PS: My last job was supervising elementary school children at a Yehudi Menuhin foundation elementary school. It was the first time I heard somebody teaching Reggae without triplet :(. I'm not kidding :(.

On Wed, 2011-12-28 at 10:51 +0100, hermann wrote: Full ACK, but my claim still is "Everybody should be able to go from one studio to the next and know how to handle the equipment. The approach off pro-audio is to keep things easy for the engineer. Applications like Ardour and Qtractor come closer and closer to this approach. The policy of several apps + a session handler is a step in the wrong direction." Tinkerer do amazing music. I'm tinker my self, AT HOME! That's not the point. I do this for home recording. For hardware we have unwritten standards, e.g. what should be pre and what should be post fader for a mixing console. A mixing console that has another way to do things could be very good, but it isn't regarding to usability for pro-audio. You know the sentence of the office mob? "If I'm not at work, nobody would be able to do the work." They say this with proud, instead of being ashamed. For pro-audio you need to make it idiotproof. Pro-audio means to do good recordings, for "normal" music. Working modular with electronics and computers is something I do myself. This is part of some compositions. Hopefully it's on a high level ;), but a high level anyway has less to do with professional work for daily bread. Regarding to DEs the Linux community claimed that Windows was "klickibunti" de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klickibunti already wit 98, and XP. Correct, but what the hell is KDE4, GNOME3, Unity. The same people tody tend to claim similar to "To see that, you need to free up your mind from oldish ways." What I do at home sometimes is completely different to what it's needed for pro-audio (sometimes there's no diff ;). - Ralf

On Wed, 2011-12-28 at 13:11 +0100, hermann wrote: Using a session handler should be possible, but to overlook a setup that is based on modules is hard, if it's done by another person. You could build already the mixer by modules, but a standardised mixer already provides what's needed and everybody is able to overlook what's done. When there are several ways to do something, than it's not an advantage to have all the ways available, e.g. mute the microphone by the mixer's mute option + by a switch provided by the microphone will make it less good to overlook where the microphone is muted. Modular systems make it much harder to overlook the situation than this example does describe, anyway, it already describe a situation where jackd might fix an issue caused by borked apps. 1. There are other AIO apps too, e.g. Rosegarden. 2. No, modular usage of apps can be useful. This idea isn't a new invention of Linux, it's older than computers are, but it never had success to become a common denominator. Again, it's not an innovation. It was already part of some proprietary solutions for computers and it was a concept that is older than the computer. It's a good idea, but it's not a good concept, if several people work on the same project, what usually is done for pro-audio. For analog tapes you have a colour code for different speeds. Additionally you have a a coloured tape that shows interruptions of the recorded program. You don't have such standards because audio engineers are idiots, you have got standards because they aren't idiots. If one engineer has got a cold, another can finish her/his work. It's not like it is for the office mob, when one of them has got a cold and can't come to the office, that nobody else is able to overlook the other ones work flow. That's not what I'm saying. I said that not every high level production is professional regarding to the work flow. A coder might be able to program very good software by her/his own work flow, e.g. some spaghetti code could be on a high level, but if a group of coders will work on the same code, this isn't a good approach. Modular audio setups are similar to what is spaghetti code for software. ;D Cheers! Ralf