Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] ardour, LADSPA, a marriage
From: Paul Barton-Davis (pbd_AT_Op.Net)
Date: Sat Nov 11 2000 - 03:49:25 EET
>> >goes through the patch bay. My personal preference is to have the
>> >recorder be the recorder and the editor, the mixer to be the mixer, the
>> >patch bay be the patch bay, and the effects to be the effects.
>>
>> talk to mackie about this. the D8B (and many other digital mixers) are
>> definitely heading in the opposite direction.
>
>Oh yes I know. And this is why every engineer I know hates them.
that doesn't seem to be the prevailing attitude towards protools,
which is probably the most extreme version of this model. every person
i know who has ever sat down in front of a protools system has been,
to some degree, blown away by the possibilities.
>I am not talking about something external. I am talking about the way
>software gets layed out. How is anyone going to understand the block
>diagram? It's very important to understand the signal chain. Software
>has been making this a blurry mess.
i agree that this is very important. i'll do what i can as ardour
evolves to make sure that this stays visible and clear and
controllable.
--p
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Sat Nov 11 2000 - 04:21:58 EET