2 Mar
2008
2 Mar
'08
3:08 a.m.
On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 7:54 AM, Lee Revell <rlrevell(a)joe-job.com> wrote:
On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 3:25 PM, Chuckk Hubbard
<badmuthahubbard(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Well, having spent a lot of time that I don't regret learning to write
scripts and edit config files, I think I'm more efficient with the OS
itself than with Windows. But for music production, there's the rub.
Digital Performer, Pro Tools, and Nuendo are probably the three most
recognized unmatched programs. Some would say Reason as well, but I'm
more than happy to trade its ease of use for Csound and Pd's greater
freedom for those who know what they're doing.
Right now I'm working on a project and using Csound and Pure Data
together. I just discovered that neither of the Csound opcodes for
arbitrarily turning off a note work correctly, and my only recourse is
to mention it and hope someone takes pity on me. This is just one
example; the exact same thing has happened to me over and over in my
time using Linux.
I don't mind usually, because I'm usually NOT someone who needs to
meet deadlines and make money with Linux. But the musicians I know
who do work this way, who have TV or movie or commercial producers
breathing down their necks, don't have the luxury of waiting for
software to be fixed when it suddenly turns out a certain command
crashes the program and erases their work. In terms of the OS we can
all laugh at this, knowing one is more secure with Linux, but with
music programs I believe the balance falls away from free software.
And in terms of functionality, Digital Performer (just because I'm
more familiar with it) has an amazing selection of hotkeys and views
and markers and video sync (which no Linux music app has still) that
experienced users zip through amazingly. It is tested carefully, the
GUI is designed to be fast and thorough, and, importantly, developers
have the possibility of being fired if they don't do all this
correctly.
Speaking for myself, I've consistently thrown in with Linux and spited
my Mac friends, believing that I'm a fast enough typer and smart
enough to do better with Csound in the end, so it's not like I don't
understand the reasons for choosing free software. Sometimes I see it
as the tortoise and the hare, and my particular interests in music
push me to put my money on the tortoise. But I've also never paid my
bills by producing music.
-Chuckk
--
http://www.badmuthahubbard.com
On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 3:43 AM, JiNN
<jinnproduction(a)gmail.com> wrote:
ee>
people using non-free software are meeting deadlines and making money.
Disagree. Many, many Linux enthusiasts take your point of view
seriously. The whole point of the Ubuntu distro is solving this
problem. Zillions of man hours have gone into it. Of course it's
still often a problem especially if your needs fall out in the long
tail of the demand curve. But it can be done - witness the progress
of the mainstream Linux desktop. The average user can now do
everything they do on proprietary OSes without ever needing to open a
terminal or edit a config file; this was not the case just a few years
ago.
Just out of curiosity, what specifically are the main issues that make
you less productive than you would be on a non-free OS? I will try the music related linux build OS that
was suggested and see where
i go from there. I guess my main thing is that i want to spend most of the
time working with music and not tinkering with, not sure if this describes
it, "programming issues."
You'll have a hard time finding a Linux enthusiast who takes that
point of view seriously. At least I did. I somehow got sucked in,
myself, and that comment actually makes me remember wistfully how
productive I used to be.
It's true that people using free software make the software better,
eventually, when the developers care, but it's also true that some