On 06/02/13 15:32, cunnilinux himself wrote: usually it means to leech a thousand instruments/plugins from the internet, fiddling around for them for some time, getting bored, having no real idea of what you want your *artistic creation* to be, thinking that the coolest compressor, not practising over and over, will give you a good voice, thinking that the latest guitar FX will make your crappy guitar playing gorgeous... All of this in 90 % cases to come up with a '4 chord song' which is just the remake of all other 4-chord songs out there. the cycle repeats. What do you think sucks about Linux audio? That we are too much concerned about what software we have, what it does and what features it has with respect to 'the-latest-marketteer-thingy' people using and Apple use... Not with musical ideas, philosophical doubts, Because come on, we can't hide under a stone, seriously, to make music, you need Mac, it's as simple as that: you don't need musical talent, creative ideas, passion, will to work and practice hard, experience etc. etc.... you just need to invest in a bloody mac. and you'll magically become a 'musician' - a star! It happens on TV why can't it happen in real life? That's what we need in Linux Audio! Magic software which will make John Doe into Freddy Mercury - instantly, money-back guarantee.

Am 06.02.2013 15:32, schrieb cunnilinux himself: Maybe, but statistics do not say much about results here. As of now we have an album going top-10 here in Germany that was recorded using an 8-track tape recorder and not a single digital plug-in involved. OK, its not electronic music but guitar-rock but you may agree, that 99% of guitar-rock albums nowadays are in fact produced using a computer running one of the usual brands of DAWs for Mac or Windows right? And there is only 1 % of any music produced going top-10 and not much more is worthwhile listening to(and in most cases the 1% top-10 is not the same as the 1% worthwhile...). In my humble opinion any method capable of producing interesting music is good enough. If an 8-track tape recorder is capable to produce an album that is both top-10 *and* worth the time listening to it, then Ardour + Linux + native plug-ins should be capable to produce even a wider range of interesting music, is it not? But anyway I think we should stop preaching the obvious to the statistic average and just try to inform *musicians* that are searching for new methods to produce outstanding art about the fact, that a Linux-system could be the very method they are searching for. And being different while still reaching for industry-standards in quality could be wise to attract such searchers. Linux audio systems are not recognized on the market because there is no company that takes a few dozen millions to push it in the market. So is desktop-linux and tablet-linux and smartphone-linux. All of this works just great, often better that the competition from Apple or Microsoft but free software systems *do not compete*, because competition means grabbing the market by means of dollars, billions of them. Apple invests more money in the poster-ads shown in the streets of one major city than the Linux Audio Users invest in the programming of Ardour in a year. Making the better product is just the first step and not the most important. And there is no such thing as a "free market", markets are ruled by companies holding market shares by means of marketing. What about that: who says, that there is not a young girl in the highlands of Kenia, that runs a Marathon faster than anyone ever enlisted for the Olympics? But she cannot enlist, because she does not have a sponsor covering the costs.... That will be it. I keep using the software I know working for me just great and everybody who asks me will get recommendation, fair warnings and advice. But I do not complain anymore, that most people out there go with the market. best regards HZN