19 Jun
2005
19 Jun
'05
12:11 a.m.
3. 'amateur' users vs. 'professionals'.
Since a took a clear stand on this matter, let me define what
I mean by a 'professional' in this context: someone who makes
a living by providing a service to customers who pay for it.
I still maintain that someone in this position will not mind
logging in as different users for his personal and pro work.
He / she will probably use different machines anyway. It's
just a matter of 'best practice' and professional conduct.
Just to join in... from a dance music making perspective i'm not sure if i understand
this customer concept. Does your fav rock band use "best practice" and
professional conduct? are they not professional? I hope at least some of the people on
here are interested in making music too, and i hope we can focus on that. The key thing
i've learned from my limited experience with music, more time making music and less
time getting your computer to work means better music. So i think the goal really needs to
be as Jay said, it just works. Though i'm coming from the just doing it for fun camp
so take that into account.
> As was already pointed out, prosumer and
professional users
> will in all probably have two different audio cards anyway.
> At least for the hobbyist (and I can speak for them):
> disagreed :) . 
19 Jun
19 Jun
4:13 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Re: Re: What Parts of Linux Audio Simply Work Great?
On Sun, 2005-06-19 at 02:10 +0000, Lachlan Davison wrote:
So i think the goal really needs to be as Jay said, it
just works.
Agree 100%, but we need to be fully aware that this we are tackling a
problem that no one has ever solved. OSX "just works" because Apple
controls the hardware and has full access to the specs. And on Windows
it most certainly does not "just work", if you don't believe me see all
the horrible hacks (eg forcing a "Standard PC" install to disable ACPI)
on every Windows audio tuning web site,
We are trying to provide an OSX like experience but support the range of
hardware that Windows does. Microsoft has more dollars at its disposal
than any entity in history, and they have not solved this problem yet.
jwz can put that in his pipe and smoke it.
Lee
4:45 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] Re: Re: What Parts of Linux Audio Simply Work Great?
Lee Revell wrote:
On Sun, 2005-06-19 at 02:10 +0000, Lachlan Davison
wrote:
I personnally think Mac Os X is way over estimated from the easy to use
point of view, but the "just works" problem is real on linux. I used to
advise more people to use linux before if they had any interest, I do it
less often now, because most of them were not satisfied ("you didn't
tell me suspend on ram would not work", etc...), and went back to the
dark side :)
I only do it when I am sure the people are really ready to get their
hands dirty. Then it generally works, because these people are surprised
to find good communities with people ready to help, etc...
Cheers,
David
So i think the goal really needs to be as Jay
said, it just works.
Agree 100%, but we need to be fully aware that this we are tackling a
problem that no one has ever solved. OSX "just works" because Apple
controls the hardware and has full access to the specs. And on Windows
it most certainly does not "just work", if you don't believe me see all
the horrible hacks (eg forcing a "Standard PC" install to disable ACPI)
on every Windows audio tuning web site,
We are trying to provide an OSX like experience but support the range of
hardware that Windows does. Microsoft has more dollars at its disposal
than any entity in history, and they have not solved this problem yet.
6:41 p.m.
We are trying to provide an OSX like experience but
support
the range of hardware that Windows does. Microsoft has
more dollars at its disposal than any entity in history,
and they have not solved this problem yet.
yeah, but perhaps it wasn't important enough for them to spent
money working on it. I cannot remember that Microsoft is
known for properly solving any problem :) .
Best regards
ce
1:16 p.m.
Lachlan Davison wrote:
Just to join in... from a dance music making
perspective i'm not sure if i understand this customer concept. Does your fav rock
band use "best practice" and professional conduct? are they not professional? I
hope at least some of the people on here are interested in making music too, and i hope we
can focus on that. The key thing i've learned from my limited experience with music,
more time making music and less time getting your computer to work means better music. So
i think the goal really needs to be as Jay said, it just works. Though i'm coming from
the just doing it for fun camp so take that into account.
I'm a music professional. I make my living teaching music, writing about
music software, and performing music (classical guitar, rock, blues). I
have no other job, I pay my bills from the money I make as a
professional musician.
