18 Jul
2004
18 Jul
'04
3:36 a.m.
On Sat, 2004-07-17 at 14:40, Stanley Jaddoe wrote:
On Saturday 17 July 2004 19:10, Russell Hanaghan
wrote:
Kind of pointless IMO. If you don't record....it's NOT a hard disk
recorder. And the mixer HAS all the functionality of a conventional
mixing console. I don't think Ardour takes up much more in the way of
resources if your not recording to HD.
IMHO, there is nothing more appropriate for these
tasks than the Ardour
mixer interface. As I state usually in this line of useage, it is a
massive underuse of Ardour and all of it's other capabilities but I use
it's mixer interface live for gigs and it is all of the things you want
plus a LOT more when you have the need.
IMHO, a harddisk recorder and mixing desk are two seperate functions. I really
hope Mr. Davis agrees and will split the mixing part from the harddisk
recording part.
The mixing part of Ardour could then be developed as a seperate 'full fledged'
JACK mixing desk. Of course, this seperate mixer can be reused by the
harddisk recording part of Ardour.