins' i.e. JACK effect/synth
clients and be creative in picking DSP algorithms and wiring them
together *even* if they don't have any background in DSP programming.
6. Allows DSP developers to fully concentrate on the DSP part, only
developing the desired DSP technique without caring about the rest.
7. Points 5. and 6. help to accelerate development of complex and high
quality effects and synths that we all miss and the win32 and macosx
users already have.
8. It would unify the LinuxAudio scene in terms of DSP code - DSP =
LADSPA.
Political issues:
1. we'd need to centralize the LADSPA scene on the web, using the
www.ladspa.org site, building a unified ladspa directory, each entry
would describe the plugin(category, author, decription, purpose)
2. the centralised site should make some general suggestions on how to
build complex JACK clients out of LADSPAs, for example splitting the
JACK client in two parts (GUI/engine) communicating via a standard msg
bus system, such as D-BUS, which in turn would make it easier to write
different GUIs for the same JACK client, Gtk+/Qt, pixmap/widget based
etc. Moreover, it would help to set and improve a standard msg bus such
as D-BUS. D-BUS seems to be very attractive since it's binary and comes
from the desktop world which would make this issue
interdisciplinary(linux desktop / linux audio) - a thing which i believe
is crucial for linux in order to become a successful platform.
3. LADSPA should allow to build both complex effects and
synths(technical issues? time-stamped events?)
Comments?
Marek
8 Jun
8 Jun
6:27 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 11:45:53 +0200, Marek Peteraj wrote:
VST plugins tend to be rather complex, offering tons
of features and
eyecandish GUIs, while LADSPAs usually offer limited functionality, no
GUI at all(hosts usually provide simple ones to control the parameters).
But what's interesting is that each LADSPA plugin usually implements
exactly one type of DSP technique, for example, an oscillator, or a
delay. This basically leads to a situation where a certain DSP technique
is 'isolated' in a separate plugin.
I think thats down to two factors (and its not a good thing)
1) LADSPA developers are few in number and short in time. The basics are a
good place to start.
2) The lack of a UI standard makes complex plugins a bit pointless.
There are a few counter examples (e.g. my VyNil plugin wraps a lot of
different bits), and infact if you look in many LADSPA plugins you will
see theres really more going on than there appears to be.
[OT] - my canned plugin writing experience - all generalisations and IMHO
of course
Time breakdown: 10% writing code, 10% maths and optimising, 80% tweaking
and tuning.
Mapping the controls 1:1 with DSP parameters makes plugins crap - people
say they want that if you ask them, but they dont mean it ;)
Fewer controls is better.
Affordance, appearance and usability has as much affect on the perceived
sound quality as the DSP code (posivly and negativly). Some of this can
be achieved without a custom UI.
You mentioned JAMin - true that does use LADSPA plugins - but of the total
ammount of code the LADSPA plugins are a tiny fraction. I just reused them
because I hate fixing bugs in two places :)
[OOT] I used to think that a UI spec for LADSPA (to make it competetive
with VST) was a technological problem. I now thinks its a manpower issue
(I think Paul Davis pointed this out a couple of years ago :). Games
develpment has moved to the point where the graphics work is more
expensive than the software development, and I bet its not far off in
plugin / eyecandy app development. We have no, or almost no, graphics
people here.
There are plenty of graphics people working on Free Software projects, but
they all seem to be working on games projects. What a waste. I guess
drawing goblins is more fun than sliders and LEDs. Who knew? ;)
- Steve
6:52 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Tue, 2004-06-08 at 10:18, Steve Harris wrote:
On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 11:45:53 +0200, Marek Peteraj
wrote:
The number of dsp developers isn't relevant.
Besides - there's at least 5 devs i know of. The number will grow.
VST plugins tend to be rather complex, offering
tons of features and
eyecandish GUIs, while LADSPAs usually offer limited functionality, no
GUI at all(hosts usually provide simple ones to control the parameters).
But what's interesting is that each LADSPA plugin usually implements
exactly one type of DSP technique, for example, an oscillator, or a
delay. This basically leads to a situation where a certain DSP technique
is 'isolated' in a separate plugin.
I think thats down to two factors (and its not a good thing)
1) LADSPA developers are few in number and short in time. The basics are a
good place to start.
2) The lack of a UI standard makes complex plugins a bit pointless.
Why do you need a UI standard for jack fx/synth clients? Does JAMin
follow one such standard?
You could do a virtually unlimited amount of UIs for exactly 1 fx/synth
using IPC.
There are a few counter examples (e.g. my VyNil plugin wraps a lot of
different bits), and infact if you look in many LADSPA plugins you will
see theres really more going on than there appears to be.
According to my proposal, this shouldn't happen. :)
[OT] - my canned plugin writing experience - all generalisations and IMHO
of course
Time breakdown: 10% writing code, 10% maths and optimising, 80% tweaking
and tuning.
See point 6)
Fewer controls is better.
Doesn't seem like if you look at the most successful
VST(i)/DX(i)/RTAS/TDM/AI plugins :)
Affordance, appearance and usability has as much affect on the perceived
sound quality as the DSP code (posivly and negativly). Some of this can
be achieved without a custom UI.
Today we've got 100% Affordance, 0% appearance and 0% usability. :)
At least the point that there's no unified affordance since each host
implements it's own, makes the question of usability irrelevant.
You mentioned JAMin - true that does use LADSPA plugins - but of the total
ammount of code the LADSPA plugins are a tiny fraction. I just reused them
because I hate fixing bugs in two places :)
And? :)
Points 5) and 6)
Marek
7:26 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
I wasn't particularly disagreeing with your proposal BTW, I was just
rambling on my pet topic :)
On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 12:50:36 +0200, Marek Peteraj wrote:
It is relevent, the point is that the development efort going into plugins
is dispraportioanlyl small compared to the apps. This means that the few
of us wh oare coding plugins start with fairly basic things, as there
needed most.
JAMin is not a plugin. Its an app.
Ah, but its a good thing :)
They have fewer controls than they could have. Also, with custom UIs its easier
to get away with more as some can be hidden in an "advanced" popout or
whatever.
I Disagree. We have 0% affordance, 0% appearance, 100% usability (not that
there really orthoganal). You cant have affordance if you dont have
control over appearance and layout.
On topic though - there are some advantages to the way plugins interact
with apps - as thier hosted thier execution order and control binding can
be controlled by apps. This is very useful.
Look at DSSI, which is an attempt to move some of the kind of things from
th JACK model into the LADSPA model, fine control over the routing is
quite important.
- Steve
- Steve
I think thats
down to two factors (and its not a good thing)
1) LADSPA developers are few in number and short in time. The basics are a
good place to start.
The number of dsp developers isn't relevant.
Besides - there's at least 5 devs i know of. The number will grow. 2) The lack of
a UI standard makes complex plugins a bit pointless.
Why do you need a UI standard for jack fx/synth clients? Does JAMin
follow one such standard?
You could do a virtually unlimited amount of UIs for exactly 1 fx/synth
using IPC. There are a
few counter examples (e.g. my VyNil plugin wraps a lot of
different bits), and infact if you look in many LADSPA plugins you will
see theres really more going on than there appears to be.
According to my proposal, this shouldn't happen. :) Fewer
controls is better.
Doesn't seem like if you look at the most successful
VST(i)/DX(i)/RTAS/TDM/AI plugins :) Affordance,
appearance and usability has as much affect on the perceived
sound quality as the DSP code (posivly and negativly). Some of this can
be achieved without a custom UI.
Today we've got 100% Affordance, 0% appearance and 0% usability. :)
At least the point that there's no unified affordance since each host
implements it's own, makes the question of usability irrelevant.
7:53 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Tue, 2004-06-08 at 11:17, Steve Harris wrote:
JAMin is not a plugin. Its an app.
Think about it.
A typical fx plugin takes audio as input does DSProcessing to the audio
and outputs that. What does JAMin do?
The whole purpose of JAMin is to do DSP. And if you make a send in
ardour... :)
Ah, but its a good thing :)
JAMin is a good thing :)
They have fewer controls than they could have. Also, with custom UIs its easier
to get away with more as some can be hidden in an "advanced" popout or
whatever.
They have a lot of controls usually. The point in having lots of
controls in a dedicated plugin is that you don't have to setup a dozen
of ladspas in a mixer strip, care about their number of i/os and reorder
them in order to achieve what you want.
Try to reproduce JAMin in one ardour mixer strip(yeah, that tiny black
insert window) with the corresponding ladspas.
The lesser controls you'll have the more plugins you'll be forced to
use.
I Disagree. We have 0% affordance, 0% appearance, 100% usability (not that
there really orthoganal). You cant have affordance if you dont have
control over appearance and layout.
Usability - as each host provides it's own UI for the same plugins,
there's really no usability at all. The true beauty about VSTs is that
they have the same visual appearance no matter which application you're
using. That's rule #1 for having usability at all. And then there's the
question of smaller usability issues, this varies from VST plugin to VST
plugin.
Marek
I wasn't particularly disagreeing with your
proposal BTW, I was just
rambling on my pet topic :)
NP, just trying to make you completely agree :)
On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 12:50:36 +0200, Marek Peteraj wrote:
It is relevent, the point is that the development efort going into plugins
is dispraportioanlyl small compared to the apps. This means that the few
of us wh oare coding plugins start with fairly basic things, as there
needed most.
True and as i'm trying to point out, basic things is all we need in
terms of DSP. You're more looking at the history of LADSPA development,
how the whole concept evolved. But i think this could really be
irrelevant for the future development of linux audio fx and synths.
I think
thats down to two factors (and its not a good thing)
1) LADSPA developers are few in number and short in time. The basics are a
good place to start.
The number of dsp developers isn't relevant.
Besides - there's at least 5 devs i know of. The number will grow. 2) The
lack of a UI standard makes complex plugins a bit pointless.
Why do you need a UI standard for jack fx/synth clients? Does JAMin
follow one such standard?
You could do a virtually unlimited amount of UIs for exactly 1 fx/synth
using IPC. There are
a few counter examples (e.g. my VyNil plugin wraps a lot of
different bits), and infact if you look in many LADSPA plugins you will
see theres really more going on than there appears to be.
According to my proposal, this shouldn't happen. :) Fewer
controls is better.
Doesn't seem like if you look at the most successful
VST(i)/DX(i)/RTAS/TDM/AI plugins :)
Affordance, appearance and usability has as much affect on the perceived
sound quality as the DSP code (posivly and negativly). Some of this can
be achieved without a custom UI.
Today we've got 100% Affordance, 0% appearance and 0% usability. :)
At least the point that there's no unified affordance since each host
implements it's own, makes the question of usability irrelevant.
8:20 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 01:52:02 +0200, Marek Peteraj wrote:
The point I didnt make is that JAMin /cannot/ be implemented efficiently
as a set of plugins. The (majority, non-ladspa) DSP code is very
intermingled, to make it run in realtime. You could argue that its just a
bad example, but I dont think thats the case.
Usability is a very broad term, some things, like not glitching when you
move a control or making each control have an (apparently) linear and
a definable effect on the sound, are also usability features. Those are
got by correctly mapping the user-facing controls to the underlying DSP
parameters. Usually in a very non-obvious way, but they have no bearing on
the appearance.
Though I do think appearance is important.
- Steve
JAMin is not a
plugin. Its an app.
Think about it.
A typical fx plugin takes audio as input does DSProcessing to the audio
and outputs that. What does JAMin do?
The whole purpose of JAMin is to do DSP. And if you make a send in
ardour... :) I Disagree. We
have 0% affordance, 0% appearance, 100% usability (not that
there really orthoganal). You cant have affordance if you dont have
control over appearance and layout.
Usability - as each host provides it's own UI for the same plugins,
there's really no usability at all. The true beauty about VSTs is that
they have the same visual appearance no matter which application you're
using. That's rule #1 for having usability at all. And then there's the
question of smaller usability issues, this varies from VST plugin to VST
plugin.
10:25 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Tue, 2004-06-08 at 12:11, Steve Harris wrote:
On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 01:52:02 +0200, Marek Peteraj
wrote:
The point I didnt make is that JAMin /cannot/ be implemented efficiently
as a set of plugins. The (majority, non-ladspa) DSP code is very
intermingled, to make it run in realtime.
How much DSP code is non-ladspa in JAMin? (approx. in %-age?)
Marek
JAMin is
not a plugin. Its an app.
Think about it.
A typical fx plugin takes audio as input does DSProcessing to the audio
and outputs that. What does JAMin do?
The whole purpose of JAMin is to do DSP. And if you make a send in
ardour... :)
11:52 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 04:24:05 +0200, Marek Peteraj wrote:
On Tue, 2004-06-08 at 12:11, Steve Harris wrote:
90%
The non-ladspa DSP code is 3800 lines (not inc. libraries), the LADSPA code
(including preamble, not libraries) is < 400.
- Steve
On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 01:52:02 +0200, Marek
Peteraj wrote:
The point I didnt make is that JAMin /cannot/ be implemented efficiently
as a set of plugins. The (majority, non-ladspa) DSP code is very
intermingled, to make it run in realtime.
How much DSP code is non-ladspa in JAMin? (approx. in %-age?) JAMin is
not a plugin. Its an app.
Think about it.
A typical fx plugin takes audio as input does DSProcessing to the audio
and outputs that. What does JAMin do?
The whole purpose of JAMin is to do DSP. And if you make a send in
ardour... :)
2:42 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Tue, 2004-06-08 at 15:43, Steve Harris wrote:
On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 04:24:05 +0200, Marek Peteraj
wrote:
Which part of that DSP code would be impossible to implement separately
as ladspa?
Marek
On Tue, 2004-06-08 at 12:11, Steve Harris wrote:
90%
The non-ladspa DSP code is 3800 lines (not inc. libraries), the LADSPA code
(including preamble, not libraries) is < 400. On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 01:52:02 +0200, Marek
Peteraj wrote:
How much DSP code is non-ladspa in JAMin? (approx. in %-age?) > JAMin is not a plugin. Its an app.
Think about it.
A typical fx plugin takes audio as input does DSProcessing to the audio
and outputs that. What does JAMin do?
The whole purpose of JAMin is to do DSP. And if you make a send in
ardour... :)
The point I didnt make is that JAMin /cannot/ be implemented efficiently
as a set of plugins. The (majority, non-ladspa) DSP code is very
intermingled, to make it run in realtime.
2:50 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 08:40:54 +0200, Marek Peteraj wrote:
90%
The non-ladspa DSP code is 3800 lines (not inc. libraries), the LADSPA code
(including preamble, not libraries) is < 400.
Which part of that DSP code would be impossible to implement separately
as ladspa?
Not impossible, just not efficiently. The EQ, xover and metering is all
combined together as they share a lot of internal (non time domain) data.
LADSPA can only input and output time domain audio data and control data.
Neither is appropraite, so you would have to do a lot of (expensive and
high latnecy) conversions before the inputs and outputs of each plugin.
- Steve
The point I
didnt make is that JAMin /cannot/ be implemented efficiently
as a set of plugins. The (majority, non-ladspa) DSP code is very
intermingled, to make it run in realtime.
How much DSP code is non-ladspa in JAMin? (approx. in %-age?) 
9 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
Hallo,
Marek Peteraj hat gesagt: // Marek Peteraj wrote:
Usability - as each host provides it's own UI for
the same plugins,
there's really no usability at all. The true beauty about VSTs is that
they have the same visual appearance no matter which application you're
using. That's rule #1 for having usability at all.
I disagree. I really hate probably 95 percent of the VST GUIs I saw on
screenshots. If I was forced to use on of those eye-candy,
hardware-lookalike, un-ergonomic interfaces for LA-DSP-A plugins, I
would probably stop using them.
I use LADSPA plugins a lot in Pd, and there I just hide those controls
I don't need (often because they are updated by scripting), and make
those I do need much larger and colorful. Even just having to handle
lots of small applications windows instead of my clean (to me) reduced
Pd GUI (like http://footils.org/images/show.png) would really annoy
me. So votes-- for GUI Ladspa. ;)
Ciao
--
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org__
10:25 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Tue, 2004-06-08 at 12:51, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Hallo,
Marek Peteraj hat gesagt: // Marek Peteraj wrote:
Judging from the current situation of the audio market that includes
proprietary app/plugins, the popularity thereof, from the numerous
reviews i've seen and from the numerous forum threads i've read...
You're representing a very small minority :)
Marek
Usability - as each host provides it's own UI
for the same plugins,
there's really no usability at all. The true beauty about VSTs is that
they have the same visual appearance no matter which application you're
using. That's rule #1 for having usability at all.
I disagree. I really hate probably 95 percent of the VST GUIs I saw on
screenshots.
1:59 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
Hallo,
Marek Peteraj hat gesagt: // Marek Peteraj wrote:
Judging from the current situation of the audio market
that includes
proprietary app/plugins, the popularity thereof, from the numerous
reviews i've seen and from the numerous forum threads i've read...
You're representing a very small minority :)
True, my taste is special, but it's also, because people working with
Pd, Max/MSP, Supercollider or similar tools have everything they need
in those apps, thus in general they don't need to hunt down new hip
applications, which often are only doing a single task, in magazines.
But I intended to point out two other things:
* First is, that usability has nothing to do with nice looks. I
truely believe - and given some research time, I'm sure I could prove
it as well - that photorealistic graphical user interfaces modelled
after hardware when shown on a screen are far from usability. Other
people will probably want just that: photo-GUIs. I fear, looking at
the commercial audio market, that exactly these might happen in the
Linux Sound world: eye candy, but bad usability.
* and then I'd like to add, that usabilty in the Linux world comes
from customizabilty, which is mostly absent in the Windows world. The
Unix philosphy is built upon small (or specific) tools that can be
combined in various, *custom* ways and that can be used to let the
computer appear in a way, the user wants, not the other way around.
