On the iPad as well as on a Linux PC I prefer software similar to Ardour, e.g. Musicstudio, Qtractor, Rosegarden, however, taking a look at the free version of Garage Band, it seems to follow a completely different approach. Perhaps no Linux software comes close to Garage Band, but "a next step" might be taking a look at LMMS too. LMMS has got another approach than Qtractor, Rosegarden, Ardour etc. and some users seem to prefer this workflow. Regards, Ralf

The right software will depend HUGELY on what sort of workflow is sought after ... for example, here are some different ones: * creating traditional scores with notation, listening (somehow) while working on them * EDM (any of the 291 sub-genres), with samples, loops, beats and FX * recording people playing instruments * 1 microphone, 1 guitar pickup the right tool for each of these will (on LInux at least) be different. On Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 3:36 PM, worik <root(a)worik.org> wrote:

On 10/27/2015 06:23 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote: Simply amazing that the likes of Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, Berlioz, Chopin, Rosini, Paganini, Liszt, Brahms and numerous others (including myself) spanning 2 centuries used the same counterpoint "tool"[1] to learn and yet somehow managed to develop their own individual style. Of course, we look back on history and study the influence such a treatise had on their style but I don't think you will find anyone claiming each wasn't individual. A tool is a tool. It doesn't create, hamper or destroy artistry. David [1] Gradus Ad Parnassum, Johann Joseph Fux

On 10/27/2015 09:21 AM, Nils Gey wrote: So what? I'm not judging the efficacy of the tool at all. Just reading the preface of the translation by Mann "Haydn took infinite pains to assimilate the theory of Fux. [...] laboriously writing out the exercises". "Mozart studied Fux's work under the influence of his father" -- copy with father's notes still exists in Salzburg "Beethoven himself subsequently wrote out an "Introduction to Fux's Study of Counterpoint". Brahms' copy with notes still exists ... //

On 10/27/2015 09:51 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote: I quoted the statement I wanted to respond to -- in its entirety, please re-read it. I didn't and don't want to comment on any other points you made. If you would like to respond to my metaphor concerning tools, mimicry and artistry, please do. If you want to question my use of the metaphor, contact me off list. There's no sense polluting this thread more than I already have ... my off-topic quota is almost full for this year :D

On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 11:02:59 -0400, Paul Davis wrote: GarageBand's virtual guitar provides 4 styles to automatically play the guitar. 3 different pickings and 1 plectrum rhythm style. Yes a real guitar has got limitations, you can't blow it as you can blow woodwinds, but you can play a guitar by more than 4 styles and you can even play a guitar sample by a keyboard in more than just 4 styles. This is the limitation I mentioned. OTHO and I explained that too, to get what those 4 GarageBand styles provides by using a DAW as Qtractor, you might need to play some sound samples with 6 individual samplers, one for each string, to e.g. simulate a pull of by using a pitch bender for just one string, another guitar sample sound might not need that much effort, when doing on kind of pull off at a specific time, for s special style. IOW the limitation of an instrument has nothing to do with the limitation provided by patterns that fake natural playing techniques.

On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 11:57:54 -0400, David Santamauro wrote: I wrote much more and the reply was in a context related to: On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 00:46:39 -0430, Luigino Bracci wrote: I tried to explain that we need more information to solve this problem. What Paul and you wrote has absolutely nothing to do with the question of the OP and my explanation why even good soundfonts could sound less good, then bad soundfonts. Paul's and your emails aren't helpful, both of you completely miss the problem the OP experiences.

On 28/10/15 05:06, Paul Davis wrote: No. I had no point, no judgements and no POV. Simply have a friend who put down her guitar and picked up a iPad, and now is a bit stuck (as the iPad Garage Band is designed to keep you in a walled garden, there is a POV!) I said she was... I was referring to the "walled garden". I should have been clearer. I have given LMMS a whirl and I think it may work. I doubt it, which is no reflection on LMMS. Threads get a bit out of control on this list, aye? Worik -- Why is the legal status of chardonnay different to that of cannabis? root(a)worik.org 021-1680650, (03) 4821804 Aotearoa (New Zealand) I voted for love

On 28/10/15 17:27, david wrote: I am on plenty of lists that are much more boring and less entertaining. W -- Why is the legal status of chardonnay different to that of cannabis? root(a)worik.org 021-1680650, (03) 4821804 Aotearoa (New Zealand) I voted for love

On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 18:42:20 +0100, fred wrote: IOW you didn't experience the limitations of GarageBand instead you experienced an approach similar to Qtractor, Ardour or Rosegarden. Remember, this thread is about migrating from GarageBand to Linux. GarageBand comes with a special kind of limitation. As already pointed out, it e.g. provides a virtual acoustic guitar with an autoplay feature for 4 playing styles. It sound absoultely realistic, even a very good soundfont doesn't provide guitar playing techniques, to get this, there is the need to carefully play the sample and most of the times there's also the need to edit the MIDI events, but assumed you're willing to spend that time, then you get more than just 4 playing stiles. IOW if somebody used to the GargeBand tool migrates to Linux, it could be that this person is missing soundquality, not because Linux sounds less good, but because this user isn't aware about the advantage not to use GarageBand features. OTOH for some "musicians" this might not be an advantage, they might not have the skills and don't want to get the skills to play (and edit) on their own, what's provided by a GarageBand auto-feature. Am I the only one who tested GarageBand ;)? Note, I was a 4-Track user and I'm a Qtractor, Ardour etc. user, even on the iPad I use something similar to Qtractor and Ardour. I do not use GarageBand. My standpoint is that GarageBand comes with limitations, I only tested it to help those who want migrate. However, those GarageBand feature experiences likely raise expectations, IOW we need to know what work-flow a GarageBand user has got, to give useful hints for the first migration steps. If possible take a look at GarageBand too, a 4-Track + Boss DR-5 + the ability to record a real guitar, is much more than GarageBand provides. GarageBand is more comparable to an ElCheapo home organ that provides e.g. an absolutely realistic sounding virtual guitar. The only problem is that the absolutely realistic sounding instrument is limited, if you play 20 songs using 4 patterns, you might consider to spend more time using no autopaly tools, but as recompense for your efforts you get your own 20 patterns. It take hours instead of minutes and it requires knowledge, but you aren't limited. Using GarageBand you very quick and easily get very good sounding results, but I doubt that you can use GarageBand very long, after a while you'll experience that a 4-Track + Boss DR-5 + the ability to record a real guitar or using Qtractor or Ardour is not that limited, even if your first impression was, that a 4-Track + Boss DR-5 + the ability to record a real guitar or Qtractor, Ardour etc. are limited compared to GarageBand. Regards, Ralf

On 27/10/15 23:23, Ralf Mardorf wrote: I think that is a false dichotomy hobby/art. Elitist. Worik -- Why is the legal status of chardonnay different to that of cannabis? root(a)worik.org 021-1680650, (03) 4821804 Aotearoa (New Zealand) I voted for love