Re: [LAU] Some thoughts on making electronic music

Interesting read, and i'll add this for discussion. We have tremendous potential in Linux for making music, and images, be they stills or film. Unlike commercial operation systems, we can operate free of limitations. For someone like me, who uses a lot of everything, be they ports, tracks, etc.., writing music and recording it in a Linux environment gives me, for the first time in over 25 years, the chance to use 'everything at once'. I run 64bit, and have little or no interest in using VST's, or more generally plugins, as sound creation devices.So apart from needing a lot of ports, tracks, and great midi editing tools, my needs could be viewed as fairly simple. I used to record my orchestral mates on an 8 track, and had a lot of fun doing so. It was faster than using a computer, because i hit record, and voila, we're off and running. (more or less) When i started using a computer to do the same, for a living, i spent a lot of time tweaking, and maintaining, and those who used Gigastudio in the past will know what i'm talking about here. It took a lot longer, and often proved to be a larger barrier than the 8 track method, which was hit record and go. Despite that, i soldiered on, as it wasn't everyday i could muster up likeminded orchestral players, and record them. (and i did the same for them as they recorded for themselves in the same way, and i played for their work.) Dave Phillips got me into Linux, after over twenty years of using Win and Mac, and it proved to be a great move. (And thanks again Dave. It's been excellent) I'm closer to the "setup and record" method than i've ever been, using a computer instead of an 8 track, but one thing remains, that i think would put the icing on the cake for not only me, but linux audio and midi application users and developers alike. And that's workflow. Like the commercial world for our particular niche, there's a heavy dependency on mousestrokes. For those of us who use a computer for orchestral and film writing, using a mouse kills the workflow. This may not be so readily apparent for the user who generally works with 4, 8, 12, or 16 tracks, but when writing for 60, 70, 80, and more tracks, the limitations of a mousecentric workflow paradigm become painfully apparent. This is particularly true for midi inputting and editing, where we might have a thousand segments, or items, to manage and edit, and constantly swapping between a mouse and the few keystrokes available kills any semblance of efficient workflow, and makes the donkey work of editing, even harder. In linux apps defence, they are no better or worse than commercial apps, but with the opportunity to exceed commercial offerings, we could get close to that '8 track' paradigm, and forge a path that few could follow. Using an 8 track was enjoyable, still had limitations, and relied on a good relationship between composer and player to get something done. Our little community of players stuck together, and helped each other out, and that worked for us. Using an orchestral sample library can be the same, if the tools are complimentary to workflow, and remove as many obstacles as possible in the record and edit process. I continue to be a big supporter of Linux, and the remarkable work done in our niche, by talented people. We still have workarounds yes, but in my case, not nearly as many as before. And i'm constantly aware of the undeniable fact that i'm in a niche, within a niche, as i've very few linux composers who write similiar music to me. (2 so far.) For developers looking to mature their apps further, i respectfully ask that you consider workflow, particularly navigation, as an important part of what you code, when making your project decisions. I was told recently by a talented dev, that many of you don't use your own apps that often, something i found amusing and ironic, so from a power user who uses linux audio and midi apps are part of a fulltime working environment, i share this view in the hope that you'll consider the efficiency of using keystroke maps as an added asset, and code accordingly. Using a mouse for so many tracks, items, and actions, is counterproductive, and introduces an element of building frustration that works against creative workflow. Gaining momentum and keeping it is essential, imho. I tend to be a bit geekish about workflow, so please take the above comments in context. I tend to examine every action stroke, in a workflow "chain", and work to reduce the number of stroke actions required, assigning keystrokes where possible, within the limitations of a coded application. If this was considered, and coded, at app development level, i'm confident the user experience, and their perception of the excellence of an application would change considerably for the better, form the already high regard many apps are held in. There's already much to enjoy in our niche community with the tools that are built, and i view great workflow as the "8 track" experience, on a computer, something few in any world, linux or commerical have achieved so far. Coding keystrokes, and examining workflow to a fine degree, including studying every action in a workflow chain when building your app might not seem very glamorous, or even interesting, but, imho, it's the....last 10% that seperates great apps from good ones. Sorry for the ramble, but i thought this important to add, when reflecting on the 8 track experience, and the potential to get close to this using a computer. Alex. On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Jostein Chr. Andersen <jostein(a)vait.se> wrote: -- www.openoctave.org