[linux-audio-user] DAW Dillema -- Seeking Advice
plutek at infinity.net
Thu Sep 30 19:11:48 EDT 2004
On Thu, 2004-09-30 at 17:08, Eric Dantan Rzewnicki wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 30, 2004 at 04:54:57PM -0400, Peter Lutek wrote:
> > On Thu, 2004-09-30 at 14:02, Eric Dantan Rzewnicki wrote:
> > > Ok, but bear in mind that at present and probably for several more years
> > > I am not attempting to make music at all. I'm really just playing with
> > > sounds to hear what might be possible.
> > > .... lots of stuff snipped.......
> > > Then, eventually I'll sit down to lay out a more structured
> > > composition. For this final stage I agree that ardour will be a better
> > > suited tool. Perhaps this last type of work is most like other people's
> > > work flows.
> > ok, thanks, eric. this clarifies what we're talking about here. the
> > process of "playing with sounds" is something which i am also interested
> > in and which is, for me, a task totally unsuited to a multitrack
> > recorder/editor like ardour. there are lots of other linux tools for
> > that sort of compositional exploration -- they are rich and varied, and
> > that is precisely what i love about linux. when most people say "DAW",
> > they are talking about an environment for production of audio recordings
> > (i.e. serving the record/edit/master cycle somehow). the subject line
> > and greg's original post led me down THAT particular path, perhaps
> > mistakenly. anyway, i think we've come to an agreement (based on the
> > paragraph quoted above) that, for an editing and assemblage situation, a
> > tool with a workflow like ardour's is probably appropriate. this does
> > not, of course, diminish the value of many, many other tools with
> > different paradigms for creative, compositional activity. the
> > record/edit/master process is, after all, a very specific and small
> > subset of all the things people might want to do with sound.
> Yeah ... I guess I went off a bit yesterday. I still think that a lot of
> what people want to do with ardour can be done in ecasound, or ecasound
> plus ECI scripts/applications. Your mention of record/edit/master
> process brings up another topic of discussion, though.
> I've never worked in that process. I don't know anything about it
> outside of what I learn in these forums from people who are looking to
> duplicate the commercially available tool chain with free software. My
> impression is that it is a holdover from the commercial CD market, which
> should die and go away, IMO. I understand that that market is still how
> many people perceive the act, focus and goal of music making. But, I
> don't think there is any reason that has to continue as a dominant
> paradigm. I will never sell a CD of my own work.
> Mastering, from what I understand, implies that you are focused on
> creating some finite product on some mass produced and distributed
> physical medium -- That what you work on will somehow be completed,
> finished, done and in the can at some point. I think that just because
> that has been the dominant channel for the "media" business, that it has
> limited so many people to thinking of their work as something that has
> to fit into the confines of the prescribed medium.
> That's an unnatural limitation to my mind.
> I may never actually finish a completed work. I may only ever publish
> snapshots of the stream of my compositional processes. Perhaps
> eventually I will publish only continuous streams, who knows. Rather
> than viewing each finite track, song, .ogg file, whatever, as something
> concrete and fixed to be listened to repeatedly, I'm thinking it is
> possible to work in a much more fluid, and to my senses and
> sensibilities, a much more natural way.
> I control my own means of production, and now my own means of
> publication as well. The internet is, as far as I'm concerned,
> unlimitted. There is no need for a production to be limited to any
> finite duration and no need for it to ever be declared completed.
> There may be times and certain material that I want to present within a
> more traditional type of framework with a introduction, development,
> recap, resolution type of structure. I don't deny that there is a
> satisfaction to something that starts and ends. But, I don't think it
> has to be the only way to experience sounds.
> anyway ... I've been babling on all week. I appologize if I've seemed to
> be incoherent and out of step with the topic the rest of you are
> discussing. I'll stop brain dumping into this thread now. I need to get
> focused and get my head together ... I have so much more energy lately
> than I've had for a very long time. It's wonderful, but at the same time
> I feel very scatter-brained and somewhat disoriented.
> -Eric Rz.
thanks for your thoughts, eric. your idea of releasing snapshots of
ongoing work is beautiful and refreshing -- certainly appropriate to the
state of things, technically.
this has been a very fruitful thread, as a vehicle for honest exchange
More information about the linux-audio-user