7 Feb
2013
7 Feb
'13
5:46 p.m.
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 5:49 PM, Nils Gey <ich(a)nilsgey.de> wrote:
Needles to say, that does say a lot about the character of those persons.
Their music sounds exactly the same: from low quality down to simple crap.
"Learning how to use an instrument, even a virtual one? Learn how music
works? Bah! I do it all from the gut.. bla bla bla".
Learn your tools and instruments. If you don't want a tool, use another
one. If that means not using Linux Audio at all, so be it.
Nils
I would not necessarily agree with this.
There is a difference between having a learning curve (all Windows
software, in fact, ANY software has a learning curve) and having a plain
inconvenient interface or lack of basic functionality.
If you have an example of something being done in a way that has a smaller
learning curve and a more pleasant workflow, with less mouse clicks, more
reliable results, more functionality, it is no wonder people would want
that.
Also, I cannot agree *at all* that a tool that is convenient to use is a
tool with which you can only produce "from low quality down to simple
crap". I am sorry, this is just plain incorrect.
What evidence there is that you can do better things musically with
Qtractor than with Ableton? Is Linux better because to render a song on
Ableton you just press a button and on Qtractor you have to channel midi to
a separate DAW, render audio separately from midi and then resync them in a
multi-channel sound editor? Does that make music better?
When you have trouble with the tools you use, you're gonna spend less time
doing actual music. I myself spent a year producing almost nothing and
learning to do things the Linux way, with my time divided between compiling
stuff and then figuring out how can I get some basic things done, like
render a looped soundtrack.
--
Louigi Verona
http://www.louigiverona.ru/