4 Sep
2012
4 Sep
'12
12:48 a.m.
On Tue, September 4, 2012 2:22 am, Thomas Vecchione wrote:
On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 11:11 AM, hermann meyer
<brummer-(a)web.de> wrote:
Given Ralf consistency over the years at attempting to present the idea
out that Linux Audio is lacking in comparison to other audio platforms
especially the ones running on the OS's sold by M$ I have to agree with
Herman that it is most certainly implied.
Which imply that you miss a feature in guitarix
and/or Rakkarrack, or at
least think that they are incomplete. You wrote this here in a open
Mailing
List, but didn't think that it is worse to let the developers of those
tools know about that. And, o top of it, if you get ask directly what
you
missing, you wrote, "oh, nothing,. . "
For once, I have to stick up for Ralf. Simply put, it doesn't imply
anything.
Just because there is an option for something on
another OS doesn't mean
that I think that feature should be in every piece of software on Linux.
This isn't comparing Guitarix or Rakkarak to specific pieces of software,
this is comparing the choices of software for a usage and variety of tools
on Linux to those on Windows or Mac. Guitarix or Rakarrak are just
examples of what exists on Linux, and while I don't use them, just because
they can't do everything that hundreds of pieces of software on Mac or
Windows do, doesn't mean they are incomplete. This is ESPECIALLY true
given your own view of the product goals which you stated...
I like to let you know that we never have the goal to make a competition
to
And does a damn good job of it too. Considering that they release the
software for free and make regular updates to the codebase it's a very
sweet deal.
Guitarists I know may own a wide selection of fx but they almost always
only use a tiny fraction of their collection the majority of their work.
Guitarix and rackarack cut through all the crap and provide the tools that
are most useful for most situations.
windows or other OS's. We just like to
provide a OpenSource Tube
Amplifier
emulation.
Your software only provides one specific piece to the selection of guitar
FX software.
Just because I have an option of using a socket driver
and socket sets
doesn't mean that there is anything wrong with my combination wrenches.
In
the audio world this translates into, just because I have the option of
using EQ-A instead of EQ-B it doesn't necessarily mean I think either is
wrong. I can use LinuxDSP's Pultec EQ, instead of or with Harrison
Console's built in EQ on Mixbus, or I could use one of a half dozen
different other EQs instead of either, and depending on the material I
will
use multiple. But this level of choice still doesn't compare to the
literally hundreds of EQs available on Windows or Mac, but they do what I
need them to and I am perfectly happy with them.
You got really defensive against something that wasn't an attack on you or
your software in my opinion. Personally I don't even use either pieces of
software so I can't speak for how good or bad they are, but I read nothing
in Ralf's responses that said they were bad at all. Just that they don't
equate to the much larger selection of tools on other OSes.
I disagree. Ralfs language when he makes comparisons to options on other
platforms is consistently dismissive.
It's no wonder that many people on this list consider him to be a M$ troll
and he gets such a lot of negativity directed at him.
To put it more plainly, just in case there is any room for doubt, if Ralf
is not an M$ troll then he is doing a damn good job of coming across like
one.
--
Patrick Shirkey
Boost Hardware Ltd