hollunder(a)gmx.at wrote: I did that, see thread: [LAU] Blender Open Movie Projects: Soundtrack made by Open audio tools!? \r

Ray Rashif wrote: This thread is about a plan for a Blender like project for audio tools, independent from Blender totally. that other thread is about the possibility for making a soundtrack for Blender with open audio tools. Sorry for the confusion.... (I reply in the other thread about this)

On Wednesday 26 August 2009 13:45:01 Ray Rashif wrote: I don't get it. Why are you asking whether linux audio is ready for production usage? There are already commercial products using linux audio for production usage. There are already studios using linux audio to produce music for money. Doesn't that answer the question? The real question is: why didn't the blender-project use free linux audio tools for the soundtrack? And the answer is there in the response from composer: They aren't normally working with linux audio and couldn't afford (mostly due to time constraints as they say for themselves) switching linux audio. Which I can understand. And which you have to fight, because ideally all projects have a fixed time-frame and if you don't start with using linux at one time, you will never... Arnold

I believe the scope is more than just "production" and the question isn't about that at all. A freelance artist or design firm could use Blender, a freelance engineer or studio could use Ardour. That's in contrast to a major project deployment, which the Blender Foundation excercises.

On Wed, 26 Aug 2009, Arnold Krille wrote: FWIW, Korg's flagship OASYS runs on a Linux OS, but I don't know what all they're using for audio processing -- and I think it's all proprietary (in lieu of having to design ASIC's). -Gabriel

I think the problem has to do with what kind of "production" work are we talking about. If we were talking about recording a band, mixing it and mastering it, then I'd say we are pretty much ready: Ardour + ladspa + jamin and off you go. Of course, an equivalent project to Durain should help improving a lot of the software (and even there is still room for improvement, let's be honest). The "Open Movie Project" of the Blender Foundation is designed with that in mind: they tackle specific production problems they KNOW are in blender, and use a real production (with a high quality standard and real deadlines, that it's going to be distributed "in the real world") to work them out and test the solutions. And even though I thnk Free Software is ready for a "professional recording, mixing and mastering", the situation is far behind from Blender. I work a little in 3D and, in that Field, Blender is not just about the enthusiastic, or the "open source advocates": it's a tool people consider alongside any other. Everybody knows about it. They complain a little bit about the interface but it doesn't seem to be a major problem. OK, it's not the most widley used, but everyone knows it and a lot of people had at least played around with it. And some people is actually using it for the day jobs. If I talk about Ardour, Ladspa, Rosegarden, LV2 or Jamin in the "professional audio world", then 99% of the people I'd talk with wouldn't have any idea what I was talking about. It'd be a good idea to see what's the difference between the free audio software and Blender AND between the audio and the 3D community that leads to this two scenarios. The other thing to consider is what I said earlier, the kind of job we are talking about: The Blender Open Movie projects require this ridiculous Hollywood type of score: - Fake but HUGE orchestral sound (may I remark HUGE?). - A lot of mood and tempo changes. - Perfect Sync wiht video. - The possibility to mix down the same work to stereo AND different multichannel outputs (5.1, 7.1, etc). I'm really no expert and never intended to make THAT kind of work, but I think we'll encounter some technical issues if we try to do that with free audio software under linux. For starters, it should require a lot of Library Stacking. Do we have a LOT of different great quality orchestral free sample libraries? Do we have software that would allow, in a comfortable workflow, to work wiht this different stacks of sample material. Could we sequence that by midi in a way we can have tempo and mood swings all around the place while syncing it in video? And that's just the things I can think of, not ever being even nearly interested with that kind of job. I'm pretty sure someone that's more "in the know" would find a lot more things to consider. If we were thinking of another kind of score (wiht a more synthetic sound, for starters) then form some reason I have the feeling we can pull it off. We wouldn't be 100%, but we could pull it off and improve the software while at it. But are we in the same situation that Blender is in the 3d field? I don't think so. But hey, that's not exactly a bad thing. Actually, is what makes me so excited about free audio software in the first place: there's a lot to be done, I feel like I grow WITH the tools. There's a great future, but I think it's a good thing we start to think seriously about this stuff... -francisco

Paul Davis wrote: Jan the maker of the soundtracks doesn't agree with you: http://www.blender.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=74533#74533 \r

Paul Davis wrote: Now it's more clear what you mean, thanks. \r

On Wed, 26 Aug 2009, Grammostola Rosea wrote: One of Harrison console's primary customers is Sony Pictures. I think somewhere there is a listing of all the films mixed with their console (i.e. mixed with Xdubber, a custom version of ardour) See http://www.harrisonconsoles.com/joomla/index.php?option=com_content&tas… -gabriel

On Wed, 2009-08-26 at 15:59 +0200, Grammostola Rosea wrote: I too was wondering if, and how many working studios were using linux tools, particularly Ardour for their production work. As a guy who comes out of the analog audio world, and has used Ardour entirely in the box to do a few mixes, I could easily use Ardour if I were opening a studio. In fact I would use it. My ideal room would have a good analog console and good outboard gear, but Ardour would replace Protools for me. Would huge artists work in my room without Protools? Who knows. Probably not, but who cares. When we had ADATs and 16 track one-inch machines, people were happy to use us. So I see no reason why most people would be unhappy with Ardour. In fact everyone from my old recording days that I've told about Ardour has been very interested. Ricardus...

On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 10:28 AM, Patrick Shirkey<pshirkey(a)boosthardware.com> wrote: Err, no, that would be the TU Berlin.

Hi, On Wednesday 26 August 2009 15:59:29 Grammostola Rosea wrote: I don't know any studios doing linux audio apart from Ron Parkers. But then I don't know any music studios apart from Ron Parkers. I know they exists because several of them seem to have said so on LAU or in the ardour-list in the past. And if I can only convince you by hard numbers, I doubt that anyone will ever convince you. Not because of conspiracies but because it is _very_ difficult to get a good overview of the market (you have to have applications that phone home or sell dongled software to do so) and even then you get studios using several competing products. And because ardour is neither phoning home, nor sold with a dongle or personalized code, there are probably only little numbers (apart from downloads which don't say much). And if these numbers aren't personalized, you won't know how many of them are studios. So there aren't any numbers to convince you. But then again you couldn't tell absolute numbers of studios using blender either... So there isn't more unless you spy into every pro studio in amerca/the world/ the universe... So long, Arnold

On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 4:39 AM, <hollunder(a)gmx.at> wrote: Well, if it helps any, they just merged support for Jack into their development branch... :) -Reuben