ProTools...Any hope for native Linux support?

[domokunrox]

I stumbled upon an old thread with ProTools discussion and I just wanted to base upon the discussion from a professional perspective and why the topic is viable or should be.

Now, I know there is some of you out there who use or sport other apps and thats great, but its just not a serious industry standard pro app. Now I've asked myself this and I'm sure some have poped this question.

Why would Digidesign even remotely consider supporting a OS that can only get 1% marketshare (if at that)?

1. ProTools on Windows is an absolute joke
2. Apple computers are at premium prices and they hate Digidesign.

I think Digidesign should Drop Windows support and Support a flavor of Linux optimized and built for ProTools. Apple computers just choke your money when you can use that extra cash instead to buy Digidesign hardware.

I know that ProTools is really all about the hardware itself, but lets face why its industry standard for Post Production and Music Production

Being able to playback hundreds of tracks with sample accuracy to video without breaking a sweat is unmatched by all others.
ProTools has a superior, quicker workflow and set of features and tools now with PT8. It absolutely trumped Logic in that dept.
Most importantly, mixdowns are of superior quality compared to all others.

Comments? Ideas? Lets discuss it.

[hanzomon4]

Interesting this topic would come up now. I just started back playing with Ardour, Pd, and jack on OS X. I'm an amateur sound artist and I've used Protools at school. I don't like it, it's about as difficult to use as Ardour and costs a ton. Granted it would be cool to have Protools run on Linux, I just don't see the advantage Protools has over other packages(perhaps because it's over kill for my needs).

[domokunrox]

Interesting this topic would come up now. I just started back playing with Ardour, Pd, and jack on OS X. I'm an amateur sound artist and I've used Protools at school. I don't like it, it's about as difficult to use as Ardour and costs a ton. Granted it would be cool to have Protools run on Linux, I just don't see the advantage Protools has over other packages(perhaps because it's over kill for my needs).

ProTools defiantly has a steep learning curve if you're just trying to learn it brute force.

Its defiantly a program oriented around keyboard shortcuts when editing or recording. Downloading a PDF of the 101 course work or sitting behind a professional using ProTools for a few days is absolutely necessary to properly use the program in a way that is organized and properly maintained. It is a major pain in the a** to open a noob session file. Just the other day, someone wanted to hire me to beat detective his work. I opened it, droped my jaw. Closed it and made a new session and just imported his tracks over. It was that bad.

You're right in the sense that ProTools is overkill for some people. They tend to be people who casually writes music or something. Which Garageband would be suitable for. I don't think I've ever come across anyone who wants to do more and not want to get professional sound results. This includes analog tape emulation, and amp emulation, which has gone a long way. Both being Reel Tape and Eleven plugins respectively.

Generally though, the cost of admission for PT LE can be had for $329 Hardware and basic software ($199 if you're enrolled in Digidesign certed school). If you're only going to edit and casually mix, theres another option at $279 with a piece of hardware that has no inputs ($159 "")

These options are far better alternatives compared to great deal of their competitors like Logic Studio ($499) and Sonar ($399).

[hanzomon4]

Are those plugins protools exclusive? The studio I had class in had reel to reel, and some good rack units. Protools was just one of the ways we could do our editing. I going to be using it a lot more this year...

What's your opinion on Ardour?

[stmiller]

I doubt this is ever going to happen.

People buy and use Pro Tools for the many thousands of third party plugins that are written for it. These plugin companies are for Mac and Windows only. :(

If you need multi channel hard disc recording, Ardour does it quite well.

[domokunrox]

Are those plugins protools exclusive? The studio I had class in had reel to reel, and some good rack units. Protools was just one of the ways we could do our editing. I going to be using it a lot more this year...

What's your opinion on Ardour?

Those plugins are RTAS or TDM only, so yes you can say they are exclusive unless there is some other DAW that uses them that I don't know about.