LADSPA combined with Jack is of course a good example of this
philosophy. Look e.g. at Jackrack: it does provide a consistent GUI
for LADSPA plugins, that you could use just fine with every other
jack-enabled application, and one will get a very usable and
consistent interface. And that even without Steve wasting his precious
time writing GUI code. ;)
Ciao
--
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org__
2:40 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 05:50:42 +0200, Frank Barknecht wrote:
But I intended to point out two other things:
* First is, that usability has nothing to do with nice looks. I
truely believe - and given some research time, I'm sure I could prove
it as well - that photorealistic graphical user interfaces modelled
after hardware when shown on a screen are far from usability. Other
people will probably want just that: photo-GUIs. I fear, looking at
the commercial audio market, that exactly these might happen in the
Linux Sound world: eye candy, but bad usability.
Theres two seperate points there:
"...that usability has nothing to do with nice looks"
Hmm, maybe, depends how you define 'nice'. nice != photorealsitic in my
book. I think ableton live is 'nice', and it has a very useable UI - an
equivlanet built with stock GTK/Qt slider widgets would be nowhere near as
usable, IMHO.
and "...I truely believe - and given some research time, I'm sure I could
prove it as well - that photorealistic graphical user interfaces modelled
after hardware when shown on a screen are far from usability..."
That I agree with, with a very small number of exceptions.
LADSPA combined with Jack is of course a good example
of this
philosophy. Look e.g. at Jackrack: it does provide a consistent GUI
for LADSPA plugins, that you could use just fine with every other
jack-enabled application, and one will get a very usable and
consistent interface. And that even without Steve wasting his precious
time writing GUI code. ;)
Thats true (and I have no intention of wasting my time writing GUI code
:). But, there are plugins that could be better with *appropriate* UIs, it
doesnt take much, but I think it can make a huge difference - e.g.
superlooper. There are also plugins that aren't being written, becuase
they would just be unusable.
- Steve
4:02 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
Hallo,
Steve Harris hat gesagt: // Steve Harris wrote:
Theres two seperate points there:
"...that usability has nothing to do with nice looks"
Hmm, maybe, depends how you define 'nice'. nice != photorealsitic in my
book. I think ableton live is 'nice', and it has a very useable UI - an
equivlanet built with stock GTK/Qt slider widgets would be nowhere near as
usable, IMHO.
Okay, "nice" was much too general. But I'm glad you brought Live up.
Live is actually a really usable and innovative GUI, because it does
*not* try to model hardware at all. This is a GUI that obviously was
intended and designed to be used on the screen of a computer. Ableton
did a great job here, but they were also taking quite a risk with
doing so. When Live wasn't as widely know as it is now, "business"
people were telling Ableton: "You'll never sell that. It looks too
flat."
What I meant with "nice" is more in the vein of this here:
http://www.propellerheads.se/products/reason/img/closeup/redrum/closeup-red…
I mean, it looks like a nice piece of hardware, but what good is that
on screen. You don't even know which button is more important that
others. And why are there srews? And Reason gets especially terrible
if you look at the moving cables on the back. Ah well, I could go on
for hours on how terrible I think this is... ;)
Ciao
--
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org__
9 Jun
9 Jun
4:57 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 07:53:43PM +0200, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Hallo,
Steve Harris hat gesagt: // Steve Harris wrote:
What I meant with "nice" is more in the vein of this here:
http://www.propellerheads.se/products/reason/img/closeup/redrum/closeup-red…
I mean, it looks like a nice piece of hardware, but what good is that
on screen. You don't even know which button is more important that
others. And why are there srews? And Reason gets especially terrible
if you look at the moving cables on the back. Ah well, I could go on
for hours on how terrible I think this is... ;)
the moving cables are quite distracting.
but you can right click on every jack and connect it to another jack via
the menu. and you can see the connections in the menu too.
reason also does a very good job at connecting everything for you.
this is of course only possible, because the reason building blocks are
really big. how should pd know how you wanted to have your objects
connected ?
i consider the eyecandy RACK part of reason only for playing (fooling)
around with the effects. so that you get to know them.
you can rightclick on every control, and add a control track to the
sequencer.
and that is what makes reason a nice tool. the sequencer is integrated
with the rack part.
imagine you got muse sequencing pd and you can add a control track to
muse with one mouse click on a pd control. (not to mention, that you can
record automation from pd to muses control track)
this is why i am still tempted to implement a full sequencer into galan
someday. But it would be much better to define some API to make this
possible in the UNIX way.
if reason had a schematic behind the rack i would be quite happy with
it. (well should run under linux and be jackified :)
--
torben Hohn
http://galan.sourceforge.net -- The graphical Audio language
6:05 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Wednesday 09 June 2004 08.53, torbenh(a)gmx.de wrote:
On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 07:53:43PM +0200, Frank
Barknecht wrote:
Hey! That's a nice idea. Don't patent it ;)
Hallo,
Steve Harris hat gesagt: // Steve Harris wrote:
What I meant with "nice" is more in the vein of this here:
http://www.propellerheads.se/products/reason/img/closeup/redrum/closeup-r
edrum450.jpg
I mean, it looks like a nice piece of hardware, but what good is that
on screen. You don't even know which button is more important that
others. And why are there srews? And Reason gets especially terrible
if you look at the moving cables on the back. Ah well, I could go on
for hours on how terrible I think this is... ;)
the moving cables are quite distracting.
but you can right click on every jack and connect it to another jack via
the menu. and you can see the connections in the menu too.
reason also does a very good job at connecting everything for you.
this is of course only possible, because the reason building blocks are
really big. how should pd know how you wanted to have your objects
connected ?
i consider the eyecandy RACK part of reason only for playing (fooling)
around with the effects. so that you get to know them.
you can rightclick on every control, and add a control track to the
sequencer.
and that is what makes reason a nice tool. the sequencer is integrated
with the rack part.
imagine you got muse sequencing pd and you can add a control track to
muse with one mouse click on a pd control. (not to mention, that you can
record automation from pd to muses control track)
this is why i am still tempted to implement a full sequencer into galan
someday. But it would be much better to define some API to make this
possible in the UNIX way.
That would be the way to go. I have to give this some thought...
/Robert
if reason had a schematic behind the rack i would be
quite happy with
it. (well should run under linux and be jackified :)
--
http://spamatica.se/music/
8 Jun
8 Jun
2:56 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Tue, 2004-06-08 at 17:50, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Hallo,
Marek Peteraj hat gesagt: // Marek Peteraj wrote:
Wrong. :)
Judging from the current situation of the audio
market that includes
proprietary app/plugins, the popularity thereof, from the numerous
reviews i've seen and from the numerous forum threads i've read...
You're representing a very small minority :)
True, my taste is special, but it's also, because people working with
Pd, Max/MSP, Supercollider or similar tools have everything they need
in those apps, thus in general they don't need to hunt down new hip
applications, which often are only doing a single task, in magazines.
But I intended to point out two other things:
* First is, that usability has nothing to do with nice looks. I
truely believe - and given some research time, I'm sure I could prove
it as well - that photorealistic graphical user interfaces modelled
after hardware when shown on a screen are far from usability.
It all depends on how you perceive different controls (different knobs
in different sections etc) and how you learn ot perceive them, i.e. how
you get to know them and how you get used to them.
Second thing is that the way you percieve them shouldn't change as you
switch applications. Which is what VST perfectly fulfills - it provides
its own UI.
Virtual 3d guis copy the real world. Try to do it the other way around,
with widget sliders and one color for both sliders and background(most
cases). Imagine a hw which would look like that.
Another such case is animations in UI. They improve usability aswell.
If carefully adjusted, they help to prevent sudden changes in the UI.
Animations are not just eye-candy.
Other
people will probably want just that: photo-GUIs.
Because they're easier to learn and get used to.
I fear, looking at
the commercial audio market, that exactly these might happen in the
Linux Sound world: eye candy, but bad usability.
What you probably prefer is modularity rather than usability. It's what
the term usability means for you.
* and then I'd like to add, that usabilty in the Linux world comes
from customizabilty,
Usability != modularity. See the Gnome HiG for examples.
Marek
3:49 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 08:55:16PM +0200, Marek Peteraj wrote:
Initially, sure; they look familiar.
But I don't believe you can simply imitate hardware and get a good UI without
thinking critically about each widget. A lot is lost in the
translation. Remember that hardware still offers vastly better visual
resolution, tactile feedback (e.g. potentiometer detents, switch clicks),
more physical space (even a lowly Mackie 1604 mixer doesn't fit on a single
display at actual size), and a much lower impedance to physical control
(compare moving a physical slider to clicking and dragging an onscreen slider
via a mouse; also, you have two hands and can use them easily at once,
but you only get one mouse.)
Even when a photo-GUI approach is chosen, there's no need to take it
to extremes. Think of Reason. You flip the "rack" around to look at
the connecting "cables" and they show you fans, screws, fuse holders...
goofy.
--
Paul Winkler
http://www.slinkp.com
Virtual 3d guis copy the real world. Try to do it the
other way around,
with widget sliders and one color for both sliders and background(most
cases). Imagine a hw which would look like that.
I agree with your point here. I used to have a Yamaha four-track
that had nothing but black sliders (no knobs) on a black background.
It was horrible to use - there was no visual or tactile
distinction
Other
people will probably want just that: photo-GUIs.
Because they're easier to learn and get used to.
4:20 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
Hallo,
Marek Peteraj hat gesagt: // Marek Peteraj wrote:
I never have used a hardware synth. Why should I first learn to
understand hardware when I only want to use software? Imagine if Word
would show a rendered, animated image of an old fashioned typewriter
with paper extending from it as its interface. It's really strange
that audio software makers can get away with this kind of GUI design
approach.
It's okay and useful to use metaphors that are common in music
production. You see this everywhere. Ardour does this with its mixing
desk. But in Ardour this is just a metaphor, not a copy.
But then, even the GUI gurus at Apple were forced to show a
photorealistic hard disk on the OS-X desktop. Why they did, fails
me...
Well, I also want modularity, but here I'm really talking about
customizability. Maybe an ideal GUI would not need that - which I
doubt. But I'm talking about things like making it easy or possible to
allow me to customize my workspace. If someone clones Reason and
inserts fans and screws, I'd like to be able to hide them or to use
another GUI.
Ciao
--
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org__
Second thing is that the way you percieve them
shouldn't change as you
switch applications. Which is what VST perfectly fulfills - it provides
its own UI.
True somehow but then also not: If I don't like a UI I'd like to be
able to change it. That's something valueable that VST doesn't allow
you to do - or makes it harder. Usablity also has to do with what
people ae used to. I think, Emacs is not useable, Emacs users think,
Vim is not. But actually both are useable, just not if you're used to
something else.
Virtual 3d guis copy the real world. Try to do it the
other way
around, with widget sliders and one color for both sliders and
background(most cases). Imagine a hw which would look like that.
I'm not at all against GUIs and colors. I'm only against drop shadows
(most of the time) and screws and fans (always). ;)
Other people
will probably want just that: photo-GUIs.
Because they're easier to learn and get used to. I fear,
looking at the commercial audio market, that exactly these
might happen in the Linux Sound world: eye candy, but bad
usability.
What you probably prefer is modularity rather than usability. It's
what the term usability means for you. 
4:54 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 08:12:07PM +0200, Frank Barknecht wrote:
But then, even the GUI gurus at Apple were forced to
show a
photorealistic hard disk on the OS-X desktop. Why they did, fails
me...
surprisingly, each single partition is shown with a photorealistic
hard disk. surprisingly, if you open the cover of a mac after
partitioning it's really divided into several disks :-)
martin
5 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Tue, 2004-06-08 at 14:12, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Hallo,
Marek Peteraj hat gesagt: // Marek Peteraj wrote:
VST certainly does allow this. When using VST plugins in Ableton Live,
the default interface is Live's widgets, but then you click on the
wrench (or whatever its supposed to be) and it opens up the VST plugin's
native GUI. I am not sure how hard this was for them to do of course,
but it works, brilliantly. This is really the only way to go, provide a
default but allow it to be overridden.
Lee
Second thing is that the way you percieve them
shouldn't change as you
switch applications. Which is what VST perfectly fulfills - it provides
its own UI.
True somehow but then also not: If I don't like a UI I'd like to be
able to change it. That's something valueable that VST doesn't allow
you to do - or makes it harder.
10:46 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
Hallo,
Lee Revell hat gesagt: // Lee Revell wrote:
On Tue, 2004-06-08 at 14:12, Frank Barknecht wrote:
You got me when I was cheating. ;) Actually I found out it's the same
in VST for Pd (on Win, but also using vstserver): You can still
control the plugin through Pd's internal messages and the actual GUI
only shows when you tell it to do so. So yes, my argument wasn't
fully valid, sorry.
So maybe it's like this: eye-candy GUI is fine, but please do also
allow some kind of textual control using maybe D-Bus, which I don't
know, or maybe OSC, which already is common and accepted in the music
world, or something else.
Ciao
--
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org__
True somehow but then also not: If I don't
like a UI I'd like to be
able to change it. That's something valueable that VST doesn't allow
you to do - or makes it harder.
VST certainly does allow this. When using VST plugins in Ableton Live,
the default interface is Live's widgets, but then you click on the
wrench (or whatever its supposed to be) and it opens up the VST plugin's
native GUI.
9 Jun
9 Jun
7:22 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 02:38:04 +0200, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Hallo,
Lee Revell hat gesagt: // Lee Revell wrote:
Actually it was - you can have 1 cutom UI that will work in any host, and
any number of generic, host specific UIs.
If the user wants to build thier own (curses for e.g.) UI to work in
all hosts, theyre screwed.
- Steve
On Tue, 2004-06-08 at 14:12, Frank Barknecht
wrote:
You got me when I was cheating. ;) Actually I found out it's the same
in VST for Pd (on Win, but also using vstserver): You can still
control the plugin through Pd's internal messages and the actual GUI
only shows when you tell it to do so. So yes, my argument wasn't
fully valid, sorry. True somehow but then also not: If I don't
like a UI I'd like to be
able to change it. That's something valueable that VST doesn't allow
you to do - or makes it harder.
VST certainly does allow this. When using VST plugins in Ableton Live,
the default interface is Live's widgets, but then you click on the
wrench (or whatever its supposed to be) and it opens up the VST plugin's
native GUI.
5:06 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 02:51:19PM -0400, Lee Revell wrote:
On Tue, 2004-06-08 at 14:12, Frank Barknecht wrote:
if i try out a new VST plug i open its GUI. with the GUI i get a nice
and compact look of all its controls.
If i want to use the plugin i resort to rebuilding the GUI with galan
controls (they have better functionality).
its all there and its your choice.
but there are of course several vst plugins, where you need the GUI,
because the controls cant be mapped to knobs or sliders.
--
torben Hohn
http://galan.sourceforge.net -- The graphical Audio language
Hallo,
Marek Peteraj hat gesagt: // Marek Peteraj wrote:
VST certainly does allow this. When using VST plugins in Ableton Live,
the default interface is Live's widgets, but then you click on the
wrench (or whatever its supposed to be) and it opens up the VST plugin's
native GUI. I am not sure how hard this was for them to do of course,
but it works, brilliantly. This is really the only way to go, provide a
default but allow it to be overridden. Second thing is that the way you percieve them
shouldn't change as you
switch applications. Which is what VST perfectly fulfills - it provides
its own UI.
True somehow but then also not: If I don't like a UI I'd like to be
able to change it. That's something valueable that VST doesn't allow
you to do - or makes it harder.
5:59 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
if i try out a new VST plug i open its GUI. with the GUI i get a nice
and compact look of all its controls.
If i want to use the plugin i resort to rebuilding the GUI with galan
controls (they have better functionality).
its all there and its your choice.
but there are of course several vst plugins, where you need the GUI,
because the controls cant be mapped to knobs or sliders.
Is there really? This would make automation impossible.
/Robert
--
http://spamatica.se/music/
7:24 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 09:44:49 +0200, Robert Jonsson wrote:
Automation in VST is pretty much broken AFAICT. It relys on explicit
support from the plugins to work.
- Steve
if i try out a new VST plug i open its GUI. with the GUI i get a nice
and compact look of all its controls.
If i want to use the plugin i resort to rebuilding the GUI with galan
controls (they have better functionality).
its all there and its your choice.
but there are of course several vst plugins, where you need the GUI,
because the controls cant be mapped to knobs or sliders.
Is there really? This would make automation impossible.
10 Jun
10 Jun
8 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 10:16:00AM +0100, Steve Harris wrote:
On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 09:44:49 +0200, Robert Jonsson
wrote:
Automation in VST is pretty much broken AFAICT. It relys on explicit
support from the plugins to work.
i am tempted to say "not true" but i may miss something.
- there is a setParameter() call on the plugin (so i can automate it)
- the plugin calls me back if i do changes in the UI.
what am i missing ?
--
torben Hohn
http://galan.sourceforge.net -- The graphical Audio language
if i try out a new VST plug i open its GUI. with the GUI i get a nice
and compact look of all its controls.
If i want to use the plugin i resort to rebuilding the GUI with galan
controls (they have better functionality).
its all there and its your choice.
but there are of course several vst plugins, where you need the GUI,
because the controls cant be mapped to knobs or sliders.
Is there really? This would make automation impossible.
7:42 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Thu, Jun 10, 2004 at 11:57:06 +0200, torbenh(a)gmx.de wrote:
OK, I'm wrong - I was unde the impression that the UI could directly
change/pass values in/to the plugin without telling the host.
- Steve
Automation in
VST is pretty much broken AFAICT. It relys on explicit
support from the plugins to work.
i am tempted to say "not true" but i may miss something.
- there is a setParameter() call on the plugin (so i can automate it)
- the plugin calls me back if i do changes in the UI.
what am i missing ? 
11 Jun
11 Jun
5:41 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Thursday 10 Jun 2004 10:34 pm, Steve Harris wrote:
On Thu, Jun 10, 2004 at 11:57:06 +0200, torbenh(a)gmx.de
wrote:
OK, I'm wrong - I was unde the impression that the UI could
directly change/pass values in/to the plugin without telling the
host.
