Subject: Re: [linux-audio-user] General Question
From: Michael J McGonagle (fndsnd_AT_rcnchicago.com)
Date: Tue Apr 09 2002 - 04:16:58 EEST
xk wrote:
>
> > Something occured to me and thought I'd ask it here.
> > Just what are or would be the parameters for being able to claim that any
> > music was 'created' using linux?
>
> Created, as opposed to processed would imply that most of the instruments
> are synthesised on Linux, from samples or synths.
> You could record one/two real instruments and, of course, the voice.
If the same software is available to run on Windows or Mac (and a lot of
programs do), then why make this distinction? What makes those version
more or less significant than the same program running on Linux? Is it
the OS or the software? I have heard PD described as an Audio OS all by
itself. Csound can pretty much do anything you could want, and it runs
on all major platforms. So, if it runs on any platform, what does the
claim "created on Linux" really mean?
While I understand the need to promote Linux for use with Audio (or any
purpose), what distingushes Linux from the other platforms? Is it all
about Open Source? Is there some other distinction? Saying free software
won't be enough because both Windows and Mac uses some 'free' (FreeBSD)
code on them...
I wonder if just using Linux is enough alone to be able to claim
"created" with Linux. My vote would tend in that direction. Weather or
not the "original" source material was generated/recorded is not always
what makes it to the final recording. So, the mixing/processing stage
can just as, if not moreso, important that the generation.
My mind likes to say, if you used Linux in any part of the process, then
your claim to 'created on Linux' is earned. It could be argued "what
percentage", but what difference does that really make?
Just my 2.3 cents...
Mike
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Tue Apr 09 2002 - 04:13:47 EEST