On Sun, 2008-02-03 at 13:52 +0100, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Hallo, Roman Haefeli hat gesagt: // Roman Haefeli wrote:
thanks for mentioning those. we're getting a bit OT now, but just a few quick comments:
-ardour is certainly a great and advanced DAW, no doubt. recording can be definitely done with FOSS.
- jamin is cool and powerful software too, but it follows the wrong
strategy: you can only use it in real-time, since it is a jack-plugin. having to render in realtime is a pain and dangerous in many situations (all drop-outs are in the resulting file). OTOH, LADSPA plugins don't support customized guis, AFAIK, therefor there is no option to do something like jamin as a LADSPA plugin. IMHO, most LADSPA plugins might be good scientific applications, but definitely not for everyday studio work (no visual feedback, strange scales of parameters).
LADSPA plugins don't have a GUI at all, so every GUI you get is a customized one. LADSPA-plugins itself are perfectly able to be run in non-realtime. For example if you render an Ardour session with LADSPA plugins in it to file, this is done in non-realtime fashion. Often it's done faster than realtime.
yeah, that is what i am saying: LADSPA plugins can be rendered offline, but don't have a visual feedback, whereas tools as jamin have visual feedback, but cannot be rendered offline and therefor are not drop-out save.
- both ardour, jamin and almost all sound editors i found don't have an
accelerated gui. scrolling causes high cpu peaks.i don't know any software on windows, that uses cpu for the gui part. it's sad, that i have hardware (gpu) in my box, which isn't used at all (but only when i do Gem).
The actually drawing is accelerated by the graphics card already. However a tricky question that cannot simply be shovelled to the gfx-card (so easily) is how to decide which samples to display at all. For example when zoomed out, you don't need to draw every single sample. Ardour uses a sophisticated algorithm for deciding things like that, AFAIK. (IIRC Paul Davis once said that this was one of the hardest parts in Ardour to get right.) Compare that to Pd, which doesn't even bother with trying to be smart here, which results in slowdown when moving arrays with many elements, even when they are displayed in only a small area.
All in all to me Ardour doesn't feel slow at all. Audacity OTOH is slow (and all around terrible for my taste anyway) as was the last version of SoundForge for Windows, that I had to run at work - though I admit that this was some years ago. But Ardour feels very snappy and quick here.
- there is not audio editor around, that even loosely fulfills my needs.
probably the makers of Elephants Dream felt the same. Some of them lack native jack support, others use very strange sets of shortcuts, or are pretty raw in general.
Uhm, while Blender certainly is great, you aren't seriously trying to tell me you really think its shortcuts are intuitive, are you?!? ;-) Someone who mastered Blender should have no problems with Ardour, given he invests about a tenth of the time to learn it.
Ciao
Telefonate ohne weitere Kosten vom PC zum PC: http://messenger.yahoo.de