It can, can't it? Torben's "the plugin calls me back" is how it's
intended to work, but there's nothing to enforce it. Still, if a
plugin said it was automatable but failed to do that, it would really
be the plugin that was broken.
Chris
Automation in VST is pretty much broken AFAICT. It relys on
explicit support from the plugins to work.
i am tempted to say "not true" but i may miss something.
- there is a setParameter() call on the plugin (so i can automate
it)
- the plugin calls me back if i do changes in the UI.
what am i missing ?
9 Jun
9 Jun
5:01 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 08:12:07PM +0200, Frank Barknecht wrote:
But then, even the GUI gurus at Apple were forced to
show a
photorealistic hard disk on the OS-X desktop. Why they did, fails
me...
has the avarage mac user ever seen a HardDisk ? :))
--
torben Hohn
http://galan.sourceforge.net -- The graphical Audio language
5:37 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On tis, 2004-06-08 at 20:12, Frank Barknecht wrote:
But then, even the GUI gurus at Apple were forced to
show a
photorealistic hard disk on the OS-X desktop. Why they did, fails
me...
... and it is even weirder when you consider that most Apple consumers
never open their boxes and have no idea what it looks like inside.
/jens :)
7:19 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 08:12:07 +0200, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Hallo,
Marek Peteraj hat gesagt: // Marek Peteraj wrote:
FWIW the DSSI UI protocol allows this. I wouldn't really consider a
hardcoded UI system sane if it didn't allow users to replace the UI.
The UI is just an executable on disk that is run when the host wants the
open hte UI for the first time - it could eg. be a scrit that spawns Pd and
then uses a Pdpatch to control the host via OS ;)
- Steve
Second thing is that the way you percieve them
shouldn't change as you
switch applications. Which is what VST perfectly fulfills - it provides
its own UI.
True somehow but then also not: If I don't like a UI I'd like to be
able to change it. That's something valueable that VST doesn't allow
you to do - or makes it harder. Usablity also has to do with what
people ae used to. I think, Emacs is not useable, Emacs users think,
Vim is not. But actually both are useable, just not if you're used to
something else.
7:25 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 10:10:43 +0100, Steve Harris wrote:
open hte UI for the first time - it could eg. be a
scrit that spawns Pd and
then uses a Pdpatch to control the host via OS ;)
OSC of course.
8 Jun
8 Jun
5:24 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
Just some thoughts...
As one who tends to use more than build these things, I can see the
pros and cons of the photorealistic GUI. For one thing, if it's
simulating a piece of equipment I once used (many years ago ;-) )
having the GUI mirror the original HW device makes a lot of sense
because I immediately remember how to run it. All my favourite
settings all "patch in" quite naturally. I like that. I can't
imagine trying to run a Mini-Moog plug in that didn't look like
one.
Having said that, I used to play my Moog with the knobs as well,
not just the keyboard. That wouldn't be very easy to do with the
GUI.
I also like the argument for knobs when you use them for settings
not going to change them much once they're set, so useability isn't
as big of an issue. Sliders aren't nearly as practical for this job.
On the other hand, I like being able to change the look of something
once I've gotten the feel of it, ala "skins". Like having the full
screen version with all the knobs and sliders and blinky lights, but
be able to minimize the effect to tiny primary controls once I have
it set up the way I want.
I know, I know, I don't ask for much. ;-) And I don't do GUI's
either. Actually, I've done so much deep level real-time systems
coding in the last 20 years, I'm very happy to let faster younger
folks have at it so I can spend my time making *MUSIC* which is
kinda my point for being here. All the same, I'm adamant about
supporting GPL solutions in professional digital audio, and the
more we can consense on what works *well enough*for most of us,
the more we move toward useability and interchangability. I'm
not so sure about "affordance" though. ;-)
Okay, there's my $1.27 worth.
Clean tracks for all!
~Jos~
9 Jun
9 Jun
5:15 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 12:16:16PM -0700, Jos Laake wrote:
Just some thoughts...
As one who tends to use more than build these things, I can see the
pros and cons of the photorealistic GUI. For one thing, if it's
simulating a piece of equipment I once used (many years ago ;-) )
having the GUI mirror the original HW device makes a lot of sense
because I immediately remember how to run it. All my favourite
settings all "patch in" quite naturally. I like that. I can't
imagine trying to run a Mini-Moog plug in that didn't look like
one.
Having said that, I used to play my Moog with the knobs as well,
not just the keyboard. That wouldn't be very easy to do with the
GUI.
I also like the argument for knobs when you use them for settings
not going to change them much once they're set, so useability isn't
as big of an issue. Sliders aren't nearly as practical for this job.
On the other hand, I like being able to change the look of something
once I've gotten the feel of it, ala "skins". Like having the full
screen version with all the knobs and sliders and blinky lights, but
be able to minimize the effect to tiny primary controls once I have
it set up the way I want.
hopefully i will find the time to add this on the fly change to control
panels to galan soon.
should not be that much code. but i am not sure about the UI.
I know, I know, I don't ask for much. ;-) And I don't do GUI's
well for galan its not THAT much anymore.
either. Actually, I've done so much deep level
real-time systems
coding in the last 20 years, I'm very happy to let faster younger
folks have at it so I can spend my time making *MUSIC* which is
kinda my point for being here. All the same, I'm adamant about
supporting GPL solutions in professional digital audio, and the
more we can consense on what works *well enough*for most of us,
the more we move toward useability and interchangability. I'm
not so sure about "affordance" though. ;-)
Okay, there's my $1.27 worth.
Clean tracks for all!
~Jos~
--
torben Hohn
http://galan.sourceforge.net -- The graphical Audio language
7:13 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
Marek Peteraj <marpet(a)naex.sk> writes:
...
Second thing is that the way you percieve them shouldn't change as you
switch applications. Which is what VST perfectly fulfills - it provides
its own UI.
If I have 100 LADSPA plug-ins installed and 3 LADSPA hosts, I'd rather
spend my time learning the guis of the 3 host-applications than
learning the different guis of 100 plug-ins. That a plug-in then has
three different interfaces depending on in which application I use it
isn't a problem. Also it looks a lot better (imho) when everything in
an application looks exactly the same. Letting plug-ins decide too
much about how they should be rendered is a bad thing. A little more
control than today could be useful at times though.
br /Pelle
7:33 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 11:04:09 +0200, Pelle Nilsson wrote:
If I have 100 LADSPA plug-ins installed and 3 LADSPA
hosts, I'd rather
spend my time learning the guis of the 3 host-applications than
learning the different guis of 100 plug-ins. That a plug-in then has
three different interfaces depending on in which application I use it
isn't a problem. Also it looks a lot better (imho) when everything in
an application looks exactly the same. Letting plug-ins decide too
much about how they should be rendered is a bad thing. A little more
control than today could be useful at times though.
Of those 100 plugins I image that only a about 10 or so would want / need
/ justify a custom UI.
...though that does sound worryingly like dangerously inaccurate early
computing predictions. "I predict that within 100 years, computers will
be twice as powerful, 10,000 times larger, and so expensive that only the
five richest kings of Europe will own them" -- Professor John Frink.
- Steve
5:37 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 11:04, Pelle Nilsson wrote:
Marek Peteraj <marpet(a)naex.sk> writes:
Well, no. As hosts only provide a slider for each parameter, there is
absolutely no layout, controls aren't organised in a logical way. No
visual clues - except a slider. All the parameters in all existing
ladspa plugins can be (and usually are) fundamentally different, but
you're only providing - a slider.(or a knob?) So you end up with 3x100.
Look at the tape delay ladspa plugin for instance.
Compare it to this for example:
http://www.kvr-vst.com/i/b/asiofxproc.jpg
Also, current ladspas are way to simple, so in order to achieve some
more complex dsp schemes you need to put lots of ladspas in say one
mixer strip. The order makes a difference, but there's no easy and
obvious way to reorder them.
http://www.beatmode.com/ohm-boyz/art/classic.jpg
That tiny green glowing button (LPF) is exactly one ladspa plugin these
days.
Looking at the number of i/os is horrible. 1/1, 2/1 1/2 1/3 etc etc.
Is that even close to usable?
Marek
...
Second thing is that the way you percieve them shouldn't change as you
switch applications. Which is what VST perfectly fulfills - it provides
its own UI.
If I have 100 LADSPA plug-ins installed and 3 LADSPA hosts, I'd rather
spend my time learning the guis of the 3 host-applications than
learning the different guis of 100 plug-ins. That a plug-in then has
three different interfaces depending on in which application I use it
isn't a problem. 
10 Jun
10 Jun
8:11 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 11:35:38PM +0200, Marek Peteraj wrote:
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 11:04, Pelle Nilsson wrote:
thats why the galan library needs to be extended :)
you can build custom UIs for all LADSPAs....
http://galan.sourceforge.net/eq-shot.png
if the gfx is not painted by me it looks like:
http://galan.sourceforge.net/anti-aliased-knobs.png
--
torben Hohn
http://galan.sourceforge.net -- The graphical Audio language
Marek Peteraj <marpet(a)naex.sk> writes:
Well, no. As hosts only provide a slider for each parameter, there is
absolutely no layout, controls aren't organised in a logical way. No
visual clues - except a slider. All the parameters in all existing
ladspa plugins can be (and usually are) fundamentally different, but
you're only providing - a slider.(or a knob?) So you end up with 3x100.
Look at the tape delay ladspa plugin for instance. ...
Second thing is that the way you percieve them shouldn't change as you
switch applications. Which is what VST perfectly fulfills - it provides
its own UI.
If I have 100 LADSPA plug-ins installed and 3 LADSPA hosts, I'd rather
spend my time learning the guis of the 3 host-applications than
learning the different guis of 100 plug-ins. That a plug-in then has
three different interfaces depending on in which application I use it
isn't a problem. 
2:24 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Thu, 2004-06-10 at 06:07, torbenh(a)gmx.de wrote:
On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 11:35:38PM +0200, Marek
Peteraj wrote:
FWIW, galan doesn't get enough recognition around here. As far as I'm
concerned galan (potentially anyway) makes the whole LADSPA plugin GUI
debate irrelevant (for my purposes).
I'd rather build a synth out of "building blocks" (oscillators and
envelopes and whatnot) and build a proper synth front panel for it after
the fact (that looks like a virus C or whatever) than have a VSTi style
synth plugin with a built-in candy GUI.
Galan being modular means you can modify the synth to do anything you
want, which is nice. If all you have is a synth front panel flexibility
is pretty limited (think trying to do FM synthesis in amSynth - you
can't)
The same applies to ams, but my computer is too slow to run it fast
enough. :D
-DR-
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 11:04, Pelle Nilsson
wrote:
thats why the galan library needs to be extended :)
you can build custom UIs for all LADSPAs....
http://galan.sourceforge.net/eq-shot.png
if the gfx is not painted by me it looks like:
http://galan.sourceforge.net/anti-aliased-knobs.png Marek Peteraj <marpet(a)naex.sk> writes:
Well, no. As hosts only provide a slider for each parameter, there is
absolutely no layout, controls aren't organised in a logical way. No
visual clues - except a slider. All the parameters in all existing
ladspa plugins can be (and usually are) fundamentally different, but
you're only providing - a slider.(or a knob?) So you end up with 3x100.
Look at the tape delay ladspa plugin for instance. ...
Second thing is that the way you percieve them shouldn't change as you
switch applications. Which is what VST perfectly fulfills - it provides
its own UI.
If I have 100 LADSPA plug-ins installed and 3 LADSPA hosts, I'd rather
spend my time learning the guis of the 3 host-applications than
learning the different guis of 100 plug-ins. That a plug-in then has
three different interfaces depending on in which application I use it
isn't a problem.
8 Jun
8 Jun
5:47 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
Frank Barknecht wrote:
LADSPA combined with Jack is of course a good example
of this
philosophy. Look e.g. at Jackrack: it does provide a consistent GUI
for LADSPA plugins, that you could use just fine with every other
jack-enabled application, and one will get a very usable and
consistent interface. And that even without Steve wasting his
precious time writing GUI code. ;)
BTW, Jackrack causes my system to freeze up. Anybody else experiencing
this?
~Jos~
5:56 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 05:50:42PM +0200, Frank Barknecht wrote:
* First is, that usability has nothing to do with nice
looks. I
truely believe - and given some research time, I'm sure I could prove
it as well - that photorealistic graphical user interfaces modelled
after hardware when shown on a screen are far from usability.
I couldn't agree more. I like keyboard input (mostly computer keyboard,
not synth.) and I don't need and dont want "realistic" GUIs that
generally waste more space. I want clarity and fast editing.
As an example of a quite popular application on the windows world that
usually keeps away from photorealistic GUIs for plugins, take a look at
Buzz - http://www.buzzmachines.com/ has about 800 plugins, increasing
with a couple a month - and buzz itself hasn't been updated in ages.
* and then I'd like to add, that usabilty in the
Linux world comes
from customizabilty, which is mostly absent in the Windows world. The
Unix philosphy is built upon small (or specific) tools that can be
combined in various, *custom* ways and that can be used to let the
computer appear in a way, the user wants, not the other way around.
There is just one problem with this approach; that once you have
seperate apps for different parts of your composition, it's usually a
lot more hassle to set up than a big giant app when you want to work
on it again. I vaguely remember a discussion on this list about an
application or library that was supposed to take care of this issue,
but I can't find it. Does anyone have any pointers?
Cheers,
Joost.
6:53 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Tue, 2004-06-08 at 15:51, Joost Diepenmaat wrote:
There is just one problem with this approach; that
once you have
seperate apps for different parts of your composition, it's usually a
lot more hassle to set up than a big giant app when you want to work
on it again. I vaguely remember a discussion on this list about an
application or library that was supposed to take care of this issue,
but I can't find it. Does anyone have any pointers?
Cheers,
Joost.
Yep, that's LADCCA, now renamed LASH (LASH Audio Session Handler).
http://lash-audio-session-handler.org/
-Dave Robillard (who came up with the new name, for the record :] )
8:34 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
Dave Robillard wrote:
Yep, that's LADCCA, now renamed LASH (LASH Audio
Session Handler).
http://lash-audio-session-handler.org/
For me the new page takes ages to load. Anyone else experiencing this?
Albert
--
Dr. Albert Gr"af
Dept. of Music-Informatics, University of Mainz, Germany
Email: Dr.Graef(a)t-online.de, ag(a)muwiinfa.geschichte.uni-mainz.de
WWW: http://www.musikwissenschaft.uni-mainz.de/~ag
7:03 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Tue, 8 Jun 2004 09:18:58 +0100
Steve Harris <S.W.Harris(a)ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:
[OOT] I used to think that a UI spec for LADSPA (to
make it competetive
with VST) was a technological problem. I now thinks its a manpower issue
(I think Paul Davis pointed this out a couple of years ago :). Games
develpment has moved to the point where the graphics work is more
expensive than the software development, and I bet its not far off in
plugin / eyecandy app development. We have no, or almost no, graphics
people here.
We don't necessarily need eyecandy, but the plain simple sliders provided
by most of the gui toolkits would be MAJORLY useful.
Erik
--
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
Erik de Castro Lopo nospam(a)mega-nerd.com (Yes it's valid)
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
A good debugger is no substitute for a good test suite.
7:27 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 06:54:32 +1000, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
On Tue, 8 Jun 2004 09:18:58 +0100
Steve Harris <S.W.Harris(a)ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:
I agree. I'm not rally fond of the "spinning cow" model of UI design, but
sensible layout and display would help immensly.
- Steve
[OOT] I used to think that a UI spec for LADSPA
(to make it competetive
with VST) was a technological problem. I now thinks its a manpower issue
(I think Paul Davis pointed this out a couple of years ago :). Games
develpment has moved to the point where the graphics work is more
expensive than the software development, and I bet its not far off in
plugin / eyecandy app development. We have no, or almost no, graphics
people here.
We don't necessarily need eyecandy, but the plain simple sliders provided
by most of the gui toolkits would be MAJORLY useful.
7:19 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
Forgot to add...
<snip>
... infact if you look in many LADSPA plugins you
will
see theres really more going on than there appears to be.
True that you can't have an ideal isolation of all DSP techniques,
whether simple of complex ones. But still, LADSPAs are simple plugins as
the name itself suggests.
<snip>
You mentioned JAMin - true that does use LADSPA
plugins -
<snip>
I just reused them (LADSPA plugins)
because I hate fixing bugs in two places :)
Which is perfect. :)
There are two advantages to this:
1. one ladspa package - get them all -- no need to chase for several
ladspas on the net. It's going to get ugly soon with the increasing
number of dsp devs.
2. 100% reusable -- interesting and attractive DSP stuff doesn't need to
be bound to one application - see glame high/low/band pass filters for
example.
7:29 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 01:17:25 +0200, Marek Peteraj wrote:
Forgot to add...
<snip>
The API is simple, /not/ the plugins!
I think you're tarring all plugins with my brush. In 2000 I was basicly a
DSP novice, so all my early plugins are a bit simplistic.
- Steve
... infact if you look in many LADSPA plugins you
will
see theres really more going on than there appears to be.
True that you can't have an ideal isolation of all DSP techniques,
whether simple of complex ones. But still, LADSPAs are simple plugins as
the name itself suggests.
7:56 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Tue, 2004-06-08 at 11:20, Steve Harris wrote:
On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 01:17:25 +0200, Marek Peteraj
wrote:
Fons' Moog HP filter is a complex piece of DSP i suspect.
But it's still a HP filter which is a smaller part of a complex synth,
or a complex fx.
Marek
Forgot to add...
<snip>
The API is simple, /not/ the plugins!
I think you're tarring all plugins with my brush. In 2000 I was basicly a
DSP novice, so all my early plugins are a bit simplistic. ... infact if you look in many LADSPA plugins you
will
see theres really more going on than there appears to be.
True that you can't have an ideal isolation of all DSP techniques,
whether simple of complex ones. But still, LADSPAs are simple plugins as
the name itself suggests. 
5:02 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 01:54:58PM +0200, Marek Peteraj wrote:
Fons' Moog HP filter is a complex piece of DSP i
suspect.
