Re: [LAU] An appeal to famous artists?

Am 03.08.2011 06:36, schrieb michael noble:
> On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 11:59 AM, Alexandre Prokoudine
> <alexandre.prokoudine@email-addr-hidden> wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 6:45 AM, pshirkey wrote:
>>
>>> This is the kind of feedback that we can only get when companies make the
>>> effort to use Linux tools as part of a solution.
>>>
>>> Chicken vs egg.
>>
>> I still believe (what a naive person am I) that it's possible to come
>> up with reasonable business models around FOSS

Everybody in the community could help by simply contribute some money to
pay developers. But not so many people seem to do so.

> (fingers crossed for
>> MuseScore folks), but IMO part of the job is gettings contacts with
>> companies who do contracts with governments, and generally staying
>> tuned to what's happening around. That means quitting the dangerous
>> "I'm just a programmer" attitude. Monotechnics is hardly an excuse.
>>
>
> Where do commercial Linux-based products like the Muse Receptor or
> Korg Oasys fit in with this? They certainly count "famous artists"
> among their user base, but I suspect that many people don't count
> these products as advocating the FOSS model. This really brings up the
> point of what your intentions are.
>
> If you are advocating that Linux can be a robust and productive
> platform, then products such as these should be your first example. If
> you are trying to advocate only for FOSS as a viable replacement to
> commercial solutions, then in many ways you are simply advocating
> politics.

And politics is the strongest point available if one intends to advocate
free software. It may not be a very strong point measured in
market-terms like amount of potential users but what other points can we
muster?

Price? License-costs are irrelevant in that field if we talk about
professional music production. The only point may be the inconvienience
that comes with licensing for more than one machine, dongles etc. But
for the payment itself: if we want more projects in the league of
Ardour, we would need users, that are willing to fund developers and the
amount of payment should be not lower than the middle class in the
proprietary realm.

Technology? UNIX? Ask Linus: whoever wants UNIX to make music can do so
under MacOSX. And the days, when Windows was unbearably slow and
unstable are over.

> Professionals seem to want to use tools that work, and are
> not so concerned with political or ethical "baggage" that might
> accompany their decisions.

So let them think so and let them do accordingly.

> Ultimately, famous artists are usually
> famous not because they use certain tools,

Exactly!

And if the rare case happens, that a talented musician who appeals to
listeners around the world, *does* care about some ethical baggage, and
if he/she finds out about Linux Audio and if either he/she does not need
MIDI-Tracks or likes to work with MIDI in a rather basical way or
Ardour3 is ready for prime-time -- well then someone in the league of
say: PJ Harvey or Mastodon or even Arcade Fire or Antony and the
Johnsons will consider switching to Linux/Free Software. (And all of
them actually could make the same records with Ardour under Linux).

Meanwhile, we use it and in case we meet some other ethical baggagers we
could tell them about. That there is not much to be feared and that
there is life beyond Steinberg and Magix(even though both make software
that is just plain brilliant and in fact more feature-rich than anything
under Linux) and that there is even life beyond VST....

best regards

HZN

> but because they make music
> that appeals to a broader base. Those that actively promote certain
> products are either paid to do so, or are happy to do so because they
> enjoy using the product. Given that, at best, Linux audio tools are
> musically equivalent in functionality or capability to commercial
> solutions, then the only advantages they offer are political or
> economic ones. Established artists probably don't have the need to
> save pennies on their tools, so that really only leaves politics. How
> many carpenters do you know that will buy a new brand eco-friendly
> hammer over a functionally equivalent one from a well known brand that
> uses rainforest timber for the handle? My point being, if you are
> trying to convert people to use a certain tool because it is
> "politically" better, then you are probably fighting a losing battle,
> or at least one that has little do with music or audio production.
>
> Personally, I do believe that people should embrace the FOSS model,
> but I've given up trying to evangelize in any way other than sharing
> my enjoyment of using the tools. If people see that and get inspired
> by it to try some of the tools that others have so graciously provided
> for free, then that's great. But I'm not famous, so that doesn't count
> for much!
>
> -Michael
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-audio-user mailing list
> Linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden
> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
>

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Received on Wed Aug 3 20:15:01 2011