Re: [linux-audio-user] Opening up the discussion

philicorda wrote:

> I use Cubase professionally almost every day. Please point out one area
> (apart from proprietary DSP hardware support) where Cubase appears as a
> toy compared to pro tools. I mean, PT only got proper automatic plugin
> delay compensation in v6.4 in 2004. How the hell did people mix a drum
> kit on the thing before that? (Well, they didn't. That, coupled with the
> problematic integer mixer summing is why most people used to use an
> analog desk with PT).
>
> Sure, there are things I feel are done better in Ardour, but there are a
> hell of a lot of useful features in Cubase that make recording and
> editing a joy, particularly when time is limited. And these are not
> features to make it easier for a newbie, they are the kind of thing you
> discover after a few years of using it.

I've heard it said that Rosegarden is more like Cubase where Ardour is
more like Pro Tools. Not having ever used Cubase, is this true?
Rosegarden does have some audio recording capabilities, and supports
DSSI and LADPSA, but doesn't have the more advanced mixing and signal
routing that Ardour (and Rosegarden doesn't support mixdown either, you
still need to use Ardour for that).

One thing I like best about Linux audio (and this is something I like
about Linux & Unix in general) is that the audio applications aren't
trying to be everything for everyone like we see in the Windows and Mac
world. Instead, we have a suite of applications that can communicate
with each other and you end up with a very powerful audio workstation,
so each application can focus on a major hunk of functionality -- Ardour
  for advanced signal routing and mixing, Jamin for matering, Rosegarden
& NoteEdit for composition and sequencing, Hydrogen for drum tracks, the
tons of synth apps... so much to pick and choose from!

-- Brett
-----------
Programmer by day, Guitarist by Night
http://www.chapelperilous.net
http://www.alhazred.com
http://www.revelmoon.com
Received on Tue Jul 26 00:15:06 2005