No, it's actually quite simple :-) The most complex one is
the four-band parametric filter I released recently, and
that's also the only one that is not intended as an AMS
plugin. And it will reappear in some time as a JACK
application with it's own GUI, as this permits to do some
things that would be difficult in a plugin.
Just to throw in my 2 eurocents in this debate:
- When I saw the collection of VST plugins that Paul Davis used
to show his VST hosting in Karlsruhe, I asked myself "My god,
do they all look that childish ?". This is just to say I terribly
dislike this eye-candy style, and given the choice between that
and a (maybe boring) set of standard toolkit sliders, I'd prefer
the latter. The ideal is somewhere in between, but certainly not
to the eye-candy side.
- Before everything went digital, multitrack mixing desks had
lots of controls and very little space to put them in. Good
layout was absolutely essential, and most of the big name
manufacturers mastered this quite well. It's done by
- observing elementary aesthetic rules (e.g. color
combinations),
- removing all useless clutter,
- following the logic of the application, e.g. keeping
things that are related together,
- accepting culturally defined standards, such as that
a signal flows from left to right and from top to bottom.
- using hints that are picked up unconsciously, rather
than explicit labeling.
All of this is practically the inverse of eye-candy.
- Confucius says: When you see a piece of audio equipment
with the word "Professional" printed on it, then it probably
isn't.
- The typical VST plugin (talking about the serious ones)
corresponds more to a JACK application than a LADSPA plugin,
not because both have a GUI, but because of the complexity.
This is just a matter of naming. We could start calling a
JACK application a JACK 'plugin' but I'd vote against.
JAMIN is a good example of this.
- As to LADSPA plugins, we could probably give almost all
of them a very functional and nice GUI by defining a set
of a few dozens of 'widget types'. Then there are a few
options:
1. the plugin specifies the dimensions and positions of
all the widgets,
2. the dimensions are standard, and the plugins specifies
the positions only,
3. the host keeps it own database of layouts indexed by
plugin ID.
I'm somehow in favour of 3, if the host's end user has
a simple way to add new plugins to the database.
--
Fons
5:27 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Tuesday 08 Jun 2004 8:15 pm, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
- When I saw the collection of VST plugins that Paul
Davis used
to show his VST hosting in Karlsruhe, I asked myself "My god,
do they all look that childish ?".
I only saw this by webcam (and 'scuse me if I just digress to say how
much I enjoyed both this and your own presentation Fons) so I'm not
sure which plugins they were, or what they looked like. Anyone able
to name names, have links to screenshots etc?
There are a few VST plugins -- particularly synths -- that have
ridiculous cheesy GUIs that I really like, but there are plenty of
hopeless ones too.
Chris
9 Jun
9 Jun
4:07 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Tue, 2004-06-08 at 21:15, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 01:54:58PM +0200, Marek
Peteraj wrote:
Ask win32 and mac users how the linux audio UIs look like :)
Fons' Moog HP filter is a complex piece of
DSP i suspect.
No, it's actually quite simple :-) The most complex one is
the four-band parametric filter I released recently, and
that's also the only one that is not intended as an AMS
plugin. And it will reappear in some time as a JACK
application with it's own GUI, as this permits to do some
things that would be difficult in a plugin.
Just to throw in my 2 eurocents in this debate:
- When I saw the collection of VST plugins that Paul Davis used
to show his VST hosting in Karlsruhe, I asked myself "My god,
do they all look that childish ?". This is just to say I terribly
dislike this eye-candy style, and given the choice between that
and a (maybe boring) set of standard toolkit sliders, I'd prefer
the latter. The ideal is somewhere in between, but certainly not
to the eye-candy side.
- Before everything went digital, multitrack mixing desks had
lots of controls and very little space to put them in. Good
layout was absolutely essential, and most of the big name
manufacturers mastered this quite well. It's done by
- observing elementary aesthetic rules (e.g. color
combinations),
- removing all useless clutter,
thus saving a few bucks.. :)
- following the logic of the application, e.g.
keeping
things that are related together,
- accepting culturally defined standards, such as that
a signal flows from left to right and from top to bottom.
- using hints that are picked up unconsciously, rather
than explicit labeling.
Doesn't influence eye-candy much.
- The typical VST plugin (talking about the serious
ones)
corresponds more to a JACK application than a LADSPA plugin,
not because both have a GUI, but because of the complexity.
This is just a matter of naming. We could start calling a
JACK application a JACK 'plugin' but I'd vote against.
JAMIN is a good example of this.
But if you let JAMin run as the only client, you'll see it makes no
sense, since it needs audio input to be useful.
You guys are developers, but this could get rather confusing for users.
Marek
7:42 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 10:06:00 +0200, Marek Peteraj wrote:
But if you let JAMin run as the only client,
you'll see it makes no
sense, since it needs audio input to be useful.
Actually some people do - audio can come from outside PCs ;)
- Steve
7:58 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 10:06:00AM +0200, Marek Peteraj wrote:
Whatever they think about linux audio UIs, that will not change
my opinion expressed above.
There are various kinds of users of audio SW; their requirements
and opinions will vary. In my experience, most serious and
professional users prefer a UI that is first of all functional,
with as little clutter as possible, i.e. a UI that is designed
by people who understand how something works and how it is
used, rather than by the marketing department. This type of
user may be a minority, but they are the only ones that really
matter to me - I am neither a politician nor a salesman, and I
have no desire to be popular.
In a more general sense, a majority is not 'right' by itself,
a majority of informed people probably is. And having paid for
something does not qualify someone as informed. In other words,
the consumer is not always right by definition. If he were,
there would be no place for marketing, which has been defined
as 'the art of disturbing rational decision making'.
The audio business is full of hype and irrational behaviour.
Lots of people seem prepared to pay 5 Eur for a meter of
'directional oxygen free left-twisting copper' loudspeaker
cable. Should I take their opinion seriously ? I prefer not to.
*What* makes no sense ?
On Tue, 2004-06-08 at 21:15, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
- When I saw
the collection of VST plugins that Paul Davis used
to show his VST hosting in Karlsruhe, I asked myself "My god,
do they all look that childish ?".
Ask win32 and mac users how the linux audio UIs look like :) - The typical
VST plugin (talking about the serious ones)
corresponds more to a JACK application than a LADSPA plugin,
not because both have a GUI, but because of the complexity.
This is just a matter of naming. We could start calling a
JACK application a JACK 'plugin' but I'd vote against.
JAMIN is a good example of this.
But if you let JAMin run as the only client, you'll see it
makes no sense, since it needs audio input to be useful. You guys are developers, but this could get rather
confusing
for users.
When you buy a piece of equipment and put it somewhere in
your studio it doesn't make much sense until you connect it.
Most users *do* understand this.
--
FA
9:46 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 11:49, Alfons Adriaensen wrote:
On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 10:06:00AM +0200, Marek
Peteraj wrote:
Whatever they think about linux audio UIs, that will not change
my opinion expressed above.
It should if you don't do your program just for yourself.
On Tue, 2004-06-08 at 21:15, Fons Adriaensen
wrote:
- When I
saw the collection of VST plugins that Paul Davis used
to show his VST hosting in Karlsruhe, I asked myself "My god,
do they all look that childish ?".
Ask win32 and mac users how the linux audio UIs look like :) There are various kinds of users of audio SW; their
requirements
and opinions will vary. In my experience, most serious and
professional users prefer a UI that is first of all functional,
Have you done a survey?
with as little clutter as possible, i.e. a UI that is
designed
by people who understand how something works and how it is
used, rather than by the marketing department.
It's always done that way. It's because it's *driven* by market demand.
Those people are called usability engineers.
i.e. it is *never* designed by marketing department.
The kind of people that linux still totally lacks in certain areas.
Rule #1: comfort. technologies help to achieve that goal. We have tons
of great technologies, no comfort.
Software companies are not only about developers and sw technologies.
Lots of oss developers tend to think they can do it all. They can't.
Marek
10:14 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Wed, 09 Jun 2004 15:44:53 +0200, Marek Peteraj wrote
Most music software written for profit is now aimed at rich bedroom techno
making kids - hence all the flashy GUI's. Professional software (that costs
much much more) will often have much simpler, clean interfaces because if you
use it all day every day gimmicky GUI's tend to get very annoying very fast.
cheers,
dave
There are
various kinds of users of audio SW; their requirements
and opinions will vary. In my experience, most serious and
professional users prefer a UI that is first of all functional,
Have you done a survey?
10:44 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 14:05, Dave Griffiths wrote:
On Wed, 09 Jun 2004 15:44:53 +0200, Marek Peteraj
wrote
Most music software written for profit is now aimed at rich bedroom techno
making kids - hence all the flashy GUI's. Professional software (that costs
much much more) will often have much simpler, clean interfaces because if you
use it all day every day gimmicky GUI's tend to get very annoying very fast.
Really?
I can give you a perfect example - a *reference* DAW system - ProTools.
Which, in ver. 6, has gone eye-candy.
Guess why.
Another fine example - serious professionals using Mac, with macosx.
Pure eyecandy.
Marek
There are
various kinds of users of audio SW; their requirements
and opinions will vary. In my experience, most serious and
professional users prefer a UI that is first of all functional,
Have you done a survey?
10:55 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 04:42:32PM +0200, Marek Peteraj wrote:
I can give you a perfect example - a *reference* DAW
system - ProTools.
Which, in ver. 6, has gone eye-candy.
Guess why.
The core app is still pretty plain (apart from a bit a 3d-ish shading), its
the bundled plugins that are photorealistic.
http://www.digidesign.com/products/sw/index_tdm.cfm
- Steve
11:16 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 14:46, Steve Harris wrote:
On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 04:42:32PM +0200, Marek
Peteraj wrote:
Steve you can't be serious.
What about the transport bar? What about the buttons that switch modes,
the smallish transport bar next to them and the rest, what about the
R,I,S,M buttons in the track headers?
It's all chrome and glass.
Marek
I can give you a perfect example - a *reference*
DAW system - ProTools.
Which, in ver. 6, has gone eye-candy.
Guess why.
The core app is still pretty plain (apart from a bit a 3d-ish shading), its
the bundled plugins that are photorealistic.
http://www.digidesign.com/products/sw/index_tdm.cfm 
11:32 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 01:46:36PM +0100, Steve Harris wrote:
On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 04:42:32PM +0200, Marek
Peteraj wrote:
and neither do they market entirely to professionals. Most of
Digidesigns efforts in the last few years have been at the bottom
end of the market where they can shift more units. Their pro
hardware for example is looking quite sad these days.
One struggles to find pro music software in the same way that you get
in say the 3d industry. While i am not very familiar with them, i think
the Neve and SSL offerings are much more practical - not that they
are good examples to copy.
--
Tim Orford
I can give you a perfect example - a *reference*
DAW system - ProTools.
Which, in ver. 6, has gone eye-candy.
Guess why.
The core app is still pretty plain (apart from a bit a 3d-ish shading), its
the bundled plugins that are photorealistic.
http://www.digidesign.com/products/sw/index_tdm.cfm
11:57 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 15:15, Tim Orford wrote:
On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 01:46:36PM +0100, Steve Harris
wrote:
Right. Like this one:
http://www.digidesign.com/news/details.cfm?story_id=919&localonly=N
Sad we can't afford it. ;)
Marek
On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 04:42:32PM +0200, Marek
Peteraj wrote:
and neither do they market entirely to professionals. Most of
Digidesigns efforts in the last few years have been at the bottom
end of the market where they can shift more units. Their pro
hardware for example is looking quite sad these days. I can give you a perfect example - a *reference*
DAW system - ProTools.
Which, in ver. 6, has gone eye-candy.
Guess why.
The core app is still pretty plain (apart from a bit a 3d-ish shading), its
the bundled plugins that are photorealistic.
http://www.digidesign.com/products/sw/index_tdm.cfm
12:22 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 03:15:12PM +0200, Tim Orford wrote:
One struggles to find pro music software in the same
way that you get
in say the 3d industry. While i am not very familiar with them, i think
the Neve and SSL offerings are much more practical - not that they
are good examples to copy.
Having used both, I can only say they made fantastic hardware, if that's
anything to go by.
--
FA
1:04 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 04:13:21PM +0200, Alfons Adriaensen wrote:
i cant find any screenshots. Anyone know what their current
software offerings look like?
--
Tim Orford
One struggles
to find pro music software in the same way that you get
in say the 3d industry. While i am not very familiar with them, i think
the Neve and SSL offerings are much more practical - not that they
are good examples to copy.
Having used both, I can only say they made fantastic hardware, if that's
anything to go by.
4:13 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype [was: Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?}
I couldn't resist.
<snip>
a UI that is designed
by people who understand how something works and how it is
used, rather than by the marketing department.
<snip>
marketing, which has been defined
as 'the art of disturbing rational decision making'.
Let me give you a perfect example.
The line6 variax.
Guitar DSP modelling.
"What if your guitar could be every guitar?"
Pretty well described product, it offers 28 various types of guitars.
Fenders, Gibsons, Martins.
"There's something magical about playing a 50-year-old guitar. Even
better is a guitar that's actually been "played" every day of that
half-century. Those instruments have a sound to them that only comes
from the passing of time, hundreds of sessions, thousands of gigs... The
guitars that are modeled in Variax aren't just showroom pieces. They
have been played to perfection. These guitars have dings, scratches,
and, most importantly, unbelievable tone. With one knob and a 5-way
switch, Variax will take you through this historic collection of
guitars."
In other words, they have taken up to 50 year a old guitar model and
tried to model it as close as possible. And now they're describing it
with positive words.
Are they cheating with this kind of marketing?
Check the sound demos.
They sound great.
True, you can't go better than original, but you can get as close as
possible.
So, in other words - perfect product, perfect marketing - that includes
a perfect site, perfect sound demos, perfect descriptions(i.e. positive
ones). They're doomed to have success. And i wouldn't mind buying one.
Just as if i said: "There something magical about the sound of pipe
organs. No wonder they're called the kings of all musical instruments.
We have tried to model one such pipe organ as close as possible so that
you can enjoy playing a real church organ at home. Almost - the church
is missing. The sound isn't<link to sound demos>"
Would i cheat if i said that? Judging from the reactions of lots of
people, i'd say not at *all*. And you'd be surprised - your opinion
doesn't matter much to me, Fons. Why?
Because you'll always be critical and you'll always know what's missing
even if it's 0.1% of it all. Which is good for the DSP part of that
application, not the application as a whole.
Or...
"JACK, the award winning professional audio server that let's you
seamlessly connect each professional audio application and route audio
as you wish in an ultra-low-latency environment."
Is jack an award winning app? It is. (google if you don't believe me ;)
Is jack professional? It fulfills most conditions, one of them being
ultra-low-latency.
Most of linux audio apps intended for pro usage support jack today.
Is it a lie?
What you guys blatantly underestimate is that in order to bring your
apps to users (= having success, sorry ;) it doesn't suffice if you're a
developer. You have to be a good manager, have a goal that you'd like to
reach(other than fooling around with code, if that's the case, ignore
this email).And that a really good and successful app has got both -
comfort and the underlying technology. What linux audio offers is
technology. No comfort at all. Right now it's all just academic
software.
<rant over>
Marek
5:27 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 21:11, Marek Peteraj wrote:
What linux audio offers is
technology. No comfort at all. Right now it's all just academic
software.
This, and the lack of marketing departments is exactly why I am here.
I don't want to see linux apps turning into slickly hyped lifestyle
products like the rest of the music software business. We should push
the advantages we have, rather than follow the path of steinberg etc...
Personally speaking, as a free software developer I don't care if my
programs are deemed as sucessful, they work for me, and handful of other
people - this makes me happy :)
cheers,
dave
6:27 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 13:17, Dave Griffiths wrote:
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 21:11, Marek Peteraj wrote:
What advantages? Free as in beer?
What linux audio offers is
technology. No comfort at all. Right now it's all just academic
software.
This, and the lack of marketing departments is exactly why I am here.
I don't want to see linux apps turning into slickly hyped lifestyle
products like the rest of the music software business. We should push
the advantages we have, rather than follow the path of steinberg etc...
But you guys *are* following proprietary software in general. Ardour is
a DAW just like cubase is, while SSM resembles reaktor in its
philosophy. LADSPAs are plugins like VSTs are, etc etc etc. There's
nothing which is perfectly original.
I've never seen such inapt community btw, which is totally ignorant in
organizing itself. See the gnome community which started to exist the
same year. They have more conferences per year, one of them being
huge(guadec) with sponsors, larger companies involved, and *most* of
*all* they're a centralised community.
What we have is tons of links and no information. Although there are
some very good standards which could be successful even in another
domain(e.g. jack), nobody cares to promote them.
Lots of LADders even think that this mailing list isn't really
important. Nobody cares that it actually represents a pretty central
meeting point for developers interested in linux audio, and a perfect
knowledgebase.
We also have an organisation, which isn't really an organisation since
it's not a legal entity, and about 2/3rds of all don't seem to even
participate. And that organisation seems to have different goals than
promoting and protecting linux audio in *general*, *whether* pro or not,
i.e. the linux audio community.
Centralising information and provoding easy access is a pretty good way
to promote linux audio so that it reaches more developers and users, you
don't need marketing hype for that. No matter if it concerns linux audio
in general or ladspa plugins.
The gnome community already provides that, the kde community aswell.
Heck, there's even a linuxprinting.org community. Do i need to say more?
Personally speaking, as a free software developer I don't care if my
programs are deemed as sucessful, they work for me, and handful of other
people - this makes me happy :)
I'd like to see what other developers of the most popular linux audio
projects think. Because if they share your opinion, i'd rather save some
bucks and buy myself a mac.
Linux audio is perfectly unusable for me. Currently.
Marek
6:46 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype
I've never seen such inapt community btw, which is totally ignorant in
organizing itself. See the gnome community which started to exist the
same year. They have more conferences per year, one of them being
huge(guadec) with sponsors, larger companies involved, and *most* of
*all* they're a centralised community.
Oh just got an email from the linuxsampler mailinglist.
