1 Sep
2009
1 Sep
'09
10:39 a.m.
----- original Nachricht --------
Betreff: [LAU] What Live is about (was: Re: ableton live in vmware)
Gesendet: Di, 01. Sep 2009
Von: Thorsten Wilms<t_w_(a)freenet.de>
On Mon, 2009-08-31 at 20:56 -0400, Brett McCoy wrote:
Thank you for this. It makes me crazy when I read "You don't need fancy apps like
this, hydrogen is good enough" or "sooperlooper do the job".
I use AL because it is a masterpiece of music software and it fits my needs for a creative
workflow. It is the state of art today and contemporary technology for musicians. It is no
hype, it is an answer for the question: How you can make music without touching the limits
of software.
When I read "just put together a few apps on Linux with JACK and you have the
same" it make me clear that most of the Linux fanboys here are never seen or used
modern software and they don't know what they are talking about. Even David Philips
never seen Garageband, but he talk about. It is no good idea to hide behind the small
world of Linux audio. The progress goes on, and now it is 2009.
Michael
I have to admit complete ignorance here, but what
is it about Live
that makes it advantageous over DAWs like Ardour, Reaper, Sonar, Pro
Tools, etc? Is it primarily loop/clip/synth based rather than a hard
disk recorder/mixer like a traditional DAW?
My knowledge is based on reading about it in magazines early on and much
later using the trial version for a bit.
When it came out, using software for live performance was seen as novel
idea (there might have been an "underground" scene thinking
differently).
The minimalistic graphics optimized for clearness were a revelation.
Dialogs are avoided, it's all in one window.
AFAIK it allows tempo changes and immediately stretches/shrinks all
audio to fit. Sony Acid might have been earlier with that.
You can also add markers on clips and then move these markers and the
material between markers will be stretched/shrunken to accommodate. The
version I tried would do so "only" linearly :)
I think the central new concept was having a matrix view, where you have
columns for tracks/instruments and rows for "Scenes".
Have a look at:
http://digisound.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/3-big-rocker.jpg
All those rectangles with play symbols are patterns.
If you look down the "Master" column, it should become clear what scenes
are about. Note that you can trigger any of the patterns any time.
There's a sync feature that can make sure patterns will be started on
the beat/next-measure.
There's also a "traditional" arrangement view:
http://www.kaosaudio.com/images/software/ableton-live-7-le-arrangement.png
Nowadays there's a collection of deeply integrated synth "plugins".
GUI-wise, you could always add such a matrix to an existing
DAW/sequencer (not a small project, of course). But you need a backend
that can play any pattern any time, with a sync-to-beat trigger feature.
And live time stretching.
So, none of the linux audio apps comes even close.
A set of separate tools can never be a replacement (except with a
not-seen-before sophisticated level of optional integration, perhaps).
People can talk about the real or perceived shortcomings of linux audio
tools all day. Doesn't change a thing. The vague and sometimes silly
comparisons and the very foggy ideas what some commercial apps actually
offer are damn frustrating. Would surprise me to read something *new*.
--
Thorsten Wilms
thorwil's design for free software:
http://thorwil.wordpress.com/
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user
--- original Nachricht Ende ----
1 Sep
1 Sep
11:01 a.m.
New subject: What Live is about (was: Re: ableton live in vmware)
Michael Bohle wrote:
> Sometime somebody wrote:
>
>
> So, none of the linux audio apps comes even close.
> A set of separate tools can never be a replacement (except with a
> not-seen-before sophisticated level of optional integration, perhaps).
>
> People can talk about the real or perceived shortcomings of linux audio
> tools all day. Doesn't change a thing. The vague and sometimes silly
> comparisons and the very foggy ideas what some commercial apps actually
> offer are damn frustrating. Would surprise me to read something *new*.
>
>
I note that rarely does anyone refer to "aptness to purpose" anymore.
Can AL do for me what I do with Csound here:
http://linux-sound.org/audio/studiodave-avs_p01_090805.ogg
If so, how quickly can it be done ? How does AL compare, in the context
of this style of composition, to something like AVSynthesis or blue ?
Thank you for this. It makes me crazy when I read
"You don't need fancy apps like this, hydrogen is good enough" or
"sooperlooper do the job".
It doesn't make me crazy, but I read such statements "cum grano salis".
If I don't know the software I don't write about it.
I use AL because it is a masterpiece of music software
and it fits my needs for a creative workflow. It is the state of art today and
contemporary technology for musicians. It is no hype, it is an answer for the question:
How you can make music without touching the limits of software.
That's a categorical statement with a huge bag of assumptions. Software
that can't do what I need it for isn't worth much to me, regardless of
its fan base or GUI or any other consideration (including OS).
When I read "just put together a few apps on
Linux with JACK and you have the same" it make me clear that most of the Linux
fanboys here are never seen or used modern software and they don't know what they are
talking about. Even David Philips never seen Garageband, but he talk about. It is no good
idea to hide behind the small world of Linux audio. The progress goes on, and now it is
2009.
I'm more than a little pissed off by that comment, Michael. I didn't
"talk about" Garageband. Here's the full quote from my article on LMMS:
"LMMS <http://lmms.info/home.php> is music creation software similar to
programs such as GarageBand <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GarageBand>
for OSX and FL Studio <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fl_studio> for
Windows. Those programs are designed to streamline the process of making
music with a computer in order to get new users into music composition
as quickly and painlessly as possible. Their feature sets include preset
audio loops, MIDI tracks, and other ready-made musical materials
available for immediate use in a piece. Their GUIs invite involvement in
the process of making music and it's clear that the designers want the
user to have fun with the program and the process. In this mini-review
we'll see if LMMS lives up to the precedents set by those programs."
