Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > NZ Computing > Alternatives to digidesgin's protools

Reply
Thread Tools

Alternatives to digidesgin's protools

 
 
thingy
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-23-2009
On Jun 24, 10:57*am, dawhead <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> On Jun 23, 5:49*am, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <l...@geek-
>
>
>
> central.gen.new_zealand> wrote:
> > In message <(E-Mail Removed)>, geoff wrote:

>
> > > Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

>
> > >> In message
> > >> <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> > >> thingy wrote:

>
> > >>> Any recommendations?

>
> > >> Ardour was, up until recently, being funded by the Audio Engineering
> > >> Society.

>
> > > Ardour is a lame toy.

>
> > Not according to the AES, who ought to know. And it works with JACK, which
> > has no equivalent in Windows.

>
> Not entirely correct.
>
> 1) Ardour has been funded at various times by:
>
> * * * * * *Solid State Logic
> * * * * * *SAE (not the same as AES)
> * * * * * *<another anonymous but very well known audio tech company>
>
> 2) We/I have also collaborated with Harrison Consoles in their XDubber
> product (which essentially *is* Ardour) and a future release that will
> be appearing soon.
>
> 3) JACK itself is available for Windows, OS X, Linux, and the BSD
> family of operating systems. On Windows, any application that can use
> ASIO can interact with JACK to share audio data with other JACK
> clients and/or the audio interface hardware. The same is true on OS X,
> substituting CoreAudio for ASIO (and adding the capability to exchange
> MIDI).
>
> 4) Ardour is not a lame toy. Like all DAWs, it has its own strengths
> and its own weaknesses. For contemporary pop production, with an
> emphasis on looping, time/pitch FX, and so forth, its almost certainly
> not the tool of choice at this point in time. Similarly, if MIDI plays
> a role in your workflow beyond control and timecode, Ardour is not
> useful to you. On the other hand, if you are involved in more
> traditional engineering workflows such as jazz/classical/folk
> recording, where the "fix it in the mix" approach is less rampant, or
> alternatively are involved in contemporary experimental music with a
> focus on multichannel that isn't constrained by commercial technology
> like 5.1, then Ardour could be an extremely useful and valuable tool
> for you.
>
> Paul Davis
> Ardour/JACK


Thanks...

regards

Thing
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
dawhead
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-24-2009
On Jun 23, 8:21*pm, "geoff" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> >> Ardour is a lame toy.

>
> > Not according to the AES, who ought to know. And it works with JACK,
> > which has no equivalent in Windows.

>
> Oh. *It's only my profession - what would I know.


apparently just enough to be insulting and wrong when spreading silly
characterizations of other people's work.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-24-2009
In message <863a718e-157c-4240-9a07-
http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed)>, dawhead wrote:

> 4) Ardour is not a lame toy. [reasons omitted]


Thank you for that. And excuse the ignorant, uninformed NBM trolls.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-24-2009
In message <(E-Mail Removed)>, geoff wrote:

> OK then, I'll qualify that by saying the last version of Ardour I saw was
> lame in comparison to contemporary DAWs at the time. To the point I
> haven't been inspired to look again .


Was that before or after Agincourt?

 
Reply With Quote
 
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-25-2009
In message <863a718e-157c-4240-9a07-
(E-Mail Removed)>, dawhead wrote:

> 3) JACK itself is available for Windows ...


The problem is, though, that very little software is available under Windows
to take advantage of it. Yes, there is Free software, but Free software is
hard to use under Dimdows. Free software developers tend to make heavy use
of each other's code. Such interdependencies can easily be managed on
systems with properly integrated package management (i.e. Linux). But on
Dimdows they either become a nightmare of build dependencies if you're
trying to compile the software yourself from source, or they lead to bloated
installers if you try to download prebuilt binaries.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-27-2009
In message <863a718e-157c-4240-9a07-
(E-Mail Removed)>, dawhead wrote:

> 1) Ardour has been funded at various times by:
>
> SAE (not the same as AES)


Society of Automotive Engineers??

 
Reply With Quote
 
dawhead
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-27-2009
On Jun 27, 6:22*am, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <l...@geek-
central.gen.new_zealand> wrote:
> In message <863a718e-157c-4240-9a07-
>
> (E-Mail Removed)>, dawhead wrote:
> > 1) Ardour has been funded at various times by:

>
> > * * * * * *SAE (not the same as AES)

>
> Society of Automotive Engineers??


Originally "School of Audio Engineering", but for several years the
acronym has become the name itself. 38,000 students worldwide.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
BGP alternatives? SP Cisco 3 09-08-2009 02:32 AM
LEAP & ACS Alternatives N. Hall Cisco 2 05-28-2005 08:31 AM
XP SP2 breaks ProTools David Preece NZ Computing 4 09-10-2004 11:53 PM
MS Press 2003 books and alternatives Bill Bixby MCSE 7 04-29-2004 05:52 PM
alternatives to accessing PIX via Telnet Anne Robynn Cisco 3 01-03-2004 08:48 AM



Advertisments