"
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: GNOME Foundation
Hackers Unite! GUADEC: The world's #1 Open Source Desktop Event.
GNOME Users and Developers European Conference, 28-30th June in Norway
http://2004/guadec.org
"
just to prove my words. Yes they're a rant but not a troll.
Marek
(who's trying to calm down)
7:26 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype
On Thu, Jun 10, 2004 at 12:26:07 +0200, Marek Peteraj wrote:
Free as in beer is good. Not having to use windows is good. Mostly I just
like the tools - varied, sometimes wacky and generally really versatile and
easy to hack.
I don't
want to see linux apps turning into slickly hyped lifestyle
products like the rest of the music software business. We should push
the advantages we have,
What advantages? Free as in beer? I've never seen such inapt community btw, which is
totally ignorant in
organizing itself. See the gnome community which started to exist the
same year. They have more conferences per year, one of them being
huge(guadec) with sponsors, larger companies involved, and *most* of
*all* they're a centralised community.
Good. I /like/ the current (lack of) linux audio community. Its not like
we're one homogenous organisation. Were just a bunch of people who hack
linux audio systems. Its great :)
The only real connection we have is that were all doing audio hacking
under linux - some are using GTK and C, some Qt and C++, some python...
I think the linux audio world is too small and varied to have a tightly
knit organisation like the Gnome guys.
- Steve
7:41 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 23:18, Steve Harris wrote:
On Thu, Jun 10, 2004 at 12:26:07 +0200, Marek Peteraj
wrote:
Free as in beer is good. Not having to use windows is good. Mostly I just
like the tools - varied, sometimes wacky and generally really versatile and
easy to hack.
Right. And most people do use linux audio standards - JACK, LADSPA,
ALSA. And lots of people from here talk about them and make them better.
I
don't want to see linux apps turning into slickly hyped lifestyle
products like the rest of the music software business. We should push
the advantages we have,
What advantages? Free as in beer? I've never seen such inapt community btw,
which is totally ignorant in
organizing itself. See the gnome community which started to exist the
same year. They have more conferences per year, one of them being
huge(guadec) with sponsors, larger companies involved, and *most* of
*all* they're a centralised community.
Good. I /like/ the current (lack of) linux audio community. Its not like
we're one homogenous organisation. Were just a bunch of people who hack
linux audio systems. Its great :)
The only real connection we have is that were all doing audio hacking
under linux - some are using GTK and C, some Qt and C++, some python...
I think the linux audio world is too small and varied to have a tightly
knit organisation like the Gnome guys.
But.. why are you participating in linuxaudio.org then? Seriously, i
don't understand, no sarcasm.
Marek
8:41 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype
On Thu, Jun 10, 2004 at 01:40:00AM +0200, Marek Peteraj wrote:
Yup, and thats good too. I'm addicted to standards incase you havent
noticed :) the benefit of standards and specs is that you can go off and
do your own thing, in your own way, but it will still work wither other
peoples stuff.
I dont see the connection. linuxaudio.org (IMHO) is about providing
information about linux-audio-y things to outside orgainsiations. Its not
trying to herd all the developers in one direction.
- Steve
Good. I /like/
the current (lack of) linux audio community. Its not like
we're one homogenous organisation. Were just a bunch of people who hack
linux audio systems. Its great :)
The only real connection we have is that were all doing audio hacking
under linux - some are using GTK and C, some Qt and C++, some python...
Right. And most people do use linux audio standards - JACK, LADSPA,
ALSA. And lots of people from here talk about them and make them better. I think the
linux audio world is too small and varied to have a tightly
knit organisation like the Gnome guys.
But.. why are you participating in linuxaudio.org then? Seriously, i
don't understand, no sarcasm.
9:02 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype
On Thu, 2004-06-10 at 00:32, Steve Harris wrote:
I dont see the connection. linuxaudio.org (IMHO) is about providing
information about linux-audio-y things to outside orgainsiations. Its not
trying to herd all the developers in one direction.
Ad 1) Each and every organization is trying to herd people in one
direction. That's one purpose of an organization. It usually consists of
people who share the same goal.
Ad 2) that goal has be declared here --
http://eca.cx/laa/2004/01/0012.html
To quote the subject:
"LINUXAUDIO.ORG CONSORTIUM LAUNCHED TO CREATE PROFESSIONAL AUDIO TOOLS"
Marek
On Thu, Jun 10, 2004 at 01:40:00AM +0200, Marek
Peteraj wrote:
Yup, and thats good too. I'm addicted to standards incase you havent
noticed :) the benefit of standards and specs is that you can go off and
do your own thing, in your own way, but it will still work wither other
peoples stuff.
Standards are often well promoted. At least they have a dedicated site
with (to some extent) centralised information.
Good. I
/like/ the current (lack of) linux audio community. Its not like
we're one homogenous organisation. Were just a bunch of people who hack
linux audio systems. Its great :)
The only real connection we have is that were all doing audio hacking
under linux - some are using GTK and C, some Qt and C++, some python...
Right. And most people do use linux audio standards - JACK, LADSPA,
ALSA. And lots of people from here talk about them and make them better. I think
the linux audio world is too small and varied to have a tightly
knit organisation like the Gnome guys.
But.. why are you participating in linuxaudio.org then? Seriously, i
don't understand, no sarcasm. 
8:13 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 17:26, Marek Peteraj wrote:
But you guys *are* following proprietary software in
general. Ardour is
a DAW just like cubase is, while SSM resembles reaktor in its
philosophy. LADSPAs are plugins like VSTs are, etc etc etc. There's
nothing which is perfectly original.
I've never seen such inapt community btw, which is totally ignorant in
organizing itself. See the gnome community which started to exist the
same year. They have more conferences per year, one of them being
huge(guadec) with sponsors, larger companies involved, and *most* of
*all* they're a centralised community.
What we have is tons of links and no information. Although there are
some very good standards which could be successful even in another
domain(e.g. jack), nobody cares to promote them.
Lots of LADders even think that this mailing list isn't really
important. Nobody cares that it actually represents a pretty central
meeting point for developers interested in linux audio, and a perfect
knowledgebase.
We also have an organisation, which isn't really an organisation since
it's not a legal entity, and about 2/3rds of all don't seem to even
participate. And that organisation seems to have different goals than
promoting and protecting linux audio in *general*, *whether* pro or not,
i.e. the linux audio community.
Centralising information and provoding easy access is a pretty good way
to promote linux audio so that it reaches more developers and users, you
don't need marketing hype for that. No matter if it concerns linux audio
in general or ladspa plugins.
The gnome community already provides that, the kde community aswell.
Heck, there's even a linuxprinting.org community. Do i need to say more?
Marek,
I hate to break this to you but I've got a life, a job, a wife, two
kids, one in college, 3 bands, and I travel for my job about 30% of the
year. I'm not interested in making money or getting customers from
JAMin. I do this because I enjoy it. I do it because I use it myself.
I do it because other people can use it and appreciate the work that
goes into it. I started working on JAMin originally because I thought
that I owed people like Paul Davis, Steve Harris, Jack O'Quin, Fernando,
Erik, Jaroslav, Jesse, Taybin, Takashi, ad infinitum something back for
the work that they have poured into the tools that I use on a daily
basis. If you want to organize something go ahead and organize it, but
please don't tell me that I have to conform to some consumer driven
vision of the great commercial future of Linux Audio. I also doubt if
there is a single developer in the Linux Audio Developer community who
could accurately be described as inept.
Jan
Personally speaking, as a free software developer I don't care if my
programs are deemed as sucessful, they work for me, and handful of other
people - this makes me happy :)
I'd like to see what other developers of the most popular linux audio
projects think. Because if they share your opinion, i'd rather save some
bucks and buy myself a mac.
Linux audio is perfectly unusable for me. Currently.
Marek
8:29 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype
On Thu, 2004-06-10 at 00:07, Jan Depner wrote:
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 17:26, Marek Peteraj wrote:
Fair point.
But you guys *are* following proprietary software
in general. Ardour is
a DAW just like cubase is, while SSM resembles reaktor in its
philosophy. LADSPAs are plugins like VSTs are, etc etc etc. There's
nothing which is perfectly original.
I've never seen such inapt community btw, which is totally ignorant in
organizing itself. See the gnome community which started to exist the
same year. They have more conferences per year, one of them being
huge(guadec) with sponsors, larger companies involved, and *most* of
*all* they're a centralised community.
What we have is tons of links and no information. Although there are
some very good standards which could be successful even in another
domain(e.g. jack), nobody cares to promote them.
Lots of LADders even think that this mailing list isn't really
important. Nobody cares that it actually represents a pretty central
meeting point for developers interested in linux audio, and a perfect
knowledgebase.
We also have an organisation, which isn't really an organisation since
it's not a legal entity, and about 2/3rds of all don't seem to even
participate. And that organisation seems to have different goals than
promoting and protecting linux audio in *general*, *whether* pro or not,
i.e. the linux audio community.
Centralising information and provoding easy access is a pretty good way
to promote linux audio so that it reaches more developers and users, you
don't need marketing hype for that. No matter if it concerns linux audio
in general or ladspa plugins.
The gnome community already provides that, the kde community aswell.
Heck, there's even a linuxprinting.org community. Do i need to say more?
Marek,
I hate to break this to you but I've got a life, a job, a wife, two
kids, one in college, 3 bands, and I travel for my job about 30% of the
year. I'm not interested in making money or getting customers from
JAMin. I do this because I enjoy it. I do it because I use it myself.
I do it because other people can use it and appreciate the work that
goes into it. I started working on JAMin originally because I thought
that I owed people like Paul Davis, Steve Harris, Jack O'Quin, Fernando,
Erik, Jaroslav, Jesse, Taybin, Takashi, ad infinitum something back for
the work that they have poured into the tools that I use on a daily
basis.
Personally speaking, as a free software developer I don't care if my
programs are deemed as sucessful, they work for me, and handful of other
people - this makes me happy :)
I'd like to see what other developers of the most popular linux audio
projects think. Because if they share your opinion, i'd rather save some
bucks and buy myself a mac.
Linux audio is perfectly unusable for me. Currently.
Marek
If you want to organize something go ahead and
organize it, but
please don't tell me that I have to conform to some consumer driven
vision of the great commercial future of Linux Audio.
Sorry to criticize still, but you're participating in linuxaudio.org
whose current aim is to do exaclty that. ;)
Which i'm not saying is bad, the opposite. I think that a lot of
valuable work has been done so far(if only technology-wise) and i think
it's a pity to leave it like that.
I also doubt if
there is a single developer in the Linux Audio Developer community who
could accurately be described as inept.
Just to be clear, i've never said that they're inept.
What's wrong about saying hey were cool, want to join us?
Here are the standards we worked out and we use, this is how they work,
this is where we meet and discuss, this is where you can learn a thing
or two.
Marek
8:40 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 19:27, Marek Peteraj wrote:
I'm doing that because I was interested and everyone else was already a
member for another project. I will do whatever I can to help out but
it's not the driving force in my life.
If you want
to organize something go ahead and organize it, but
please don't tell me that I have to conform to some consumer driven
vision of the great commercial future of Linux Audio.
Sorry to criticize still, but you're participating in linuxaudio.org
whose current aim is to do exaclty that. ;)
Which i'm not saying is bad, the opposite. I think that a lot of
valuable work has been done so far(if only technology-wise) and i think
it's a pity to leave it like that.
What's wrong about saying hey were cool, want to
join us?
Here are the standards we worked out and we use, this is how they work,
this is where we meet and discuss, this is where you can learn a thing
or two.
There's nothing wrong with that and I agree with some of your points.
I just think you need to chill a bit. A good dialog has been started.
Contribute positively instead of negatively.
Jan
8:55 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype
On Thu, 2004-06-10 at 00:34, Jan Depner wrote:
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 19:27, Marek Peteraj wrote:
I'm doing that because I was interested and everyone else was already a
member for another project. I will do whatever I can to help out but
it's not the driving force in my life.
Jan, i'm sorry but if say negative words about a few things, is it
negative contribution? I'm only naming things which i see as a real
problem. I feel that the threshold for criticism is low and every
criticism is viewed as negative.
Otherwise it would be pertty easy to digest even trolls. Which sometimes
too can be very educative. Believe it or not.
I'm honest. that's all.
Marek
If you
want to organize something go ahead and organize it, but
please don't tell me that I have to conform to some consumer driven
vision of the great commercial future of Linux Audio.
Sorry to criticize still, but you're participating in linuxaudio.org
whose current aim is to do exaclty that. ;)
Which i'm not saying is bad, the opposite. I think that a lot of
valuable work has been done so far(if only technology-wise) and i think
it's a pity to leave it like that.
What's wrong about saying hey were cool, want
to join us?
Here are the standards we worked out and we use, this is how they work,
this is where we meet and discuss, this is where you can learn a thing
or two.
There's nothing wrong with that and I agree with some of your points.
I just think you need to chill a bit. A good dialog has been started.
Contribute positively instead of negatively.
8:47 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype
On Thu, Jun 10, 2004 at 02:27:36AM +0200, Marek Peteraj wrote:
Er, I think its only you who thinks that - theres nothing in the remit or
action of la.o that suggests it might have any aims like that.
- Steve
If you want
to organize something go ahead and organize it, but
please don't tell me that I have to conform to some consumer driven
vision of the great commercial future of Linux Audio.
Sorry to criticize still, but you're participating in linuxaudio.org
whose current aim is to do exaclty that. ;)
8:56 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype
On Thu, 2004-06-10 at 02:27, Marek Peteraj wrote:
On Thu, 2004-06-10 at 00:07, Jan Depner wrote:
Moreover, i think that opensource has become more than just hacking
around with friends over the years.
I think that there's a real chance to make this a better world. Which
can sound as cliche, but at least it would legalize the software in the
whole world in a few years time. Not to mention free as in beer for
those who can't afford to pay for sw at all.
So i think it pays off to be more open to new ideas, especially
usability related and organisational, these days. You might not reach
your peak in terms of usability with your app still. And people get used
to good things easy so it's easy to recognize. ;)
So using that kind of empathy in designing interfaces is what should
drive oss aplications forward these days. This doesn't apply to desktop
apps only. The desktop people already have human interface guidelines
worked out. They have usability mailing lists, and usability engineers
that do UI reviews.
And here's the chance to decide whether you want to provide your tool to
as many people as possible. The more people will use your tool the
happier you'll be since you make more people happier. And since you'll
continue hacking on JAMin(or any other project) anyway....
Marek
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 17:26, Marek Peteraj
wrote:
Fair point.
But you guys *are* following proprietary software
in general. Ardour is
a DAW just like cubase is, while SSM resembles reaktor in its
philosophy. LADSPAs are plugins like VSTs are, etc etc etc. There's
nothing which is perfectly original.
I've never seen such inapt community btw, which is totally ignorant in
organizing itself. See the gnome community which started to exist the
same year. They have more conferences per year, one of them being
huge(guadec) with sponsors, larger companies involved, and *most* of
*all* they're a centralised community.
What we have is tons of links and no information. Although there are
some very good standards which could be successful even in another
domain(e.g. jack), nobody cares to promote them.
Lots of LADders even think that this mailing list isn't really
important. Nobody cares that it actually represents a pretty central
meeting point for developers interested in linux audio, and a perfect
knowledgebase.
We also have an organisation, which isn't really an organisation since
it's not a legal entity, and about 2/3rds of all don't seem to even
participate. And that organisation seems to have different goals than
promoting and protecting linux audio in *general*, *whether* pro or not,
i.e. the linux audio community.
Centralising information and provoding easy access is a pretty good way
to promote linux audio so that it reaches more developers and users, you
don't need marketing hype for that. No matter if it concerns linux audio
in general or ladspa plugins.
The gnome community already provides that, the kde community aswell.
Heck, there's even a linuxprinting.org community. Do i need to say more?
Marek,
I hate to break this to you but I've got a life, a job, a wife, two
kids, one in college, 3 bands, and I travel for my job about 30% of the
year. I'm not interested in making money or getting customers from
JAMin. I do this because I enjoy it. I do it because I use it myself.
I do it because other people can use it and appreciate the work that
goes into it. I started working on JAMin originally because I thought
that I owed people like Paul Davis, Steve Harris, Jack O'Quin, Fernando,
Erik, Jaroslav, Jesse, Taybin, Takashi, ad infinitum something back for
the work that they have poured into the tools that I use on a daily
basis.
Personally speaking, as a free software developer I don't care if my
programs are deemed as sucessful, they work for me, and handful of other
people - this makes me happy :)
I'd like to see what other developers of the most popular linux audio
projects think. Because if they share your opinion, i'd rather save some
bucks and buy myself a mac.
Linux audio is perfectly unusable for me. Currently.
Marek
If you want to organize something go ahead and
organize it, but
please don't tell me that I have to conform to some consumer driven
vision of the great commercial future of Linux Audio.
Sorry to criticize still, but you're participating in linuxaudio.org
whose current aim is to do exaclty that. ;)
Which i'm not saying is bad, the opposite. I think that a lot of
valuable work has been done so far(if only technology-wise) and i think
it's a pity to leave it like that.
10:52 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 20:54, Marek Peteraj wrote:
Moreover, i think that opensource has become more than
just hacking
around with friends over the years.
I think that there's a real chance to make this a better world. Which
can sound as cliche, but at least it would legalize the software in the
whole world in a few years time. Not to mention free as in beer for
those who can't afford to pay for sw at all.
I couldn't agree more. The freedom is why I'm here. However this noble
goal you've outlined doesn't get completed by people walking around
telling people about stuff. It gets completed by people who "shut up
and code".
Every hacker who wastes his/her time gabbing about software instead of
actually getting something done holds back your elusive dream.
If you can't code, and can't help out in more concrete ways (testing and
documentation etc.), but still want to help, by all means go out there
and promote, organize, help out in other ways, that's great. But don't
expect developers to give a crap. It's a good thing they don't or
nothing would actually get coded at all.
