2 Apr
2008
2 Apr
'08
5:03 p.m.
On Sun, 2008-03-30 at 16:59 +0200, schoappied wrote:
On Sunday 30 March 2008 16:47:46 Dave Phillips wrote:
some views,
"real" module trackers have "all" included. that means i can still
play
and edit! my fasttracker2 modules that i made like 15 years ago...
(probably also due popularity and open file format)
but my midi tracks made with <pick your favourite midi sequencer> are
"useless" today, as i have sold my midi hardware and don't even have the
sysexs of the sounds anymore...
module trackers are like a midi-(step)-sequencer that have samples and
sample-player built in. some have effects too, newer even synths...
but the biggest difference (beside looks) is probably the "work flow".
"tracking" is pretty restricting and you stay 99% of the time on the
computer-keyboard (real trackers don't use midi-keyboards;) and
record/play/edit your piece seamlessly...
in "sequencing" you move more between your (virtual-)midi keyboard, the
computer-keyboard and mouse...
.andre
schoappied wrote:
Ok, so the question must be:
'what's the difference between a module tracker and a track-oriented
audio/MIDI sequence?'... Can someone explain me what the difference is
between Renoise and
programs like Rosegarden, Qtractor and reaper?
Renoise is built upon the design of a module tracker. The others you
mention are more track-oriented audio/MIDI sequencers.
The Renoise GUI may be a bit of a shock if you have no experience with a
tracker, but it's not really very complicated, perhaps no more so (or
even less so) than the contenders. ;)
See Brett's post for other difference factors.
Best,
dp When do you use which app?
~dirk
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user