I don't distinguish between pro and consumer when I use my computers. I
turn 'em on, I use whatever software I need, and it's just about that
easy for me.
Btw, when I'm teaching I don't have time to hassle with the machines. If
the stuff didn't work for me I'd be losing money and I'd use something
else. It all works pretty well for me (100% Linux here), but I've also
reluctantly accepted that I might be an advanced user.
I've spent a long time working on the systems here. I've watched Linux
itself get easier to set up and use, but I must agree with Jay and jwz
when they're pointing out the difficulties of configuring the Linux
sound system. Just because it's easy (well, easier) for me doesn't mean
the system is perfect or that Jay and jwz are clueless. I'm still
learning how to do things with ALSA that ought to be a lot clearer and
easier, which is a testament both to ALSA's depth and to its opacity for
even an advanced user.
Best,
dp
20 Jun
20 Jun
11:48 a.m.
[Lachlan Davison]
... from a dance music making perspective i'm not
sure if i
understand this customer concept. Does your fav rock band use
"best practice" and professional conduct? are they not professional?
[Dave Phillips]
I'm a music professional. I make my living
teaching music, writing
about music software, and performing music (classical guitar, rock,
blues). I have no other job, I pay my bills from the money I make
as a professional musician.
Yes, many musicians today can rightly be called audio professionals
in the sense that they use audio production equipment that was the
specialist domain of trained audio engineers not some many years ago.
But this does not mean
Audio professional == Musician.
In both examples at hand (my fav rock band, and Dave), the people
involved essentially work with their own material only. If they
screw it up, they will be the only ones to blame and to suffer.
Also, the professional audio work they do is limited to their
own requirements, and they set their own standards.
But not all audio professionals work in these favorable conditions.
When the files on your hard disk are not related to your own
musical (or other) activities but represent the (often considerable)
investment of a customer, you can't afford to take a cavalier
attitude.
To answer Lachlan's question "Does your fav rock band use best
practice and professional conduct?", the answer is probably no,
but the PA firm they hire to support their tour, and the studio
they pay to record their next CD will, and know why.
And I'd be surprised if Dave would allow his students to work on
the same machine + login that he uses to write his articles, do
his acoounts, etc. (Dave ???)
[Tim Orford]
although "pros" have some valuable
knowledge, one of the funny
things about them (and i am guilty of this) is that they all
think other pros are like them, which is not remotely true.
There are big differences between pros in different professions,
and even within the same discipline. The differences are not
overcomable, and i think you would be better off trying to analyse
and accomodate the differences rather than underplaying their
existance.
Wise Words (but I suspect you wanted to write 'not *un*overcomable')
--
FA
1:16 p.m.
Alfons Adriaensen wrote:
... many musicians today can rightly be called audio
professionals
in the sense that they use audio production equipment that was the
specialist domain of trained audio engineers not some many years ago.
But this does not mean
Audio professional == Musician.
I've had occasion to lament this fact. ;-)
But it's a good distinction. As a professional musician I want what
professional audio recording engineers have, in terms of quality and
accessibility, but of course I do not claim to be an audio professional.
In both examples at hand (my fav rock band, and Dave),
the people
involved essentially work with their own material only. If they
screw it up, they will be the only ones to blame and to suffer.
Also, the professional audio work they do is limited to their
own requirements, and they set their own standards.
But not all audio professionals work in these favorable conditions.
When the files on your hard disk are not related to your own
musical (or other) activities but represent the (often considerable)
investment of a customer, you can't afford to take a cavalier
attitude.
Agreed.
To answer Lachlan's question "Does your fav
rock band use best
practice and professional conduct?", the answer is probably no,
but the PA firm they hire to support their tour, and the studio
they pay to record their next CD will, and know why.
It's the business.
And I'd be surprised if Dave would allow his
students to work on
the same machine + login that he uses to write his articles, do
his acoounts, etc. (Dave ???)
Same machine, different login, maybe. But they all use Windows anyway... ;)
Best,
dp
6896
days inactive
6898
days old
linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
6 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
Alfons Adriaensen -
Christoph Eckert -
Dave Phillips -
David Cournapeau -
Lachlan Davison -
Lee Revell