My opinion on Ardour is that it only supports LADSPA and LV2 plugins and the lack of stable VST support chokes it from being viable to be taken as a viable option for music production. While it does do AU plugins natively, which have a few gems, but its certainly not up to par of the RTAS or TDM plugins available.


I doubt this is ever going to happen.

People buy and use Pro Tools for the many thousands of third party plugins that are written for it. These plugin companies are for Mac and Windows only.

If you need multi channel hard disc recording, Ardour does it quite well.

Why doubt? RTAS can be adapted to linux. Digidesign designed it, they can make it work for linux.

[MikeTheC]

@domokunrox:

Not to in any way be rude or belittle your question or points, but remember this is Apple we're talking about here. They're unlikely to ever release apps for Linux. The only way I could envision Apple releasing for Linux is if Linux suddenly held a substantial amount (40%? 50%? 60%? Higher still?) of Microsoft's current marketshare. I mean, Linux would have to take over from Microsoft as the dominant player.

Something like that really requires both the F/OSS community to succeed AND Microsoft to fail. It's not just one or the other here, folks. I mean, I don't think there's really any argument that Linux is the superior OS from a technological point-of-view, as well as from a more academic P.O.V. (Linux is, after all, a peer-reviewed OS and Windows is not), but that isn't sufficient. Beta was better than VHS, after all, but we know which won. Anyhow, what I'm getting at is it's not sufficient that it's better; it must actually be adopted, and as pointed out above (and as well all know from our various life experiences) one does not presuppose the other.

Alright, so fast-forward to a couple days ago, when Microsoft announced they will be laying off up to 5,000 employees over the course of the next 18 months. That's significant for two different reasons, though from a technologist's perspective, one far overshadows the other in importance. It's significant because this is the first of any kind of significant (if, indeed, any at all) layoffs by Microsoft, and it is a significant number. But the second, and far more important factor, is what this implies about what's happening to Microsoft.

Without getting into a multi-paragraph personal assessment and analysis, it's my belief that what's transpiring at AND too Microsoft might possibly have the potential to make shorter the period it might take for mainstream adoption of Linux by the masses, which in turn would hasten the porting of mainstream commercial apps to Linux, and not that Apple might care one way or another about that, but the more commercial apps there are that people want, the more people there will be who can (in whatever sense of the word you want to employ) use Linux. This in turn accelerates the adoption rate, and we could eventually get to the point in that scenario of enough people using Linux instead of Windows that Apple would feel the pressure to develop for Linux.

But there's no way that Apple will develop for Linux without sustained and significant market-related pressure to do so.

[domokunrox]

@domokunrox:

Not to in any way be rude or belittle your question or points, but remember this is Apple we're talking about here. They're unlikely to ever release apps for Linux. The only way I could envision Apple releasing for Linux is if Linux suddenly held a substantial amount (40%? 50%? 60%? Higher still?) of Microsoft's current marketshare. I mean, Linux would have to take over from Microsoft as the dominant player.

Something like that really requires both the F/OSS community to succeed AND Microsoft to fail. It's not just one or the other here, folks. I mean, I don't think there's really any argument that Linux is the superior OS from a technological point-of-view, as well as from a more academic P.O.V. (Linux is, after all, a peer-reviewed OS and Windows is not), but that isn't sufficient. Beta was better than VHS, after all, but we know which won. Anyhow, what I'm getting at is it's not sufficient that it's better; it must actually be adopted, and as pointed out above (and as well all know from our various life experiences) one does not presuppose the other.

Alright, so fast-forward to a couple days ago, when Microsoft announced they will be laying off up to 5,000 employees over the course of the next 18 months. That's significant for two different reasons, though from a technologist's perspective, one far overshadows the other in importance. It's significant because this is the first of any kind of significant (if, indeed, any at all) layoffs by Microsoft, and it is a significant number. But the second, and far more important factor, is what this implies about what's happening to Microsoft.