If John Q. Hacker cared about PR, he wouldn't be that much of a hacker
would he? :)
Heck, I write programs I don't even release because I'm too lazy (ie
this: http://chat.carleton.ca/~drobilla/patchbay.png).. PR isn't even on
the radar screen.
-DR-
10 Jun
10 Jun
4:35 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype
On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 08:41:10 -0400, Dave Robillard wrote:
If you can't code, and can't help out in more
concrete ways (testing and
documentation etc.), but still want to help, by all means go out there
and promote, organize, help out in other ways, that's great. But don't
expect developers to give a crap. It's a good thing they don't or
nothing would actually get coded at all.
Marek has provided valuable input to several projects. And I dont think
that not being a coder means you shouldn't have an opinion. I think the
free software world tends to glorify hackers sometimes. Just cos we
occasionaly plonk out butts down and scrabble away on a keyboard for a
couple of hours doesn't mean we should be treated like royalty.
There are plently of people in this community who have put in as much
effort as most coders.
If John Q. Hacker cared about PR, he wouldn't be
that much of a hacker
would he? :)
Heh. Lazyness, Imapatience and Hubris.
Heck, I write programs I don't even release
because I'm too lazy (ie
this: http://chat.carleton.ca/~drobilla/patchbay.png).. PR isn't even on
the radar screen.
Yeah, where is that whizzy patchbay, I've been waiting a while now ;)
- Steve
8:26 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype
On Thu, Jun 10, 2004 at 07:27:03AM +0100, Steve Harris wrote:
On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 08:41:10 -0400, Dave Robillard
wrote:
me too... very nicely done.
where is the midi ?
please make midi data run from top to bottom :)
this imposes some syntax on the graph (works for galan at least)
why isnt it Gtk ? :))))))))))
--
torben Hohn
http://galan.sourceforge.net -- The graphical Audio language
Heck, I write programs I don't even release
because I'm too lazy (ie
this: http://chat.carleton.ca/~drobilla/patchbay.png).. PR isn't even on
the radar screen.
Yeah, where is that whizzy patchbay, I've been waiting a while now ;)
2:19 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype
On Thu, 2004-06-10 at 06:22, torbenh(a)gmx.de wrote:
On Thu, Jun 10, 2004 at 07:27:03AM +0100, Steve Harris
wrote:
Hmm..... I never thought of the idea of having MIDI run vertically. I
think it might just confuse matters, but perhaps not. Athough I suppose
it does paralell control/audio data in galan, and that works pretty
well.
Well.. when I do midi I'll give it a try. :)
And it is Gtk... well, sorta. Gtkmm, with gnomecanvas for the actual
patch bay part. What can I say, I like C++.
-DR-
On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 08:41:10 -0400, Dave
Robillard wrote:
me too... very nicely done.
where is the midi ?
please make midi data run from top to bottom :)
this imposes some syntax on the graph (works for galan at least)
why isnt it Gtk ? :)))))))))) Heck, I write programs I don't even release
because I'm too lazy (ie
this: http://chat.carleton.ca/~drobilla/patchbay.png).. PR isn't even on
the radar screen.
Yeah, where is that whizzy patchbay, I've been waiting a while now ;)
11 Jun
11 Jun
7:44 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype
On Thu, Jun 10, 2004 at 12:08:57PM -0400, Dave Robillard wrote:
On Thu, 2004-06-10 at 06:22, torbenh(a)gmx.de wrote:
Hmm..... I never thought of the idea of having MIDI run vertically. I
think it might just confuse matters, but perhaps not. Athough I suppose
it does paralell control/audio data in galan, and that works pretty
well.
Well.. when I do midi I'll give it a try. :)
before you implement check if it works out.
i am not sure either.
And it is Gtk... well, sorta. Gtkmm, with gnomecanvas
for the actual
patch bay part. What can I say, I like C++.
oh... nice. it looked like qt... i am happy now.
-DR-
--
torben Hohn
http://galan.sourceforge.net -- The graphical Audio language
10 Jun
10 Jun
11:55 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype
On Thu, 2004-06-10 at 02:27, Steve Harris wrote:
Guilty as charged. More like "riled up by Marek and spouting his mouth
off" though. :)
Any day now, HONEST.
I was waiting on that patch for jack (which you yourself wrote, one
liner though it may be), and I realised it had already be commited.
Clever me.
Anyway, I autotool-ized it yesterday and I'm cleaning it up a bit to
make adding alsa seq patching easier, then it's released. Still a
random weekend's hack, but hopefully one that works for people..
-DR-
If John Q.
Hacker cared about PR, he wouldn't be that much of a hacker
would he? :)
Heh. Lazyness, Imapatience and Hubris. Heck, I write
programs I don't even release because I'm too lazy (ie
this: http://chat.carleton.ca/~drobilla/patchbay.png).. PR isn't even on
the radar screen.
Yeah, where is that whizzy patchbay, I've been waiting a while now ;)
- Steve 
9 Jun
9 Jun
8:33 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 15:26, Marek Peteraj wrote:
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 13:17, Dave Griffiths wrote:
Most probably you will find out (when/if other developers care to speak
out) that this view is shared by many, if not all, developers, and not
just in the audio world. Great projects in the open source community
usually happen when a motivated individual or group _needs_ something.
It is not the needs of the world (usually), or "user demand", or the
desire to fill or create a marketing niche, it is their need. They work
on the project because it is fun. Because they want to learn. Sometimes
they do it because they want to give back to the community. If they feel
like it, they will consider suggestions as well, but not always. Their
view of what is best may be completely different from yours, and from
what today's "market" finds fashionable and cool.
Personally speaking, as a free software developer
I don't care if my
programs are deemed as sucessful, they work for me, and handful of other
people - this makes me happy :)
I'd like to see what other developers of the most popular linux audio
projects think. Because if they share your opinion, i'd rather
save some
bucks and buy myself a mac.
Perhaps you should start saving now? :-)
I have to echo other comments in that I also like the freedom of the
linux or - more generally - open source (audio) world, the
non-hierarchical non-centralized nature of it, the chaos, the lack of
hype, marketing techno-speak and half truths if not outright lies, and
all that.
You seem to consider all these attributes big failures.
I don't agree. We don't _have_ to be big, take over the world and
"sell"
our "products"[*] like everyone else in the music software and hardware
industry.
Which does not mean all software and projects are perfect, of course. I
can think of many that could use some improvement :-)
-- Fernando
[*] there are exceptions, of course, as in everything. Some developers
seem to have the need to push their software and demostrate that it is
better than everything else. To each his/her own.
8:52 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype
On Thu, 2004-06-10 at 00:24, Fernando Pablo Lopez-Lezcano wrote:
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 15:26, Marek Peteraj wrote:
That is very untrue, and evolution and the motivations behind that app
prove that.
Marek
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 13:17, Dave Griffiths
wrote:
Most probably you will find out (when/if other developers care to speak
out) that this view is shared by many, if not all, developers, and not
just in the audio world. Great projects in the open source community
usually happen when a motivated individual or group _needs_ something.
It is not the needs of the world (usually), or "user demand", or the
desire to fill or create a marketing niche, it is their need. Personally speaking, as a free software developer
I don't care if my
programs are deemed as sucessful, they work for me, and handful of other
people - this makes me happy :)
I'd like to see what other developers of the most popular linux audio
projects think.
9:16 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 17:50, Marek Peteraj wrote:
On Thu, 2004-06-10 at 00:24, Fernando Pablo
Lopez-Lezcano wrote:
I'm missing something. Which app? What is untrue? What I just wrote? Let
the developers speak, please. So far they are saying what I stated, more
or less. Now, if what the developers themselves say does not matter, or
if you know their (our) minds better than ourselves then this is all
rather pointless.
-- Fernando
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 15:26, Marek Peteraj
wrote:
That is very untrue, and evolution and the motivations behind that app
prove that. On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 13:17, Dave Griffiths
wrote:
Most probably you will find out (when/if other developers care to speak
out) that this view is shared by many, if not all, developers, and not
just in the audio world. Great projects in the open source community
usually happen when a motivated individual or group _needs_ something.
It is not the needs of the world (usually), or "user demand", or the
desire to fill or create a marketing niche, it is their need. Personally speaking, as a free software developer
I don't care if my
programs are deemed as sucessful, they work for me, and handful of other
people - this makes me happy :)
I'd like to see what other developers of the most popular linux audio
projects think.
9:25 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 18:08, Fernando Pablo Lopez-Lezcano wrote:
I'm missing something. Which app? What is untrue? What I just wrote? Let
the developers speak, please. So far they are saying what I stated, more
or less. Now, if what the developers themselves say does not matter, or
if you know their (our) minds better than ourselves then this is all
rather pointless.
As far as I'm concerned, Fernando has hit the nail on the head. I
think Marek is talking about Ardour, but I doubt if Paul's total
motivation is monetary return.
Jan
Most probably you will find out (when/if other developers care to speak
out) that this view is shared by many, if not all, developers, and not
just in the audio world. Great projects in the open source community
usually happen when a motivated individual or group _needs_ something.
It is not the needs of the world (usually), or "user demand", or the
desire to fill or create a marketing niche, it is their need.
That is very untrue, and evolution and the motivations behind that app
prove that.
9:38 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype
On Thu, 2004-06-10 at 01:19, Jan Depner wrote:
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 18:08, Fernando Pablo
Lopez-Lezcano wrote:
I'm missing something. Which app? What is untrue? What I just wrote? Let
the developers speak, please. So far they are saying what I stated, more
or less. Now, if what the developers themselves say does not matter, or
if you know their (our) minds better than ourselves then this is all
rather pointless.
As far as I'm concerned, Fernando has hit the nail on the head. I
think Marek is talking about Ardour, but I doubt if Paul's total
motivation is monetary return.
In case anybody here is using evolution to post on lad.
That application was driven by the same factors that drive most sw apps
today. User demand, marketing niche. All there. Result?
Since 1.2 it was the most stable and perfect application i've ever seen.
Fast, robust, export/import of mailboxes with tons of emails with no
problems, easy searches, easy and fast managing of multiple accounts,
easy to add filters (without digging manuals), virtual folders, and
more... Much better job than outlook has ever done.
Why? Because it's enterprise ready. And it shows.
Marek
Most probably you will find out (when/if other developers care to speak
out) that this view is shared by many, if not all, developers, and not
just in the audio world. Great projects in the open source community
usually happen when a motivated individual or group _needs_ something.
It is not the needs of the world (usually), or "user demand", or the
desire to fill or create a marketing niche, it is their need.
That is very untrue, and evolution and the motivations behind that app
prove that.
10 Jun
10 Jun
5:35 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype
Hallo,
Marek Peteraj hat gesagt: // Marek Peteraj wrote:
In case anybody here is using evolution to post on
lad.
Since 1.2 it was the most stable and perfect application i've ever seen.
Evolution seems to have one big problem: It seems to make it hard to
edit and shorten replies, or what's the reason that I see many Ev.
mails here (at least yours) that almost repeat a whole thread only to
add 1 to 2 lines?
Better use Mutt, it sucks less.
Ciao
--
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org__
7:30 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype
On Thu, Jun 10, 2004 at 09:26:54 +0200, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Hallo,
Marek Peteraj hat gesagt: // Marek Peteraj wrote:
In all seriousness, all the non elm/mutt apps I've used dont let me go
though my mail quickly enough. The ability to switch inboxes, delete big
swathes of threads I dont care about and save sutff I do it vital to me.
Plus, I use mutt installed on a login server at work, so I can read my
mail from many machine with a terminal and telnet or ssh client. Even
windows has one of those :)
- Steve
In case anybody here is using evolution to post
on lad.
Since 1.2 it was the most stable and perfect application i've ever seen.
Evolution seems to have one big problem: It seems to make it hard to
edit and shorten replies, or what's the reason that I see many Ev.
mails here (at least yours) that almost repeat a whole thread only to
add 1 to 2 lines?
Better use Mutt, it sucks less.
8:30 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype
Hallo,
Steve Harris hat gesagt: // Steve Harris wrote:
On Thu, Jun 10, 2004 at 09:26:54 +0200, Frank
Barknecht wrote:
And Mutt was obviously written without eye-candy in mind, just
functionality. And it was created at a time, when even GUI mail clients
were approaching usefulness, so it didn't *have* to be Just Another
Console Mail Client, it wanted to be one.
Instructive side story: I once installed Linux on a CPU-challenged
machine (486/133Mhz) for a friend and teached her to use Mutt. Later
she bought a faster PC, I upgraded everything to KDE and so on and then
suggested to install a "real" email client with a GUI. She vehemently
forbid that I did this with: "Don't take away my mail program, I'm
really used to it now and know all keyboard shortcuts." I never
expected this.
Ciao
--
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org__
Better use Mutt, it sucks less.
In all seriousness, all the non elm/mutt apps I've used dont let me go
though my mail quickly enough. The ability to switch inboxes, delete big
swathes of threads I dont care about and save sutff I do it vital to me. 
9:44 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype
Hallo,
Steve Harris hat gesagt: // Steve Harris wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 10, 2004 at 09:26:54 +0200, Frank Barknecht wrote:
> > Better use Mutt, it sucks less.
>
> In all seriousness, all the non elm/mutt apps I've used dont let me go
> though my mail quickly enough. The ability to switch inboxes, delete big
> swathes of threads I dont care about and save sutff I do it vital to me.
<paul returns from a week away>
% f +gtk-in
% rmm cur-last
% f +gtkmm-in
% rmm cur-last
% f +new
% rmm `pick -from wine-devel`
% rmm `pick -from xdg-list`
and then i can put all those commands in script and next time just do:
% clean-mail
that's what i call a mail client.
better yet, i can use it from any point on the internet that i can get
shell access.
the one disadvantage is the lack of a persistent on-screen listing of
a mailbox tends to lead them growing without bound. my inbox has 2000
messages in it that i kept because they were of some
importance/interest. a GUI mail client would tend to force me to look
some way back into the past :)
--p
9 Jun
9 Jun
9:44 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype
Simple logic has it that you just can't do a perfect app if your
motivation isn't 'to do it for lots of users'.
You guys stated that it's just your hobby and your doing that mostly for
yourself and the other devs that did other apps perhaps if somebody
wants to give it a go. I'm fine with that. Just wanted to know.
I think we can end the session now. :)
Marek
11:04 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 21:43, Marek Peteraj wrote:
Simple logic has it that you just can't do a
perfect app if your
motivation isn't 'to do it for lots of users'.
You guys stated that it's just your hobby and your doing that mostly for
yourself and the other devs that did other apps perhaps if somebody
wants to give it a go. I'm fine with that. Just wanted to know.
I think we can end the session now. :)
Marek
I'll code for someone else when that 'someone else' starts sending me
paycheques. :)
-DR-
9:26 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype
On Thu, 2004-06-10 at 01:08, Fernando Pablo Lopez-Lezcano wrote:
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 17:50, Marek Peteraj wrote:
The email client. Which one are you using?
On Thu, 2004-06-10 at 00:24, Fernando Pablo
Lopez-Lezcano wrote:
I'm missing something. Which app? What is untrue? On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 15:26, Marek Peteraj
wrote:
That is very untrue, and evolution and the motivations behind that app
prove that. On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 13:17, Dave Griffiths
wrote:
> Personally speaking, as a free software developer I don't care if my
> programs are deemed as sucessful, they work for me, and handful of other
> people - this makes me happy :)
I'd like to see what other developers of the most popular linux audio
projects think.
Most probably you will find out (when/if other developers care to speak
out) that this view is shared by many, if not all, developers, and not
just in the audio world. Great projects in the open source community
usually happen when a motivated individual or group _needs_ something.
It is not the needs of the world (usually), or "user demand", or the
desire to fill or create a marketing niche, it is their need. What I just wrote? Let
the developers speak, please.
The devs are themselves users.
Marek
9:58 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype
On Thu, 2004-06-10 at 00:24, Fernando Pablo
Lopez-Lezcano wrote:
I'm missing something. Which app? What is untrue? On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 15:26, Marek Peteraj
wrote:
> On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 13:17, Dave Griffiths wrote:
> > Personally speaking, as a free software developer I don't care if my
> > programs are deemed as sucessful, they work for me, and handful of other
> > people - this makes me happy :)
>
> I'd like to see what other developers of the most popular linux audio
> projects think.
Most probably you will find out (when/if other developers care to speak
out) that this view is shared by many, if not all, developers, and not
just in the audio world. Great projects in the open source community
usually happen when a motivated individual or group _needs_ something.
It is not the needs of the world (usually), or "user demand", or the
desire to fill or create a marketing niche, it is their need.
That is very untrue, and evolution and the motivations behind that app
prove that. What I just
wrote? Let the developers speak, please.
The devs are themselves users.
10:09 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 17:50, Marek Peteraj wrote:
On Thu, 2004-06-10 at 00:24, Fernando Pablo
Lopez-Lezcano wrote:
Awh, rats. Sorry. I read "and _the_ evolution and the motivations
behind" :-)
There are always going to be exceptions you can point to, the open
source world is not monolithic. That does not invalidate what the
developers on lad have said so far of their motivations. So far it is a
small sample, of course.
-- Fernando
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 15:26, Marek Peteraj
wrote:
That is very untrue, and evolution and the motivations behind that app
prove that. On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 13:17, Dave Griffiths
wrote:
Most probably you will find out (when/if other developers care to speak
out) that this view is shared by many, if not all, developers, and not
just in the audio world. Great projects in the open source community
usually happen when a motivated individual or group _needs_ something.
It is not the needs of the world (usually), or "user demand", or the
desire to fill or create a marketing niche, it is their need. Personally speaking, as a free software developer
I don't care if my
programs are deemed as sucessful, they work for me, and handful of other
people - this makes me happy :)
I'd like to see what other developers of the most popular linux audio
projects think.
9:39 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype
On Thu, Jun 10, 2004 at 12:26:07AM +0200, Marek Peteraj wrote:
I've never seen such inapt community btw, which is totally ignorant in
organizing itself. See the gnome community which
started to exist the
same year. They have more conferences per year, one of them being
huge(guadec) with sponsors, larger companies involved, and *most* of
*all* they're a centralised community.
