Is there a future in an open source DAW?

[atticus]

I have been interested in an open source DAW a for awhile and I was wondering if there were any other thoughts on it. I know there have been some posts about Ardour and I know that some of you have tried it with limited success in it's infancy, but I have been in communication with it's main programmer for over a year and have been reading it's mailing list for quite some time as well and it seems to be growing more powerful and more stable by the day. There are now drivers for RME, MAudio, and Lynx interface cards and installing Linux on a PC or Mac has never been easier. So my question is, is an open source DAW the future? Thanks.

ardour.sourceforge.net

[Teacher]

if the audio community can get there head out of there asses and realize there are other S/W that does the same shit as Pro tools(some better) it will be a better day for all of us...IMO

[atticus]

Considering that Ardour can be run on either platform it looks like a good long term solution, since it's code is open and development is independent. With the release of the new AMD 64 bit processors it looks like an exremely powerful and cost effective solution. Anyone else?

[MCal27]

I took alook at ardour.. it actually looks really good
However Linux still needs maybe another 3 to 4 years to become 'polished' enough for regular DAW users to consider it as a mainstream alternative..... I've played with both Yellow Dog, and very recently Red Hat 9 linux, and I support them wholeheartedly.....
I'd say its day has still to come.. but I'm sure it will...

Al.

[atticus]

You really think three or four years?!?

[MCal27]

yep certainly.... its still not muso friendly enough to be trouble free enough for a studio to depend on it....
I know Linux is truely robust and stable in itself.. but configuring and setup is still a fair way behind Macintosh, and (although slightly less far behind) Win XP.

There also needs to be more driver support.....

I'm sure it will be there someday though.... I'm keeping an eye on it

Al.

[atticus]

Al,

I know that some of the guys behind Ardour are working on a turn key package to eliminate some of the setup issues. I'm hoping it's way less then four years!

[fishtop_records]

Originally posted by atticus
You really think three or four years?!?

Yeah, he said "mainstream DAW users"
which generally includes a lot of not very
computer literate folks. Mass market
"pro sumers" are unlikely to be
happy with Linux today.

But my Linux systems are tons more reliable
than my Windows systems, so I'm more than
interested in moving way before the mass market.

Kinda like folks who are interested in
Benchmark's products, they already know
that they don't want something from
Creative Labs...

The good news for hardware vendors is that
drivers are likely to be easier to write and more
stable than for the Redmondian OS. Not
that drivers are ever really easy.

I don't know if I'd ever expect Linux to be
as naive user friendly as a Mac. It takes
a lot of engineering money/time/effort
to do that. Not many Linux players have
that kinda funds.

Still, it will be great when there are DAWs
that are not from Apple or Redmond.

[Bob Olhsson]

The best DAW has consistently been the one utilizing feedback from the largest number of pro users who are working under the gun with real budgets and deadlines. We all have complaints about one aspect or another of Pro Tools but the fact remains that it seems to be getting better lots faster than anything else is.

The moment something else REALLY IS significantly better than Pro Tools, you'll see almost everybody switch in a heartbeat.

[fishtop_records]

Originally posted by Bob Olhsson
The best DAW has consistently been the one utilizing feedback from the largest number of pro users...

The moment something else REALLY IS significantly better than Pro Tools, you'll see almost everybody switch in a heartbeat.

That wasn't the question.
It is true that Snap-On tools are better
than those sold at the local hardware store.

The question is, is there a place and market for
cheaper than Snap-On tools?

Once there is something in the open source world,
and it gets solid and feature rich, and has a couple
of clock years with at least hundreds of full time
folks beating on it, then you can ask whether it
will, or will not, compete with Pro Tools.

Gotta walk before you can run.

[heinz]

Originally posted by Bob Olhsson
The moment something else REALLY IS significantly better than Pro Tools, you'll see almost everybody switch in a heartbeat.

Hmmmm....

The implication there is that, the percentage of smart people within that "everybody" group will carry enough weight to change an established industry standard? To something.... better??

Ask yourself if that has ever happened long term in any software application or industry?

DOS?
Windows?
Office?
Photoshop?

When the market becomes large enough, marketing wins. Pro Tools is by no means the best, most stable, or fastest evolving audio software. It is the industry standard.

[hammer]

Hmm I don't think that linux is the stumbling block anymore for an open scource DAW. Check out Lindows 4.0 (there's a few reviews on the net) (www.lindows.com). This release seems to have linux pretty much sorted as a "user" OS.
Ardour is certainly going to continue developing but I don't think much is gonna happen till someone can write a windows VST Plug to linux plug converter. Although you can bet someone is working on it. Untill that happens, I fear that linux daw progress is going to be slow.
H.

[atticus]

True on the plugin front, but what if the LADSPA plugins rule?