Without getting into a multi-paragraph personal assessment and analysis, it's my belief that what's transpiring at AND too Microsoft might possibly have the potential to make shorter the period it might take for mainstream adoption of Linux by the masses, which in turn would hasten the porting of mainstream commercial apps to Linux, and not that Apple might care one way or another about that, but the more commercial apps there are that people want, the more people there will be who can (in whatever sense of the word you want to employ) use Linux. This in turn accelerates the adoption rate, and we could eventually get to the point in that scenario of enough people using Linux instead of Windows that Apple would feel the pressure to develop for Linux.

But there's no way that Apple will develop for Linux without sustained and significant market-related pressure to do so.

Sir, you are very confused. Apple didn't make ProTools for Apple computers. ProTools is coded by Digidesign (owned by Avid) and Apple computers has been attempting to take marketshare in professional recording apps from Digidesign ever since they acquired Logic from whoever (I forget their name).

Now that you know this. You're post made a big woosh sound.

[MikeTheC]

Really?

I was under the impression that ProTools was owned by Apple through acquisition of the originating company. Hmmm...

[hanzomon4]

Ouch...

Yeah laspda plugins suck.... Audio on linux would be a lot better with some good quality plugins. I just don't get why they are so bad... I mean everyone says that foss makes better software but in a lot of cases I just don't see it.

I think it's possible for the audio industry to get behind Linux, I mean look at digital animation.

[domokunrox]

Really?

I was under the impression that ProTools was owned by Apple through acquisition of the originating company. Hmmm...

Yeah, uh, Avid acquired Digidesign in 1994

Wiki page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avid)


Ouch...

Yeah laspda plugins suck.... Audio on linux would be a lot better with some good quality plugins. I just don't get why they are so bad... I mean everyone says that foss makes better software but in a lot of cases I just don't see it.

I think it's possible for the audio industry to get behind Linux, I mean look at digital animation.

I think you get it. Linux distros are so quick and easy to install and update, and the great improvements to GUI features and ease of use make it friendly enough.

I think that post production houses and recording studios have ENOUGH incentive to save money with the current struggling economy that they would switch over to a free OS with free updates.

I think all that it would take is simply hardware support. As long as someone gracious enough could get a hold of current and discontinued Avid hardware and work on getting it to work properly, it would defiantly get them to turn their head and test it out internally at the very least.

[cmay]

this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/64_Studio has some commercial solutions. i do not tink that there is any hope for exactly protools support native in linux but as there is some proffesional solutions available for linux already then maybe someting E.Q as good has already found it way to linux.
for free this distro as it is is great. i used for my hobby studio a long time. the new upgrade is not so great i think but the 2.0.0 version is all i need to make my music. i left my roland sonar and cubase setup on windows for this.
its just as great as i need it to be. it is really worht a good check up if one has tried ubuntu studio but found it is not really not exactly what is needed but maybe close. this here has the ability to find out when you plug in a usb keyboard (synth) or drummachine to just set it up and connect it as it should be and you can actully make music also using the live cd and not sit down many hours mousing around configuring stuff before being able to use it for recording. i never found out how to make ubuntu studio act so simple so i stick with this distro.
but as far as pro tools is concerned i think there should be a solution that looks a bit like it for free in ardour and it seems that some really proffs use this distro so there must be some commercial solutions that make it as replacement for protools.

[domokunrox]

this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/64_Studio has some commercial solutions. i do not tink that there is any hope for exactly protools support native in linux but as there is some proffesional solutions available for linux already then maybe someting E.Q as good has already found it way to linux.
for free this distro as it is is great. i used for my hobby studio a long time. the new upgrade is not so great i think but the 2.0.0 version is all i need to make my music. i left my roland sonar and cubase setup on windows for this.
its just as great as i need it to be. it is really worht a good check up if one has tried ubuntu studio but found it is not really not exactly what is needed but maybe close. this here has the ability to find out when you plug in a usb keyboard (synth) or drummachine to just set it up and connect it as it should be and you can actully make music also using the live cd and not sit down many hours mousing around configuring stuff before being able to use it for recording. i never found out how to make ubuntu studio act so simple so i stick with this distro.
but as far as pro tools is concerned i think there should be a solution that looks a bit like it for free in ardour and it seems that some really proffs use this distro so there must be some commercial solutions that make it as replacement for protools.

