[PD] [OT] FOSS audio tools (was: sound for blender apricot opensource game)

Roman Haefeli reduzierer at yahoo.de
Sun Feb 3 15:50:59 CET 2008


On Sun, 2008-02-03 at 13:52 +0100, Frank Barknecht wrote:
> Hallo,
> Roman Haefeli hat gesagt: // Roman Haefeli wrote:
> 
> > thanks for mentioning those. we're getting a bit OT now, but just a few
> > quick comments:
> > 
> > -ardour is certainly a great and advanced DAW, no doubt. recording can
> > be definitely done with FOSS.
> > 
> > - jamin is cool and powerful software too, but it follows the wrong
> > strategy: you can only use it in real-time, since it is a jack-plugin.
> > having to render in realtime is a pain and dangerous in many situations
> > (all drop-outs are in the resulting file). OTOH, LADSPA plugins don't
> > support customized guis, AFAIK, therefor there is no option to do
> > something like jamin as a LADSPA plugin. IMHO, most LADSPA plugins might
> > be good scientific applications, but definitely not for everyday studio
> > work (no visual feedback, strange scales of parameters).
> 
> LADSPA plugins don't have a GUI at all, so every GUI you get is a
> customized one. LADSPA-plugins itself are perfectly able to be run in
> non-realtime. For example if you render an Ardour session with LADSPA
> plugins in it to file, this is done in non-realtime fashion. Often
> it's done faster than realtime.

yeah, that is what i am saying: LADSPA plugins can be rendered offline,
but don't have a visual feedback, whereas tools as jamin have visual
feedback, but cannot be rendered offline and therefor are not drop-out
save. 

> > - both ardour, jamin and almost all sound editors i found don't have an
> > accelerated gui. scrolling causes high cpu peaks.i don't know any
> > software on windows, that uses cpu for the gui part. it's sad, that i
> > have hardware (gpu) in my box, which isn't used at all (but only when i
> > do Gem).
> 
> The actually drawing is accelerated by the graphics card already.
> However a tricky question that cannot simply be shovelled to the
> gfx-card (so easily) is how to decide which samples to display at all.
> For example when zoomed out, you don't need to draw every single
> sample. Ardour uses a sophisticated algorithm for deciding things like
> that, AFAIK. (IIRC Paul Davis once said that this was one of the
> hardest parts in Ardour to get right.) Compare that to Pd, which
> doesn't even bother with trying to be smart here, which results in
> slowdown when moving arrays with many elements, even when they are
> displayed in only a small area.


> All in all to me Ardour doesn't feel slow at all. Audacity OTOH is
> slow (and all around terrible for my taste anyway) as was the last
> version of SoundForge for Windows, that I had to run at work - though
> I admit that this was some years ago. But Ardour feels very snappy and
> quick here.


> > - there is not audio editor around, that even loosely fulfills my needs.
> > probably the makers of Elephants Dream felt the same. Some of them lack
> > native jack support, others use very strange sets of shortcuts, or are
> > pretty raw in general. 
> 
> Uhm, while Blender certainly is great, you aren't seriously trying to
> tell me you really think its shortcuts are intuitive, are you?!? ;-)
> Someone who mastered Blender should have no problems with Ardour,
> given he invests about a tenth of the time to learn it.
> 
> Ciao


		
___________________________________________________________ 
Telefonate ohne weitere Kosten vom PC zum PC: http://messenger.yahoo.de





More information about the Pd-list mailing list