[Chae Ham]

I think its too early to predict a "DAW of the future." Love it or hate it, for the forseeable future the DAW of choice is ProTools. I think just about all DAW have their place, but for the time being they are more well-suited for musicians and individual hobbyists...not necessarily because they are greatly lacking feature x or y, but because they aren't compatible with 98% of the pro recording studios in the industry, namely ProTools. To add fuel to the fire, the "ProTools" brand has become such a marketing trend-word that musicians judge the value of a studio by whether or not they have ProTools.

As far as I can tell the greater recording community is quite pleased with ProTools, and it isn't until that sentiment changes that we'll probably see the next revolution in DAWs. Another great strategy that Digidesign has working for them is the great growing number of third-party "development partners."

The funny thing is a great number of the development partners are not very happy with how Digidesign handles things, yet they continue to stick by and continue developing for the TDM platform. Why? Because for the foreseeable future ProTools is THE DAW and this symbiotic relationship works and actually continues to strengthen the position of ProTools in the Pro Recording marketplace.

Just my 2 cents.

[jeronimo]

I don't know about you... but within all the DAWs I've tried (PT LE, PT HD, PT TDM, Logic 4.7, DP 3.0, Nuendo 1.5.1, Cubase 5) PT IS the most reliable...

[MCal27]

I have to agree.... I love the potential that Logic has under Apple... and DP4 is an amazing program in a capable programmers hands.... But I just keep going back to 'Tools' Version 6.1 with Ableton Live 3, Reason 2.5 and Mach5 is really all I need.... oh apart from my Gigacube and Kyma.. but then I'm getting carried away lol

Al.

[Bob Olhsson]

Originally posted by fishtop_records
That wasn't the question.
It is true that Snap-On tools are better
than those sold at the local hardware store.

The question is, is there a place and market for
cheaper than Snap-On tools?
....

To me, Pro Tools is barely adequate and not even remotely equivalent to the quality of Snap-On tools or for that matter Photo-shop, Quark or Auto-cad. There is no place in the market for a wrench that breaks easily but probably a pretty good one for an affordable power wrench that doesn't break too often.

Pro Tools is as good as it is entirely because of the quality of its users and not just the number of them. I don't think digidesign or for that matter most developers or audio manufacturers have a clue about what we do with their products in a professional audio production environment.

[jeronimo]

Sorry Bob, you lost me on your last post

[atticus]

I have been doing a lot of research over the past couple of days and I have found that Linux is already very widely used in the video industry every day. I don't see why it wouldn't be usable enough for the audio market? All of the main audio cards are supported or are having drivers written right now. There are several high end audio apps being worked on and development is taking place very rapidly. It may still be a ways off, but I am excited about it.

[C.Lambrechts]

Originally posted by Bob Olhsson
Pro Tools is as good as it is entirely because of the quality of its users and not just the number of them. I don't think digidesign or for that matter most developers or audio manufacturers have a clue about what we do with their products in a professional audio production environment.

just quoting this to make sure people can read it again ... excelent statement.

[Bob Olhsson]

Originally posted by atticus
I have been doing a lot of research over the past couple of days and I have found that Linux is already very widely used in the video industry every day. I don't see why it wouldn't be usable enough for the audio market? ...

Unix and virtual memory are notoriously unfriendly to audio which is why every university in the world has not been running their own home-brew Unix DAWs for years. Apple had to spend huge bucks to make audio application development affordable for system X.

As we move into widespread AES-31 compliance, I expect to see a lot of single-function audio applications and, no doubt, if there are usable Linux libraries, some will be written in Linux. I also expect to see high-end audio studios developing their own custom applications exactly as high-end video studios have.

I have serious doubts about open-source audio applications because there is no comparable infrastructure of code that was developed at government expense supporting them and there are scads of enforceable patents involved. There's no such thing as free software or music. There's just software and music that somebody ELSE paid for.

[heinz]

Originally posted by Bob Olhsson
I don't think digidesign or for that matter most developers or audio manufacturers have a clue about what we do with their products in a professional audio production environment.

Man that is an incredibly bold, blanket statement.

[Bob Olhsson]

It is also kind of amazing when you think about it but an awful lot of people I know completely agree with me on this point. Audio manufacturers have this way of copying each other's features without understanding why they were originally implemented or how people actually use them. About the only way you can really learn is by interning for a few years under people who themselves interned.

[fishtop_records]

Originally posted by Bob Olhsson
Audio manufacturers have this way of copying each other's features without understanding why they were originally implemented or how people actually use them.

I don't know the hardware side, but
I do know that writting good software
User Interfaces is vastly harder than
it looks. It takes serious work to see
how people actually use tools. You can't
ask them, they don't know. You have
to watch them using it. Over and
over.

Which is why I posted earlier in this thread that you need several clock years
and hundreds of full time user years
before the UI will be better than poor.