That is actually pretty interesting. I'll see how that works for mixing.

[Cope57]

ProTools...Any hope for native Linux support?
I hope not.

I do not like mixing proprietary software with my operating system.
Besides, if it did have Linux support, I am sure they would want the product to be purchased at a price that is not very reasonable. I personally like giving to the developers which actually create software for free, and I contribute to the software I feel is necessary for my needs.
If I want to produce some music using Linux, I would start with a place like http://linux-sound.org/.

Comparison of multitrack recording software (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_multitrack_recording_software)
I know there are more links out there, but these are just a couple that came to mind.

Make Protools open source, and I am sure the community just might port it over.. :^o

[domokunrox]

I hope not.

I do not like mixing proprietary software with my operating system.
Besides, if it did have Linux support, I am sure they would want the product to be purchased at a price that is not very reasonable. I personally like giving to the developers which actually create software for free, and I contribute to the software I feel is necessary for my needs.
If I want to produce some music using Linux, I would start with a place like http://linux-sound.org/.

Comparison of multitrack recording software (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_multitrack_recording_software)
I know there are more links out there, but these are just a couple that came to mind.

Make Protools open source, and I am sure the community just might port it over.. :^o

Well, Digidesign is sort of there. They make money off selling you the hardware and the plug-ins, not the software. Everyone knows this, right?

What I was getting at is, that could be a particular flavor of linux designed specifically for use for ProTools with a purchased license. Don't get me wrong, guys. I like free, but I'll gladly pay for software, hardware, plugins that are of quality to meet industry professional standards.

They pay for it now. Along with the OS supported and any necessary OS upgrades to run the latest version ProTools.

What I'm saying is that Digidesign can stick it to BOTH MS and Apple by taking this route. Which effectively cuts the need to run and maintain an OS that does more then what is necessary to do a job.

[abyssius]

Well, Digidesign is sort of there. They make money off selling you the hardware and the plug-ins, not the software. Everyone knows this, right?

What I was getting at is, that could be a particular flavor of linux designed specifically for use for ProTools with a purchased license. Don't get me wrong, guys. I like free, but I'll gladly pay for software, hardware, plugins that are of quality to meet industry professional standards.

They pay for it now. Along with the OS supported and any necessary OS upgrades to run the latest version ProTools.

What I'm saying is that Digidesign can stick it to BOTH MS and Apple by taking this route. Which effectively cuts the need to run and maintain an OS that does more then what is necessary to do a job.

Since you can purchase and use Protools without purchasing any of their hardware, I don't think that you can state as a fact that Digidesign doesn't make money on their software.

FYI, companies that design software/hardware for profit DON'T want to "stick" it to Microsoft or Apple. That would be "shooting themselves in the foot to spite their face." If they really wanted to avoid Windows or OS-X, they could develop a proprietary OS for their hardware, similar to what Roland or Yamaha does with their DAWs. Linux source-code would be an excellent base. However, it doesn't make business sense for Digidesign to do this. They know that the majority of audio professionals use MAC - and Windows usage is quickly catching up. Why would they jeopardize their market?

Besides, why should anyone in the Linux community care if Digidesign can increase their profits by using Linux to avoid MS and Apple licensing fees? Central to the Linux experience is sharing in the growth and development of community-designed software. If Digidesign decides to turns over the source code to their TDM technology, I'm sure there are many Linux developers waiting to build a Linux equivalent or incorporate this technology into existing Linux digital audio applications. If they're not willing to do this, why should anyone care about Digidesign?

[thisllub]

I hope not.

I do not like mixing proprietary software with my operating system.
Besides, if it did have Linux support, I am sure they would want the product to be purchased at a price that is not very reasonable. I personally like giving to the developers which actually create software for free, and I contribute to the software I feel is necessary for my needs.
If I want to produce some music using Linux, I would start with a place like http://linux-sound.org/.

