Prev: How to turn away work V 2.0
Next: Question about paralleling inputs
From: Mike Rivers on 16 Feb 2010 17:12
Lucian Bicescu wrote:
> Another example of a Linux studio that is commercial.
> There is no reason why professional quality recordings cannot be
> made using Linux.

I agree - there is no reason why professional quality recordings cannot
be made using Linux. All you need is to have a DAW up and running,
know how to use it, and have interface hardware that the operating system
will support.

> Who needs overpriced Windows when Linux is free?

Anyone who already has a Windows computer running and doesn't want to
learn a new OS, apparently to a level beyond what he probably knows Windows.
Software might be free, but time, for many, isn't, or rather, it isn't
worth spending
a large amount of time just to save a couple of hundred bucks on ready-to-go
software.

> This gentleman appears to be earning his living running a Linux
> based recording studio so it is indeed possible.

No argument there. People earn their living carving decoys with a pocket
knife
after learning how to sharpen that knife. Others buy them at WalMart.

> Five years ago, when Geoff Beasley decided to move his sound
> studio
> business from a Windows-based one to a Linux-based setup

Oh, him again.



--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be operated without
a passing knowledge of computing, although it seems that it can be
operated without a passing knowledge of audio." - John Watkinson
From: M0she_ on 17 Feb 2010 04:14
On Tue, 16 Feb 2010 15:42:33 -0500, Lucian Bicescu wrote:


> All this time, he kept track of developments in audio software for
> Linux through the website of Dave Phillips, whom he describes as
> "one of the great movers and shakers in Linux audio."
>
> http://linux-sound.org/
>
> [/quote]

A mover and shaker in Linux audio?
That's funny!

Anybody ever hear of this guy?
I haven't.
From: liquidator on 17 Feb 2010 09:04

"Krooburg Science" <krooburg(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
news:d4962d27-43b6-4c00-a2f0-cb64a04f03ac(a)u19g2000prh.googlegroups.com...


With Pro Tools already being an industry standard on Mac & Windows for
TV, Feature film, and recording audio sweetening/editing/mixing, why
on earth would anybody want to waste their time building and
supporting such system??

I honestly cannot comprehend that statement.

Why would anybody support anybody other than Microsoft? Because it is
healthy to have alternatives.

I don't want pro tools to be the only thing available.

All that said, I would probably use pro tools, but I actively encourage
alternatives.


From: Sylvain Robitaille on 18 Feb 2010 15:27
["Followup-To:" header set to rec.audio.pro.]

M0she_ wrote:

>> "... Dave Phillips, whom he describes as "one of the great movers and
>> shakers in Linux audio."
>
> A mover and shaker in Linux audio?
> That's funny!
>
> Anybody ever hear of this guy?
> I haven't.

Except you've made it clear that you also haven't been paying attention
to what's available for audio in that community, so it isn't surprising
that you haven't heard of Dave Phillips. I wouldn't refer to him as a
"mover and shaker" myself, so much as someone who has written about and
provided a lot of helpful information on the subject.

I never heard of "M0she_" either before seeing your messages on this
newsgroup, but that doesn't stop me from seriously considering what you
write.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sylvain Robitaille syl(a)encs.concordia.ca

Systems analyst / AITS Concordia University
Faculty of Engineering and Computer Science Montreal, Quebec, Canada
----------------------------------------------------------------------
 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: How to turn away work V 2.0
Next: Question about paralleling inputs