[Bob Olhsson]

Now that hardware is dirt cheap, there's a pretty good chance that people who really know what's required can begin to write applications using high level languages. There are still big technical problems in an awful lot of code which suggests that many people are not being taught how to test their DSP code.

[Ruphus]

Originally posted by Bob Olhsson
The best DAW has consistently been the one utilizing feedback from the largest number of pro users who are working under the gun with real budgets and deadlines. We all have complaints about one aspect or another of Pro Tools but the fact remains that it seems to be getting better lots faster than anything else is.

The moment something else REALLY IS significantly better than Pro Tools, you'll see almost everybody switch in a heartbeat.

Have you seen Samplitude yet, Bob?
I can´t judge the unlimited PT version, only am familiar with LE. And I am actually very positively thinking about Digi as a company, however lately I am back on Samplitude ( with a Lynx card ) again and that thing is incredible in my opinion. As I said to friends the only thing you can´t vary and tweak with it must be the fins of your CPU. And that thing unlike Steinjerk stuff is stable.
I am willing to bet that PT is a limitation comapred to Samplitude. And its plugs make Waves sound inferior for sure.

As DSP becomes less and lesser of a necessity I wouldn´t wonder if Magix was to become the audio pro standard within the next few years.

Now, if I only could get Samplitude to make the different and individual Lynx channels visble as such ...

---

About OS: If Be hadn´t been messing up by announcing his focus on internet stuff right after introduction of his system and SW manufacturers from there hadn´t stopped their plans on writing for BeOS back then, I bet that´s what media people would had been working with now for years.

Ruphus

[Jack Ruston]

I'm considering buying Samplitude or Sequoia and was having a read of the manual over the weekend. Every couple of minutes \i got a nice surprise. Playing with the demo confirmed the feel good factor. It s clever, and it has many features that are somehow cleverer and neater than PT. I hope the newest update will sort out many of the little details that are holding the app back.

J

[jeronimo]

Originally posted by Ruphus
Have you seen Samplitude yet, Bob?
I can´t judge the unlimited PT version, only am familiar with LE. And I am actually very positively thinking about Digi as a company, however lately I am back on Samplitude ( with a Lynx card ) again and that thing is incredible in my opinion. As I said to friends the only thing you can´t vary and tweak with it must be the fins of your CPU. And that thing unlike Steinjerk stuff is stable.
I am willing to bet that PT is a limitation comapred to Samplitude. And its plugs make Waves sound inferior for sure.

As DSP becomes less and lesser of a necessity I wouldn´t wonder if Magix was to become the audio pro standard within the next few years.

Now, if I only could get Samplitude to make the different and individual Lynx channels visble as such ...

---

About OS: If Be hadn´t been messing up by announcing his focus on internet stuff right after introduction of his system and SW manufacturers from there hadn´t stopped their plans on writing for BeOS back then, I bet that´s what media people would had been working with now for years.

Ruphus

I'm just curious why a DAW that's more powerfull than TDM/HD, more stable than PT in general, w/ plugins that sound better that Waves and I bet it is more user friendly than PT, is not the standard yet...

[Jack Ruston]

The midi options including grid implimentation and tempo mapping and midi editing is not there yet. It is all expected in the next release.

J

[Ruphus]

I'm just curious why a DAW that's more powerfull than TDM/HD, more stable than PT in general, w/ plugins that sound better that Waves and I bet it is more user friendly than PT, is not the standard yet...

I would think this to be easy to answer.
First of all becasue humans are habitual animals.
Secondly, because the other manufacturers products in conjunction with diverse computer configurations and sound cards used to give a hell of instability, which I guess many people won´t forget about for a long time.

However, I must say at this point that when I tried out Samplitude years ago it was great sounding and reliable already ( with a Darla card and a Pentium II thingy). I only switched to Steinjerk crap, because I wanted midi which samplitude didn´t have at that time. ( These days though I figure that midi actually shows to be less and less of practical importance for me. I had been overrating its worth for my individual needs a bit.) From that hell I escaped to PT LE then.

You can count on Samplitude with good HW was / might already be / superiour to proTools yet it to take still some time afterwards to become the pro standard.

First because customers would hesitate to leave the platform everybody works on, secondly because of the common difficulties with session transfers.

I for my part keep PT LE in case any potential client would be insisting on PT, respectively in case he´d want me to sample down from Samplitude and make him a PT session.

I havn´t checked it out in detail yet, but I think Magix has already a feature to convert your session at least partially into PT format though. And as they must be aware of the importance of session transfer, if there is left out yet anything on this I could think of them completing that in the near future.
--

Sly, you´re maybe going for Sequoia?!
Geez, that´s an expensive dang! At least they give you some discount if you prove to have another Sequencer already. In my case of Samplitude not too badly 400 Euros.

Ruphus