Comparison of multitrack recording software (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_multitrack_recording_software)
I know there are more links out there, but these are just a couple that came to mind.

Make Protools open source, and I am sure the community just might port it over.. :^o

Computer based systems are a perfectly valid way to make a living.
If Linux is the best platform for Pro-Tools they should do it whether you pay or not.
Pro-Tools is as the name implies, professional and they have every right to charge money to expedite its development.

However Ardour is improving all the time, especially since the SAE donated money for development.
I built Version3 from source and find it excellent.
64Studio is an excellent distribution. I used it myself for about 9 months. In my opinion it is the best music focused distro.

[abyssius]

Computer based systems are a perfectly valid way to make a living.
Where has anyone disputed this?

If Linux is the best platform for Pro-Tools they should do it whether you pay or not.
I doubt that Linux is the best platform for Pro-Tools. In fact, the Digidesign people believe that MAC is the best platform for Pro-Tools. They 'ported' over to Windows simply to increase market share. Even though I don't agree that Windows is an inferior platform for ProTools.


Pro-Tools is as the name implies, professional and they have every right to charge money to expedite its development.
Do you give any credance to the Linux philosophy of developing and supporting "open-source" software, or do you thing that Ubuntu should amend its philosophy, as stated below, to accommodate commercialization of their OS? If they do, then wouldn't it be fair for them to demand licensing fees from Digidesign (for example), if Digidesign used their OS to earn money.


Our Philosophy
Our work is driven by a philosophy on software freedom that aims to spread and bring the benefits of software to all parts of the world. At the core of the Ubuntu Philosophy are these core philosophical ideals:

1. Every computer user should have the freedom to download, run, copy, distribute, study, share, change and improve their software for any purpose, without paying licensing fees.
2. Every computer user should be able to use their software in the language of their choice.
3. Every computer user should be given every opportunity to use software, even if they work under a disability.

Our philosophy is reflected in the software we produce and included in our distribution. As a result, the licensing terms of the software we distribute are measured against our philosophy, using the Ubuntu License Policy.

When you install Ubuntu almost all of the software installed already meets these ideals, and we are working to ensure that every single piece of software you need is available under a license that gives you those freedoms.

Currently, we make a specific exception for some "drivers" which are only available in binary form, without which many computers will not complete the Ubuntu installation. We place these in a restricted section of your system which makes them easy to remove if you do not need them.


However Ardour is improving all the time, especially since the SAE donated money for development.
I built Version3 from source and find it excellent.
64Studio is an excellent distribution. I used it myself for about 9 months. In my opinion it is the best music focused distro.

This is great news. My hope is that Linux open-source software in many categories reach or exceed their proprietary equivalents. Many Linux software applications have already met this test. However, in the field of digital audio and video editing, most will acknowledge that there is still a ways to go.

[domokunrox]

Since you can purchase and use Protools without purchasing any of their hardware, I don't think that you can state as a fact that Digidesign doesn't make money on their software.

FYI, companies that design software/hardware for profit DON'T want to "stick" it to Microsoft or Apple. That would be "shooting themselves in the foot to spite their face." If they really wanted to avoid Windows or OS-X, they could develop a proprietary OS for their hardware, similar to what Roland or Yamaha does with their DAWs. Linux source-code would be an excellent base. However, it doesn't make business sense for Digidesign to do this. They know that the majority of audio professionals use MAC - and Windows usage is quickly catching up. Why would they jeopardize their market?

Besides, why should anyone in the Linux community care if Digidesign can increase their profits by using Linux to avoid MS and Apple licensing fees? Central to the Linux experience is sharing in the growth and development of community-designed software. If Digidesign decides to turns over the source code to their TDM technology, I'm sure there are many Linux developers waiting to build a Linux equivalent or incorporate this technology into existing Linux digital audio applications. If they're not willing to do this, why should anyone care about Digidesign?