Maybe this explains my experience about 8 months ago when I upgraded
from SuSE 8.2 to 9.0. In the new distro, most of the Gnome apps that
I loved before suddenly seemed to be dumbed down to the point I really
started to dislike them, and I just removed them form my system.
--
FA
9:54 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype
On Thu, 2004-06-10 at 01:11, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
On Thu, Jun 10, 2004 at 12:26:07AM +0200, Marek
Peteraj wrote:
I've never seen such inapt community btw, which is totally ignorant in
Facts please. :)
(Ok i promised to shut up so hopefully this time ;)
Marek
organizing itself. See the gnome community which
started to exist the
same year. They have more conferences per year, one of them being
huge(guadec) with sponsors, larger companies involved, and *most* of
*all* they're a centralised community.
Maybe this explains my experience about 8 months ago when I upgraded
from SuSE 8.2 to 9.0. In the new distro, most of the Gnome apps that
I loved before suddenly seemed to be dumbed down to the point I really
started to dislike them, and I just removed them form my system. 
10:03 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype
On Thu, Jun 10, 2004 at 01:11:43AM +0200, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
from SuSE 8.2 to 9.0. In the new distro, most of the
Gnome apps that
I loved before suddenly seemed to be dumbed down to the point I really
started to dislike them, and I just removed them form my system.
Agree completely. It gets dumber and dumber. Options I *like* and *use*
disappear in each release. Meanwhile dumb stuff appears and I can't
figure out how to do simplish things.
I'm using KDE now for about a week, and I can't say I like it THAT much
better.
Sigh. XP may have it's problems, but the UI is fast, the file browser
works 99.99% of the time, and stuff just works.
I know Linux people love to claim how choice is our strength, but I think
it's bunk. Linux needs a single GUI environment that has a lot of deep
flexibility (and I don't mean Scheme config files :) and a single widget
kit, bound to all the languages.
A freshly installed linux box is a horrible mess, these days. Hundreds of
megs of disk spent on crap that the vast majority of people don't even
know is there.
9:51 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 18:26, Marek Peteraj wrote:
I would like to personally apologize for not dedicating my free time to
making you happy. This is the linux audio DEVELOPERS list, and it's
just that, a mailing list for developers. Just a bunch of people with a
common interest.
Want the easy route out? Want to just go buy a Mac and get some spiffy
music making programs and be on your way? Then do it! Oh so sorry the
free ride didn't work out for you, better luck next time. If you want a
plug-in-and-drool computer, you're not running the right OS.
Suggestions are good, ideas are good, discussion is good. Bitching and
moaning that "Linux audio is perfectly unusable for me", and implying
that somehow everyone on this list needs to make it their goal in life
to spend all their _free time_ making a bunch of nameless random idiots
happy is not good. Especially when you don't make a single valid
suggestion while doing so.
(My apoligies to all for the ESR style 'self appointed voice of the
community' crap...)
-DR- (Who debated hitting "send" on this one for a good 5 minutes)
I've never seen such inapt community btw, which is
totally ignorant in
organizing itself. See the gnome community which started to exist the
same year. They have more conferences per year, one of them being
huge(guadec) with sponsors, larger companies involved, and *most* of
*all* they're a centralised community.
What we have is tons of links and no information. Although there are
some very good standards which could be successful even in another
domain(e.g. jack), nobody cares to promote them.
Lots of LADders even think that this mailing list isn't really
important. Nobody cares that it actually represents a pretty central
meeting point for developers interested in linux audio, and a perfect
knowledgebase.
We also have an organisation, which isn't really an organisation since
it's not a legal entity, and about 2/3rds of all don't seem to even
participate. And that organisation seems to have different goals than
promoting and protecting linux audio in *general*, *whether* pro or not,
i.e. the linux audio community.
Centralising information and provoding easy access is a pretty good way
to promote linux audio so that it reaches more developers and users, you
don't need marketing hype for that. No matter if it concerns linux audio
in general or ladspa plugins.
What exactly is preventing you (yes, YOU, Marek Peteraj) from "promoting
linux audio in *general*" etc. etc.? Not much that I can see. I don't
want to speak on behalf of anyone here; but I'm sure there are plenty of
people here who DON'T CARE. ie me. I don't care if every idiot who'se
ever bought an Electronic Musician magazine uses LAD software. I don't
want to waste my time letting them know about it. You do? Fantastic,
then shut up and do it already.
All the other super communities you love that are so much better than
LAD can have their conferences, sponsors, "larger companies", "legal
identities" and whatever other stupid MBA-speak you've come up with. I
just kinda like hacking FOSS audio stuff, whether or not it jives with
your plan for world domination or not.
Personally
speaking, as a free software developer I don't care if my
programs are deemed as sucessful, they work for me, and handful of other
people - this makes me happy :)
I'd like to see what other developers of the most popular linux audio
projects think. Because if they share your opinion, i'd rather save some
bucks and buy myself a mac.
Linux audio is perfectly unusable for me. Currently.
Marek
10 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype
On Thu, 2004-06-10 at 01:40, Dave Robillard wrote:
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 18:26, Marek Peteraj wrote:
I would like to personally apologize for not dedicating my free time to
making you happy. This is the linux audio DEVELOPERS list, and it's
just that, a mailing list for developers. Just a bunch of people with a
common interest.
Want the easy route out? Want to just go buy a Mac and get some spiffy
music making programs and be on your way? Then do it! Oh so sorry the
free ride didn't work out for you, better luck next time. If you want a
plug-in-and-drool computer, you're not running the right OS.
Suggestions are good, ideas are good, discussion is good. Bitching and
moaning that "Linux audio is perfectly unusable for me", and implying
that somehow everyone on this list needs to make it their goal in life
to spend all their _free time_ making a bunch of nameless random idiots
happy is not good. Especially when you don't make a single valid
suggestion while doing so.
(My apoligies to all for the ESR style 'self appointed voice of the
community' crap...)
-DR- (Who debated hitting "send" on this one for a good 5 minutes)
Point taken.
Marek
I've never seen such inapt community btw,
which is totally ignorant in
organizing itself. See the gnome community which started to exist the
same year. They have more conferences per year, one of them being
huge(guadec) with sponsors, larger companies involved, and *most* of
*all* they're a centralised community.
What we have is tons of links and no information. Although there are
some very good standards which could be successful even in another
domain(e.g. jack), nobody cares to promote them.
Lots of LADders even think that this mailing list isn't really
important. Nobody cares that it actually represents a pretty central
meeting point for developers interested in linux audio, and a perfect
knowledgebase.
We also have an organisation, which isn't really an organisation since
it's not a legal entity, and about 2/3rds of all don't seem to even
participate. And that organisation seems to have different goals than
promoting and protecting linux audio in *general*, *whether* pro or not,
i.e. the linux audio community.
Centralising information and provoding easy access is a pretty good way
to promote linux audio so that it reaches more developers and users, you
don't need marketing hype for that. No matter if it concerns linux audio
in general or ladspa plugins.
What exactly is preventing you (yes, YOU, Marek Peteraj) from "promoting
linux audio in *general*" etc. etc.? Not much that I can see. I don't
want to speak on behalf of anyone here; but I'm sure there are plenty of
people here who DON'T CARE. ie me. I don't care if every idiot who'se
ever bought an Electronic Musician magazine uses LAD software. I don't
want to waste my time letting them know about it. You do? Fantastic,
then shut up and do it already.
All the other super communities you love that are so much better than
LAD can have their conferences, sponsors, "larger companies", "legal
identities" and whatever other stupid MBA-speak you've come up with. I
just kinda like hacking FOSS audio stuff, whether or not it jives with
your plan for world domination or not.
Personally speaking, as a free software developer I don't care if my
programs are deemed as sucessful, they work for me, and handful of other
people - this makes me happy :)
I'd like to see what other developers of the most popular linux audio
projects think. Because if they share your opinion, i'd rather save some
bucks and buy myself a mac.
Linux audio is perfectly unusable for me. Currently.
Marek 
10 Jun
10 Jun
2:01 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype
At Wed, 09 Jun 2004 19:40:44 -0400,
Dave Robillard wrote:
If you want a plug-in-and-drool computer, you're not running the
right OS.
/me scratches head
if (plugin_and_drool == JUST_WORKS)
buy (plugin_and_drool);
Point being, just because something is hard to use doesn't mean it is
superior in *any* way to something which is easy to use.
-DR- (Who debated hitting "send" on this one
for a good 5 minutes)
Should have waited longer. Marek wasn't telling anyone to become his
personal code-bitch, and if you were truly apathetic to his plight
a simple "I don't care" would suffice.
Marek, I think you'll be surprised at how many "I don't care" + flame
responses you're going to get. I, for one, do care. I want to make
money writing libre software, so I'm all ears to your suggestions.
But remember that if you can't put up, you'll be well advised to shut
up 'round these parts.
OH, since likely nobody knows, I'm the guy that's writing Specimen.
[pb]
9 Jun
9 Jun
7:51 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 06:17, Dave Griffiths wrote:
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 21:11, Marek Peteraj wrote:
Same here.
Jan
What linux audio offers is
technology. No comfort at all. Right now it's all just academic
software.
This, and the lack of marketing departments is exactly why I am here.
I don't want to see linux apps turning into slickly hyped lifestyle
products like the rest of the music software business. We should push
the advantages we have, rather than follow the path of steinberg etc...
Personally speaking, as a free software developer I don't care if my
programs are deemed as sucessful, they work for me, and handful of other
people - this makes me happy :)
9:07 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype [was: Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?}
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 16:11, Marek Peteraj wrote:
What you guys blatantly underestimate is that in order
to bring your
apps to users (= having success, sorry ;) it doesn't suffice if you're a
developer. You have to be a good manager, have a goal that you'd like to
reach(other than fooling around with code, if that's the case, ignore
this email).And that a really good and successful app has got both -
comfort and the underlying technology. What linux audio offers is
technology. No comfort at all. Right now it's all just academic
software.
<rant over>
Marek
I don't think I could possibly care less who uses 'linux audio'. I
don't really think anyone else here should either - we should be aiming
to build the best system possible, period. Not saying "look! popular
software the people pay money for does this; therefore we must too!"
If anything, we should be looking at the proprietary music software
world to make sure we avoid repeating their mistakes (ridiculous
duplication of effort, lock-in, and horrid UIs for example), not
duplicating them just because. (Not to say we can't take positive
things from that world too though)
-DR
9:20 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype [was: Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?}
On Thu, 2004-06-10 at 00:56, Dave Robillard wrote:
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 16:11, Marek Peteraj wrote:
Exactly!
Note that there are many things that we should learn from though. It's
because most things are driven by market demand i.e. users. So the sw
companies *had* to respect it in order to sell thier product.
Sure they don't have Jack - but see the reason - being proprietary is
there barrier they could not bridge.
Open standards are very strong players! To not promote them is suicide.
Marek
What you guys blatantly underestimate is that in
order to bring your
apps to users (= having success, sorry ;) it doesn't suffice if you're a
developer. You have to be a good manager, have a goal that you'd like to
reach(other than fooling around with code, if that's the case, ignore
this email).And that a really good and successful app has got both -
comfort and the underlying technology. What linux audio offers is
technology. No comfort at all. Right now it's all just academic
software.
<rant over>
Marek
I don't think I could possibly care less who uses 'linux audio'. I
don't really think anyone else here should either - we should be aiming
to build the best system possible, period. Not saying "look! popular
software the people pay money for does this; therefore we must too!"
If anything, we should be looking at the proprietary music software
world to make sure we avoid repeating their mistakes (ridiculous
duplication of effort, lock-in, and horrid UIs for example), not
duplicating them just because. (Not to say we can't take positive
things from that world too though) 
10 Jun
10 Jun
2:19 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype [was: Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?}
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 15:56, Dave Robillard wrote:
I don't think I could possibly care less who uses
'linux audio'. I
don't really think anyone else here should either - we should be aiming
to build the best system possible, period. Not saying "look! popular
software the people pay money for does this; therefore we must too!"
I'm with a company trying to make money off of linux audio. While I
enjoy the technical/academic discursion (though lots get the
subject-line only review! %), I'd like to think this list could support
those who mix the market with idealism.... like, well, me.
If anything, we should be looking at the proprietary
music software
world to make sure we avoid repeating their mistakes (ridiculous
duplication of effort, lock-in, and horrid UIs for example), not
duplicating them just because. (Not to say we can't take positive
things from that world too though)
Should I drop off the list? I ain't the same 'we' you are, I guess.
While it's true that the proprietary world has made lots of bad s/w, we
in the biz have also made lots of great stuff.
If y'all care (and I think you should) the best way to encourage the
proprietary folks to adopt and put energy into open source efforts is to
focus on libraries and not apps.
Another good opportunity is dedicated Linux devices (what I am working
on at Muse Research). These have much more promise than getting folks
off their desktop environments and familiar desktop apps.
I could go on and on about this, but I gotta get back to work... mo
4:46 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype [was: Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?}
On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 09:10:35 -0700, Michael Ost wrote:
I'm with a company trying to make money off of
linux audio. While I
enjoy the technical/academic discursion (though lots get the
subject-line only review! %), I'd like to think this list could support
those who mix the market with idealism.... like, well, me.
So do I, I'm hoping its people like you who are going to save my arse if
linux audio /does/ become popular. I doubt I can make my living off audio
software, and I could support the number of people that commercial
audio software developers I know do, with the way I work now.
While it's true that the proprietary world has
made lots of bad s/w, we
in the biz have also made lots of great stuff.
Yep. Bring it on. Its not for me (my needs are kinda specilised), but I'd
rather see a thriving propietary software matket on linux than on windows.
I know many people disagree though FWIW.
If y'all care (and I think you should) the best
way to encourage the
proprietary folks to adopt and put energy into open source efforts is to
focus on libraries and not apps.
Here is where we disagree. You guys dont make apps I'm interested in (in
general), and while I make plenty of libraries as a side effect of writing
apps, the apps are what I want.
- Steve
11:50 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype [was: Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?}
On Thu, 2004-06-10 at 00:10, Michael Ost wrote:
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 15:56, Dave Robillard wrote:
Hence why I specifically said we can take positive things from the
proprietary software world too. You really just want to precisely
duplicate all popular proprietary software, just because? I guess we
aren't the same "we".
I don't think I could possibly care less who
uses 'linux audio'. I
don't really think anyone else here should either - we should be aiming
to build the best system possible, period. Not saying "look! popular
software the people pay money for does this; therefore we must too!"
I'm with a company trying to make money off of linux audio. While I
enjoy the technical/academic discursion (though lots get the
subject-line only review! %), I'd like to think this list could support
those who mix the market with idealism.... like, well, me.
If anything, we should be looking at the
proprietary music software
world to make sure we avoid repeating their mistakes (ridiculous
duplication of effort, lock-in, and horrid UIs for example), not
duplicating them just because. (Not to say we can't take positive
things from that world too though)
Should I drop off the list? I ain't the same 'we' you are, I guess.
While it's true that the proprietary world has made lots of bad s/w, we
in the biz have also made lots of great stuff. If y'all care (and I think you should) the best
way to encourage the
proprietary folks to adopt and put energy into open source efforts is to
focus on libraries and not apps.
I have to ask: if you want to develop everything exactly like the
popular proprietary Windows/MacOS software, and want to facilitate
proprietary audio software under linux... why the linux in the first
place? Obviously you don't care about 'software freedom' all that much,
so what's the point?
If you want a system with a bunch of proprietary audio software, why the
*#$#@ would you be running linux??
That nice you think I should want proprietary software to get developed
for linux. Well, I don't. IMHO that amounts to throwing away the
single advantage "we" have, which sounds pretty stupid to me.
Go develop proprietary software on OSX or something.
-DR- (Who is speaking for himself and only himself, save it)
12:38 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype [was: Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?}
On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 09:39:42 -0400, Dave Robillard wrote
On Thu, 2004-06-10 at 00:10, Michael Ost wrote:
I think that for some of us who are not interested in the possible commercial
possibilities of linux audio apps - this the stuff is what we do when we are
not working. We do it to escape commercial constraints. We deal with that
stuff all day, and get paid for it - so linux is where we go to make something
we can truly own, rather than writing software for anyone else. Where we are
the user *and* programmer, its really quite liberating.
So when people tell us that we have to care about our market share, whether we
are "enterprise ready" and all that - we tend to have quite strong opinions. :)
Should I drop off the list? I ain't the same 'we' you are, I guess.
While it's true that the proprietary world has made lots of bad s/w, we
in the biz have also made lots of great stuff.
Hence why I specifically said we can take positive things from the
proprietary software world too. You really just want to precisely
duplicate all popular proprietary software, just because? I guess we
aren't the same "we".
> If y'all care (and I think you should) the best way to encourage the
> proprietary folks to adopt and put energy into open source efforts is to
> focus on libraries and not apps. If you want a system with a bunch of proprietary audio
software, why
the *#$#@ would you be running linux??
That nice you think I should want proprietary software to get developed
for linux. Well, I don't.
I don't think it matters - I think if people want to make money, then all the
luck to them (in all honesty). It can only be good for us.
I'm currently running linux (at work) with a very closed source proprietary
and expensive maya running in another window - pixar's very expensive prman
running in the background, these guys are here already (ok - for graphics at
least) - it doesn't change a thing, still running gimp for textures, sylpheed
for email, firefox for web, xmms for oggs etc...
If cubase/reason/reaktor/logic all appeared on linux tomorrow - would LAD
disappear because everything *just worked* and we wouldn't want to develop
anything anymore? - not a chance. I prefer the way we work here, little apps
connected together via jack, silly little commandline tools, lots of crazy
scripting languages - I'm here by choice, not for political zeal.
Go develop proprietary software on OSX or something.
