22 Sep
2009
22 Sep
'09
11:55 a.m.
On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 9:11 AM, Michael Bohle
<opendaw(a)jacklab.org> wrote:
and LV2.
We don't need this shiny bloated closed source VST with all this
uncreative presets.
Not all VSTs have equivalents on Linux, sadly, especially with regard
to virtual instruments.
We have good instruments like Hexter and so on, enough for music production. If it is not
enough for you, start to developing other virtual instruments. But don't look back to
the proprietary shiny VST preset wonderland, we don't need this.
Thats what I've learned in endless discussions with this list and now I believe this
is true.
Michael
Just wondering, could a hardware VST host be another solution for the
'VST-problem' on Linux?
There is no VST problem on Linux - we have Jack, Hydrogen, Zynadd, LADSPA -- Brett
------------------------------------------------------------
"In the rhythm of music a secret is hidden;
If I were to divulge it, it would overturn the world."
-- Jelaleddin Rumi
--- original Nachricht Ende ----
22 Sep
22 Sep
12:08 p.m.
New subject: Hardware VST host?
On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 9:41 AM, Michael Bohle <opendaw(a)jacklab.org> wrote:
I would love to develop more virtual instruments but don't have the
resources for recording orchestral instruments and choirs. It's doubly
sad that a lot of manufacturers are moving to proprietary sample
engines so you can't even migrate the samples into LinuxSampler or
similar. There are a large number of sample libraries that simply
can't be used on Linux. I'm not saying I like the situation, I'd like
to be running a 100% Linux studio, but have no choice.
-- Brett
------------------------------------------------------------
"In the rhythm of music a secret is hidden;
If I were to divulge it, it would overturn the world."
-- Jelaleddin Rumi
Not all VSTs
have equivalents on Linux, sadly, especially with regard
to virtual instruments.
We have good instruments like Hexter and so on, enough for music production. If it is not
enough for you, start to developing other virtual instruments. But don't look back to
the proprietary shiny VST preset wonderland, we don't need this. 
12:12 p.m.
New subject: Hardware VST host?
But the vendors don't open up the specs how it
works
Um, isn't that like, going against the GPL if they're not giving the code
back (wine/kernel patches) back to the community?
Andrew Coughlan
On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 3:08 PM, Brett McCoy <idragosani(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 9:41 AM, Michael Bohle
<opendaw(a)jacklab.org>
wrote:
production. If it
is not enough for you, start to developing other virtual
instruments. But don't look back to the proprietary shiny VST preset
wonderland, we don't need this.
I would love to develop more virtual instruments but don't have the
resources for recording orchestral instruments and choirs. It's doubly
sad that a lot of manufacturers are moving to proprietary sample
engines so you can't even migrate the samples into LinuxSampler or
similar. There are a large number of sample libraries that simply
can't be used on Linux. I'm not saying I like the situation, I'd like
to be running a 100% Linux studio, but have no choice.
-- Brett
------------------------------------------------------------
"In the rhythm of music a secret is hidden;
If I were to divulge it, it would overturn the world."
-- Jelaleddin Rumi
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Not all
VSTs have equivalents on Linux, sadly, especially with regard
to virtual instruments.
We have good instruments like Hexter and so on, enough for music 
24 Sep
24 Sep
5:39 p.m.
New subject: Hardware VST host?
Michael Bohle wrote:
We have good instruments like Hexter and so on, enough
for music
production. If it is not enough for you, start to developing other
virtual instruments. But don't look back to the proprietary shiny VST
preset wonderland, we don't need this.
I have to disagree.
I would love to join the "we have the better way", but I can't (at least
not 100%). Sure everything from PD to phasex to ghostess to ardour is
great stuff, but the ability to 1) load a project in one go and 2)
integrate as tightly as possible with plugins attract *some* people
(obviously you're not one of them, that's fine).
NB: I did a CD last year and one this year with my electronic project,
both 100% linux. The first one was a done with a intricate web of all
the usual suspects (muse, zyn, ams, pd, ardour, phasex, ghostess,
specimen + some I forgot), the second is done in a $50 native linux
host, and it's been a much more enjoyable experience and I feel the
result is better in every way.
NB2: I'm currently on a quest to get pd/sc/csound working as native vst
plugin. Of course I don't believe in presets fits all. I personally try
to develop all my sounds myself, and would love to plug in to the power
of csound totally integrated into my host.
--
Atte
http://atte.dk http://modlys.dk http://virb.com/atte
5592
days inactive
5594
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
3 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Andrew C -
Atte Andre Jensen -
Brett McCoy -
Michael Bohle