You're misinformed. You cannot run ProTools without hardware connected. M-powered or HD cannot run with an ilok, in addition to that.

If you've ever seen or ran ProTools without hardware connected, its hacked with gimped functionality.

Allow me to respond to your comment I've bolded.

Digidesign would not jeopardize their market by droping windows support. I never said drop Apple support. All that Digidesign would be doing is offer an better alternative in sort of a "Hey, we now support this particular flavor of Linux and its better for us and you". They wouldn't lose any marketshare. If you can run Windows or OSX, you can run Linux. You can install and update it in about 30 minutes.

Why would you care if Digidesign "makes profits" or gets linux support?

Think of it this way. One of Digidesign's biggest customers is educational institutions and its quickly growing. Post production houses and recordings studios would defiantly embrace a free and healthy OS.

Why does this matter? This would only add a massive bump in marketshare towards Linux, and thats good for us all, right?

[abyssius]

You're misinformed. You cannot run ProTools without hardware connected. M-powered or HD cannot run with an ilok, in addition to that.

If you've ever seen or ran ProTools without hardware connected, its hacked with gimped functionality.

Allow me to respond to your comment I've bolded.

Digidesign would not jeopardize their market by droping windows support. I never said drop Apple support. All that Digidesign would be doing is offer an better alternative in sort of a "Hey, we now support this particular flavor of Linux and its better for us and you". They wouldn't lose any marketshare. If you can run Windows or OSX, you can run Linux. You can install and update it in about 30 minutes.

Why would you care if Digidesign "makes profits" or gets linux support?

Think of it this way. One of Digidesign's biggest customers is educational institutions and its quickly growing. Post production houses and recordings studios would defiantly embrace a free and healthy OS.

Why does this matter? This would only add a massive bump in marketshare towards Linux, and thats good for us all, right?

I've heard that Digidesign's hardware restriction is artificial and easily hacked. I don't personally use ProTools, and I definitely don't use a MAC.

Digidesign couldn't possibly generate a "massive bump" in Linux Adoption. It has such a small market niche that in the larger scheme of things it would be irrelevant. However, Digidesign could aid the Linux community by providing an open-source package. But, I wouldn't count on that any time soon.

There are great developers in the Linux community working on digital audio solutions. Some are mentioned in this thread. So, it's only a matter of time before a DAW application matches ProTools software capabilities.

As for the hardware, Digidesign has plenty of competition in the ADC department, Tascam, Roland, Mackie, Yamaha... the list goes on and on. Other hardware manufacturers support many different DAW applications. On the plug-in side, Cubase's VST technology is usable by many different software applications and are quite "professional". These solutions are available to the vastly larger Windows user base. I'm not going to argue about ProTool's supremacy over other DAW solutions. That's debatable - and not the point.

Digidesign's philosophies closely mirror the Apple philosophy of proprietary strictness. This is completely at odds with the philosophy of Linux users and the open-source community at large.

I say we petition Digidesign for an open-source ProTools contribution. That way us common folk can get to enjoy this amazing technology.

[thisllub]

Digidesign's philosophies closely mirror the Apple philosophy of proprietary strictness. This is completely at odds with the philosophy of Linux users and the open-source community at large.


Somewhere someone has to pay.
If they can't make money out of software they have to make it out of hardware. Then their hardware is uncompetitive.

At the moment there is amongst professionals that ProTools is worth them investing in.

That is the way of the market.
I read a great article that I believe correctly asserted that the biggest competitor for Linux is free,illegal Windows.
Why pay for something you don't know if you are happy with what you have and it is free?

I often laugh at people getting hung up about proprietary software used for hardware when the BIOS on their computer is proprietary software that runs all of the time.
Why should any other device be required to be open source when BIOSes are not?

If I ran a pro studio I would possibly go digidesign / Mac.
For a good home studio RME / Ardour / Linux is more than adequate.

[domokunrox]

I've heard that Digidesign's hardware restriction is artificial and easily hacked. I don't personally use ProTools, and I definitely don't use a MAC.