That's called a "mention", it's not a discourse, a review, or even an
opinion. I'll appreciate it if you don't misquote me.
Best,
dp
11:07 a.m.
New subject: What Live is about (was: Re: ableton live in vmware)
On 09/01/2009 10:39 PM, Michael Bohle wrote:
Thank you for this. It makes me crazy when I read "You don't need fancy apps
like this, hydrogen is good enough" or "sooperlooper do the job".
You are clearly misreading the conversation so far.
We have been discussing the finer points of the interfaces and workflow
and how to take some of the features and integrate them with existing
apps to make the workflow of existing apps more familiar. Others have
suggested to start from scratch with the goal of completely replicating
AL. I find that quite a bizarre concept.
I use AL because it is a masterpiece of music software
and it fits my needs for a creative workflow. It is the state of art today and
contemporary technology for musicians. It is no hype, it is an answer for the question:
How you can make music without touching the limits of software.
When I read "just put together a few apps on Linux with JACK and you have the
same"
When did you read this?
No one has said we have the same but some people have said we have a
comparable and productive environment that can be leveraged.
If we are not building the apps to meet some of the expectations of some
of the users then there is nothing left to do as most of us developers
are fairly happy with the work that has been achieved so far.
it make me clear that most of the Linux fanboys here
are never seen or used modern software and they don't know what they are talking
about. Even David Philips never seen Garageband, but he talk about. It is no good idea to
hide behind the small world of Linux audio. The progress goes on, and now it is 2009.
Michael
--
Thorsten Wilms
thorwil's design for free software:
http://thorwil.wordpress.com/
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user
--- original Nachricht Ende ----
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user
11:18 a.m.
New subject: What Live is about (was: Re: ableton live in vmware)
"...the small world of Linux audio. The progress goes on, and now it is
2009."
I feel sorry for that kind of imperialist/progessist thinking..You are
right, we are in 2009 and some thinking should be different nowadays,
progress not always bring good things, if you can tell the difference
between good and bad..
Some vague third world thoughts
Daniel D2 - Brazil
2009/9/1 Michael Bohle <opendaw(a)jacklab.org>
----- original Nachricht --------
Betreff: [LAU] What Live is about (was: Re: ableton live in vmware)
Gesendet: Di, 01. Sep 2009
Von: Thorsten Wilms<t_w_(a)freenet.de>
On Mon, 2009-08-31 at 20:56 -0400, Brett McCoy
wrote:
http://www.kaosaudio.com/images/software/ableton-live-7-le-arrangement.png
I have to admit complete ignorance here, but what
is it about Live
that makes it advantageous over DAWs like Ardour, Reaper, Sonar, Pro
Tools, etc? Is it primarily loop/clip/synth based rather than a hard
disk recorder/mixer like a traditional DAW?
My knowledge is based on reading about it in magazines early on and much
later using the trial version for a bit.
When it came out, using software for live performance was seen as novel
idea (there might have been an "underground" scene thinking
differently).
The minimalistic graphics optimized for clearness were a revelation.
Dialogs are avoided, it's all in one window.
AFAIK it allows tempo changes and immediately stretches/shrinks all
audio to fit. Sony Acid might have been earlier with that.
You can also add markers on clips and then move these markers and the
material between markers will be stretched/shrunken to accommodate. The
version I tried would do so "only" linearly :)
I think the central new concept was having a matrix view, where you have
columns for tracks/instruments and rows for "Scenes".
Have a look at:
http://digisound.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/3-big-rocker.jpg
All those rectangles with play symbols are patterns.
If you look down the "Master" column, it should become clear what scenes
are about. Note that you can trigger any of the patterns any time.
There's a sync feature that can make sure patterns will be started on
the beat/next-measure.
There's also a "traditional" arrangement view:
Nowadays there's a collection of deeply integrated synth "plugins".
GUI-wise, you could always add such a matrix to an existing
DAW/sequencer (not a small project, of course). But you need a backend
that can play any pattern any time, with a sync-to-beat trigger feature.
And live time stretching.
So, none of the linux audio apps comes even close.
A set of separate tools can never be a replacement (except with a
not-seen-before sophisticated level of optional integration, perhaps).
People can talk about the real or perceived shortcomings of linux audio
tools all day. Doesn't change a thing. The vague and sometimes silly
comparisons and the very foggy ideas what some commercial apps actually
offer are damn frustrating. Would surprise me to read something *new*.
Thank you for this. It makes me crazy when I read "You don't need fancy
apps like this, hydrogen is good enough" or "sooperlooper do the job".
I use AL because it is a masterpiece of music software and it fits my needs
for a creative workflow. It is the state of art today and contemporary
technology for musicians. It is no hype, it is an answer for the question:
How you can make music without touching the limits of software.
When I read "just put together a few apps on Linux with JACK and you have
the same" it make me clear that most of the Linux fanboys here are never
seen or used modern software and they don't know what they are talking
about. Even David Philips never seen Garageband, but he talk about. It is no
good idea to hide behind the small world of Linux audio. The progress goes
on, and now it is 2009.
Michael
--
Thorsten Wilms
thorwil's design for free software:
http://thorwil.wordpress.com/
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user
--- original Nachricht Ende ----
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user
5359
days inactive
5359
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
3 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Daniel Roviriego -
Dave Phillips -
Michael Bohle -
Patrick Shirkey