On a slightly different tack, if I were interested in making money from linux
apps - I would take a serious look at OSX. It's soooo easy to cross develop
for with linux, and there are a lot of people with money there....
cheers,
dave
1:03 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype [was: Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?}
On Thu, 2004-06-10 at 06:39, Dave Robillard wrote:
On Thu, 2004-06-10 at 00:10, Michael Ost wrote:
I guess this counts as a flame...? Wow. What vitriol. Tone it down if
you want a discussion.
- mo
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 15:56, Dave Robillard
wrote:
Hence why I specifically said we can take positive things from the
proprietary software world too. You really just want to precisely
duplicate all popular proprietary software, just because? I guess we
aren't the same "we".
I don't think I could possibly care less who
uses 'linux audio'. I
don't really think anyone else here should either - we should be aiming
to build the best system possible, period. Not saying "look! popular
software the people pay money for does this; therefore we must too!"
I'm with a company trying to make money off of linux audio. While I
enjoy the technical/academic discursion (though lots get the
subject-line only review! %), I'd like to think this list could support
those who mix the market with idealism.... like, well, me.
If anything, we should be looking at the
proprietary music software
world to make sure we avoid repeating their mistakes (ridiculous
duplication of effort, lock-in, and horrid UIs for example), not
duplicating them just because. (Not to say we can't take positive
things from that world too though)
Should I drop off the list? I ain't the same 'we' you are, I guess.
While it's true that the proprietary world has made lots of bad s/w, we
in the biz have also made lots of great stuff. If y'all care (and I think you should) the
best way to encourage the
proprietary folks to adopt and put energy into open source efforts is to
focus on libraries and not apps.
I have to ask: if you want to develop everything exactly like the
popular proprietary Windows/MacOS software, and want to facilitate
proprietary audio software under linux... why the linux in the first
place? Obviously you don't care about 'software freedom' all that much,
so what's the point?
If you want a system with a bunch of proprietary audio software, why the
*#$#@ would you be running linux??
That nice you think I should want proprietary software to get developed
for linux. Well, I don't. IMHO that amounts to throwing away the
single advantage "we" have, which sounds pretty stupid to me.
Go develop proprietary software on OSX or something.
2:51 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype [was: Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?}
On Thu, 2004-06-10 at 10:54, Michael Ost wrote:
On Thu, 2004-06-10 at 06:39, Dave Robillard wrote:
You're right, and I apologize. But I was kind of trolled, and insanely
bored. :)
Not that I wasn't being truthful though - I really don't want
proprietary software anywhere around here (freedom's pretty much all we
have), but that's just one man's opinion, take it or leave it.
I just don't like being told I "should" want cubase for linux or
whatever.
-DR-
That nice you think I should want proprietary
software to get developed
for linux. Well, I don't. IMHO that amounts to throwing away the
single advantage "we" have, which sounds pretty stupid to me.
Go develop proprietary software on OSX or something.
I guess this counts as a flame...? Wow. What vitriol. Tone it down if
you want a discussion.
- mo
3:33 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype [was: Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?}
On Thu, Jun 10, 2004 at 12:40:33PM -0400, Dave Robillard wrote:
Not that I wasn't being truthful though - I really
don't want
proprietary software anywhere around here (freedom's pretty much all we
have), but that's just one man's opinion, take it or leave it.
I'm happy to have the freedom to know what my OS is *really* doing. I'd
buy Cubase for Linux.
4:35 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype [was: Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?}
On Thu, Jun 10, 2004 at 12:40:33PM -0400, Dave
Robillard wrote:
you don't care as much about the freedom to know what your DAW is
*really* doing? if you're a musician or an audio engineer, you will be
interacting with the DAW very very much more than with the OS ...
--p
Not that I wasn't being truthful though - I
really don't want
proprietary software anywhere around here (freedom's pretty much all we
have), but that's just one man's opinion, take it or leave it.
I'm happy to have the freedom to know what my OS is *really* doing. I'd
buy Cubase for Linux.
4:44 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype [was: Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?}
On Thu, Jun 10, 2004 at 02:26:44PM -0400, Paul Davis wrote:
I'd *like* that. But I'd also like to be able to make music on Linux.
I'm an OS hacker by trade and an amateur musician by hobby. In order to
reconcile my tastes for music software and Linux, I have had to begin to
become an audio hacker. I am faced every day with the decision to
a) make music
b) make music software
So when I disappear from the GMPI list for a few days and then re-appear
with 20 emails in one day, you now know where my attention is going :)
Tim
I'm happy
to have the freedom to know what my OS is *really* doing. I'd
buy Cubase for Linux.
you don't care as much about the freedom to know what your DAW is
*really* doing? if you're a musician or an audio engineer, you will be
interacting with the DAW very very much more than with the OS ...
7:37 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype [was: Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?}
On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 10:11:33PM +0200, Marek Peteraj wrote:
Just as if i said: "There something magical about
the sound of pipe
organs. No wonder they're called the kings of all musical instruments.
We have tried to model one such pipe organ as close as possible so that
you can enjoy playing a real church organ at home. Almost - the church
is missing. The sound isn't <link to sound demos>"
Would i cheat if i said that? Judging from the
reactions of lots of
people, i'd say not at *all*.
The term 'cheat' only makes sense in a context where you are are
interacting with someone, and want to drive the result of that
interaction in a certain direction which you consider desirable.
As far as I am concerned, that context is not present.
What I *can* say is that your text would completely misrepresent
both myself as a person and my motivations for writing Aeolus.
And you'd be surprised - your opinion doesn't
matter much to me,
Fons. Why?
My opinion on what ?
Because you'll always be critical and you'll
always know what's
missing even if it's 0.1% of it all. Which is good for the DSP part
of that application, not the application as a whole.
What is you definition of 'the good of the application as a whole' ?
And I didn't wait to release it, even if IMHO it still very far from
target, a lot more than 0.1%.
Anyway, those people who have said they like it don't seem to bother
about the complete absence of eyecandy. Why should that be ? Probably
because they are interested in making music, and you don't need chrome
and coloured plastic to do that. The GUI as it is looks very basic, and
maybe at some time I will design some nice round buttons for the stops.
But even now it respects the logic and traditions of organ building
(or at least the main 'performance' window does), and any organist will
find his way without even having to think a second.
--
FA
9 Jun
9 Jun
7:27 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 04:49, Alfons Adriaensen wrote:
On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 10:06:00AM +0200, Marek
Peteraj wrote:
Whatever they think about linux audio UIs, that will not change
my opinion expressed above.
There are various kinds of users of audio SW; their requirements
and opinions will vary. In my experience, most serious and
professional users prefer a UI that is first of all functional,
with as little clutter as possible, i.e. a UI that is designed
by people who understand how something works and how it is
used, rather than by the marketing department. This type of
user may be a minority, but they are the only ones that really
matter to me - I am neither a politician nor a salesman, and I
have no desire to be popular.
In a more general sense, a majority is not 'right' by itself,
a majority of informed people probably is. And having paid for
something does not qualify someone as informed. In other words,
the consumer is not always right by definition. If he were,
there would be no place for marketing, which has been defined
as 'the art of disturbing rational decision making'.
The audio business is full of hype and irrational behaviour.
Lots of people seem prepared to pay 5 Eur for a meter of
'directional oxygen free left-twisting copper' loudspeaker
cable. Should I take their opinion seriously ? I prefer not to.
<sarcasm> Didn't you know that the consumer is *always* right. Now
stop bothering me - I want to go watch my Betamax, but first I have to
do some number crunching on my Windoze system. </sarcasm>
Jan
On Tue, 2004-06-08 at 21:15, Fons Adriaensen
wrote:
- When I
saw the collection of VST plugins that Paul Davis used
to show his VST hosting in Karlsruhe, I asked myself "My god,
do they all look that childish ?".
Ask win32 and mac users how the linux audio UIs look like :)
7:39 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 23:21, Jan Depner wrote:
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 04:49, Alfons Adriaensen wrote:
s/Betamax/VHS ;)
Marek
On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 10:06:00AM +0200, Marek
Peteraj wrote:
Whatever they think about linux audio UIs, that will not change
my opinion expressed above.
There are various kinds of users of audio SW; their requirements
and opinions will vary. In my experience, most serious and
professional users prefer a UI that is first of all functional,
with as little clutter as possible, i.e. a UI that is designed
by people who understand how something works and how it is
used, rather than by the marketing department. This type of
user may be a minority, but they are the only ones that really
matter to me - I am neither a politician nor a salesman, and I
have no desire to be popular.
In a more general sense, a majority is not 'right' by itself,
a majority of informed people probably is. And having paid for
something does not qualify someone as informed. In other words,
the consumer is not always right by definition. If he were,
there would be no place for marketing, which has been defined
as 'the art of disturbing rational decision making'.
The audio business is full of hype and irrational behaviour.
Lots of people seem prepared to pay 5 Eur for a meter of
'directional oxygen free left-twisting copper' loudspeaker
cable. Should I take their opinion seriously ? I prefer not to.
<sarcasm> Didn't you know that the consumer is *always* right. Now
stop bothering me - I want to go watch my Betamax, but first I have to
do some number crunching on my Windoze system. </sarcasm> On Tue, 2004-06-08 at 21:15, Fons Adriaensen
wrote:
- When I
saw the collection of VST plugins that Paul Davis used
to show his VST hosting in Karlsruhe, I asked myself "My god,
do they all look that childish ?".
Ask win32 and mac users how the linux audio UIs look like :)
7:40 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 09:15:13 +0200, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
No, it's actually quite simple :-) The most
complex one is
the four-band parametric filter I released recently, and
that's also the only one that is not intended as an AMS
plugin. And it will reappear in some time as a JACK
application with it's own GUI, as this permits to do some
things that would be difficult in a plugin.
While having it as a jack app would certianly be good, I think it would
also be useful to have it still as a plugin but with a custom UI. Not that
that's possible right now.
- Steve
8 Jun
8 Jun
8:03 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] affordance? (was: Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?)
Steve Harris wrote:
[OT] - my canned plugin writing experience - all
generalisations
and IMHO of course
Affordance, appearance and usability has as much affect on the
perceived sound quality as the DSP code (posivly and negativly).
Some of this can be achieved without a custom UI.
Sorry for my ignorance -- but is there someone who can present me
the german term for "affordance"? The web-dicts I searched, don't
know this word -- and the wikipedia entry doesn't give me any clue
about the german word (though I understand the concept).
Uwe
--
voiceINTERconnect www.voiceinterconnect.de
... smart speech applications from germany
8:40 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] affordance? (was: Is ladspa actually
I read:
Sorry for my ignorance -- but is there someone who can
present me
the german term for "affordance"? The web-dicts I searched, don't
know this word -- and the wikipedia entry doesn't give me any clue
about the german word (though I understand the concept).
It's "Affordanz", a psychological term see:
http://www.wissenschaft-online.de/abo/lexikon/psycho/320
regards,
x
--
chris(a)lo-res.org Postmodernism is german romanticism with better
http://pilot.fm/ special effects. (Jeff Keuss / via ctheory.com)
9:33 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Writing An ALSA Driver?
Hi,
I'd like to get a copy of Takashi Iwai's "Writing an ALSA Driver"
however most of the links to it seem to be broken.
Where can I get a copy of this article?
Cheers,
Chris Share
9:41 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Writing An ALSA Driver?
On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 12:24:19PM +0100, Chris Share wrote:
I'd like to get a copy of Takashi Iwai's
"Writing an ALSA Driver"
however most of the links to it seem to be broken.
Where can I get a copy of this article?
Google, less than 1 Minute:
http://www.alsa-project.org/documentation.php#Driver
2:51 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Writing An ALSA Driver?
Thanks!
-----Original Message-----
From: linux-audio-dev-bounces(a)music.columbia.edu
[mailto:linux-audio-dev-bounces@music.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of Claudio
Mettler
Sent: 08 June 2004 12:33
To: The Linux Audio Developers' Mailing List
Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] Writing An ALSA Driver?
On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 12:24:19PM +0100, Chris Share wrote:
I'd like to get a copy of Takashi Iwai's
"Writing an ALSA Driver"
however most of the links to it seem to be broken.
Where can I get a copy of this article?
Google, less than 1 Minute:
http://www.alsa-project.org/documentation.php#Driver
10:25 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] affordance? (was: Is ladspa actually
CK wrote:
It's "Affordanz", a psychological term see:
http://www.wissenschaft-online.de/abo/lexikon/psycho/320
Aaah! Thank you.
This also explains, why this artword isn't found in any dictionary.
Another little piece in the neverending quest for knowlegde ;-)
Uwe
--
voiceINTERconnect www.voiceinterconnect.de
... smart speech applications from germany
11:44 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] affordance? (was: Is ladspa actually
On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 02:16:58 +0200, Uwe Koloska wrote:
CK wrote:
Its in FOLDoc and Wikipedia: (first two I tried)
http://wombat.doc.ic.ac.uk/foldoc/foldoc.cgi?query=affordance&action=Se…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affordance
Its also in Hyperdictionary and the Computer Dictionary and a google would
have found you a defintion in the top hit. It is however not in the OED
(arguably the nearest thing to a authorative dictionary in English), it's
a production from the verb 'afford'.
Its not a very good word, but its the only one I know of that can
describe... affordance ;)
- Steve
It's "Affordanz", a psychological term see:
http://www.wissenschaft-online.de/abo/lexikon/psycho/320
Aaah! Thank you.
This also explains, why this artword isn't found in any dictionary.
7:18 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] affordance? (was: Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?)
On Tue, 2004-06-08 at 04:54, Uwe Koloska wrote:
Steve Harris wrote:
The problem is that it's not a word. Your understanding of it is
probably the best definition there is ;-)
Jan
[OT] - my canned plugin writing experience - all
generalisations
and IMHO of course
Affordance, appearance and usability has as much affect on the
perceived sound quality as the DSP code (posivly and negativly).
Some of this can be achieved without a custom UI.
Sorry for my ignorance -- but is there someone who can present me
the german term for "affordance"? The web-dicts I searched, don't
know this word -- and the wikipedia entry doesn't give me any clue
about the german word (though I understand the concept).
9 Jun
9 Jun
7:46 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] affordance? (was: Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?)
On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 04:11:54 -0500, Jan Depner wrote:
I have to disagree with this - it may not be a german word, but it
certainly is an English one - its been in consistant use in scientific
literature for ~30 years.
(UK) English is defined by usage - not a canonical dictionary, so it is a
word.
- Steve
Sorry for my
ignorance -- but is there someone who can present me
the german term for "affordance"? The web-dicts I searched, don't
know this word -- and the wikipedia entry doesn't give me any clue
about the german word (though I understand the concept).
The problem is that it's not a word. Your understanding of it is
probably the best definition there is ;-)
8:30 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] affordance? (was: Is ladspa actually
I read:
as I pointed out earlier "Affordanz" _is_ a german word (if I would need to
make it up I'd come up with something more beautiful ;) and just like it's
english counterpart has been primarily used in psychology and related fields.
The problem
is that it's not a word. Your understanding of it is
probably the best definition there is ;-)
I have to disagree with this - it may not be a german word, but it
certainly is an English one - its been in consistant use in scientific
literature for ~30 years. (UK) English is defined by usage - not a canonical
dictionary, so it is a
word.
so is german (and I don't care if this is the official view).
regards,
x
--
chris(a)lo-res.org Postmodernism is german romanticism with better
http://pilot.fm/ special effects. (Jeff Keuss / via ctheory.com)
7:23 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] affordance? (was: Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?)
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 04:37, Steve Harris wrote:
On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 04:11:54 -0500, Jan Depner
wrote:
I have to disagree with this - it may not be a german word, but it
certainly is an English one - its been in consistant use in scientific
literature for ~30 years.
And iff has been in constant use in mathematics for over 40 years and
shows up in mathematics textbooks and papers but it's still not a
recognized English word. It's not in Webster's Unabridged (although
FUBAR is ;-).
Jan
Sorry for
my ignorance -- but is there someone who can present me
the german term for "affordance"? The web-dicts I searched, don't
know this word -- and the wikipedia entry doesn't give me any clue
about the german word (though I understand the concept).
The problem is that it's not a word. Your understanding of it is
probably the best definition there is ;-)
7:37 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] affordance? (was: Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?)
On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 04:16:58 -0500, Jan Depner wrote:
Iff is in the OED: "A written form of abbreviation of the phrase `if
and only if', always read as `if and only if', used in Math. and Logic to
introduce a condition that is necessary as well as sufficient, or a
statement that is implied by and implies the preceding one."
First recorded use is in 1955, J. L. KELLEY Gen. Topology vii. 232 F is
equicontinuous at x iff there is a neighborhood of x whose image under
every member of F is small.
So maybe affordance will go in, in 20 years time :)
- Steve
I have to
disagree with this - it may not be a german word, but it
certainly is an English one - its been in consistant use in scientific
literature for ~30 years.
And iff has been in constant use in mathematics for over 40 years and
shows up in mathematics textbooks and papers but it's still not a
recognized English word. It's not in Webster's Unabridged (although
FUBAR is ;-).
10:44 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] centralising ladspa [was: Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?]
Political issues:
1. we'd need to centralize the LADSPA scene on the web, using the
www.ladspa.org site, building a unified ladspa directory, each entry
would describe the plugin(category, author, decription, purpose)
At least? :)
Marek
7460
days inactive
7463
days old
linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
133 comments
30 participants
participants (30)
-
Alfons Adriaensen -
Chris Cannam -
Chris Share -
CK -
Claudio Mettler -
Dave Griffiths -
Dave Robillard -
Dr.Graef＠t-online.de -
Erik de Castro Lopo -
Fernando Pablo Lopez-Lezcano -
Fons Adriaensen -
Frank Barknecht -
Jan Depner -
Jens M Andreasen -
Joost Diepenmaat -
Jos Laake -
Lee Revell -
Marek Peteraj -
martin rumori -
Michael Ost -
Paul Davis -
Paul Winkler -
Pelle Nilsson -
Pete Bessman -
Robert Jonsson -
Steve Harris -
Tim Hockin -
Tim Orford -
torbenh＠gmx.de -
Uwe Koloska