Subject: Re: [linux-audio-user] New Linux soundapp site progress
From: Eric Dantan Rzewnicki (rzewnickie_AT_rfa.org)
Date: Fri Apr 05 2002 - 19:23:23 EEST
Paul Winkler wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 05, 2002 at 07:11:59AM +0200, francesco whalley wrote:
>
> > just some comments...
> > apart from all these comments i'd like to declare beforehand
> > that they are not here just to criticize but only because i think
> > that public speaking about a matter could help to absorb it,
> > and this is very important for the browsing categories of a site.
>
> Of course.
I definitely agree, too. Criticism can be constructive and extremely
helpful.
>
> > Csound and friends could be seen as development tools
> > but they reside more in the "synthesis" domain...
> > orc, sco and csd files are jit compiled but what you get
> > it's rendered soundfiles or realtime stuff, not a conventional app.
>
> I could go either way on that issue.
>
> I'm not sure if I've made this clear:
> we're not restricted to apps. being located in a single category.
> It's not a strict tree
> hierarchy, where each leaf is unique and can only be on one
> branch. Instead, the categories are more like sets of the whole set
> of apps. They can overlap.
> The category tree is just a convenient way to find
> your way around.
>
> > Isn't Digital Audio too general as a category if we speak
> > about audio software? I know what it's meant here but
> > personallyi think it's too broad.
I thought about Bit Twiddling as a category.... I guess the distinction
in my mind between these tools and, say, MIDI tools is that the "Digital
Audio Bit Twiddlers" are used for working with digital audio sample
data. In contrast MIDI tools work mainly with control data for affecting
how bit twiddlers and bit generators(i.e. synths, etc.) do their
twiddling and generating.
>
> I had the same thought.
> Not sure what to do here.
>
> In case anyone's lost, we're talking about Eric
> Rzewnicki's proposed categorization:
stress on "proposed" there. I'm not attached to any of my suggestions on
a personal level. This has to be a community effort. Don't worry about
hurting my feelings. :)
>
> > > Digital Audio:
> > > File Compression
> > > LADSPA Plugins
> > > Mixers
> > > Multitrack Recorders/Mixers
> > > Soundfile Editors
>
> > Same apply for Musician's tools
> > I know here musician is used to refer to classical musician
> > but I created most of my music with a machine not with
> > my ex violin so i personally think most of the things in the
> > site will be musician tools...
>
> I agree. I think the problem is with the name, and I
> can't think of a better one.
> "Tools for Instrumentalists"???
Acoustic (Instrumentalist|Musician) Tools, perhaps? as distinct from
electronic or electroacoustic music making.
> More precise, but unweildy.
>
> > Sound cards & Drivers aren't necessarily in the development
> > domain. Everyone that has to setup an environment not
> > automatically settled by an os installer or by some other tool,
> > has to pass the "ordeal"... especially for some types of soundcards.
>
> I agree. I think drivers, soundcards, and related docs are important
> enough to get a top-level category.
>
> > please forgive me for my macaronic english
>
> It's quite good.
I second that as well. Your English is fine.
>
>
> --PW
-Eric Rz.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Fri Apr 05 2002 - 19:10:17 EEST