Digidesign couldn't possibly generate a "massive bump" in Linux Adoption. It has such a small market niche that in the larger scheme of things it would be irrelevant. However, Digidesign could aid the Linux community by providing an open-source package. But, I wouldn't count on that any time soon.

There are great developers in the Linux community working on digital audio solutions. Some are mentioned in this thread. So, it's only a matter of time before a DAW application matches ProTools software capabilities.

As for the hardware, Digidesign has plenty of competition in the ADC department, Tascam, Roland, Mackie, Yamaha... the list goes on and on. Other hardware manufacturers support many different DAW applications. On the plug-in side, Cubase's VST technology is usable by many different software applications and are quite "professional". These solutions are available to the vastly larger Windows user base. I'm not going to argue about ProTool's supremacy over other DAW solutions. That's debatable - and not the point.

Digidesign's philosophies closely mirror the Apple philosophy of proprietary strictness. This is completely at odds with the philosophy of Linux users and the open-source community at large.

I say we petition Digidesign for an open-source ProTools contribution. That way us common folk can get to enjoy this amazing technology.

Well, like I've said. You need certified hardware connected to legitimately use ProTools. Allow me show you the reality of ProTools of both Windows and Mac. In every studio and post production house, you are expected to know Mac keyboard commands because thats the only platform that matters. Its Mac or bust in professional audio industry.

I don't understand what you're thinking. If there was Linux support, that certainly would be a large bump in Linux users. Every Digidesign certified school, State and Government accredited colleges for Audio Engineering would seriously consider adoption of Linux.

In reply to the part I bolded, what you're requesting is absolutely ridiculous. Don't get me wrong, I like the Linux philosophy. Thats why I'm using the OS. But your request is like asking the only company who has the engineered schematics for a saw with a certain distinct features that makes it competitive. Every professional owns one, they happily payed for it because its a great product. And you're asking them to hand over schematics so you can manufacture and give it away the product with blueprints at your free store? Are you joking? YOU should be grateful if they want to work with you because you only carry handsaws.

Again, don't get me wrong. Open source is great. But you need to understand why some things cannot be open source. They're called trade secrets.

But here is the gist of where I'm getting at.

You NEED a OS to make computing easier and secure
You NEED a web browser to securely surf the net
You NEED a Word processor to write and print documents

You DO NOT NEED a DAW as a basic function of a computer

A serious DAW is a professional tool. Its not a hobby. Go find me a hit record or Hollywood movie that was mixed in Ardour. You can't because it doesn't exist. Ardour's competitor who sells their products for thousands of dollars trumps them in every single aspect for a reason. Smell the coffee.

[Cope57]

You are one strange individual, please post more PRODUCTIVE threads... thank you...

[domokunrox]

So, the function of your thread was to start a thread which you can troll successfully?

You are one strange individual, please post more PRODUCTIVE threads... thank you...

Sorry, I wasn't aware that I couldn't disagree and explain why someone's response is flawed.

But to clarify, the function of the thread was to start a conversation about how ProTools could work under native Linux support.

If you're wrong about something in the industry I work in, I'm going to tell you why. I'm not going to just allow someone to remain uninformed and stay that way.

[Cope57]

Can ProTools work natively under Linux?

Then how about WINE?

If not, port it over...

:popcorn:

[domokunrox]

Can ProTools work natively under Linux?

Then how about WINE?

If not, port it over...

:popcorn:

I was actually thinking about more then that. As a community we can make studio useful applications for a native Linux release.

Like Studio Calendars, Tracksheets, a better Digidelivery system, Session file organization tools, Bluetooth transport control remotes, the list goes on and on.

These are just some examples of some ideas I had. They don't exist or they cost lots of money on other OS.

[abyssius]

Well, like I've said. You need certified hardware connected to legitimately use ProTools. Allow me show you the reality of ProTools of both Windows and Mac. In every studio and post production house, you are expected to know Mac keyboard commands because thats the only platform that matters. Its Mac or bust in professional audio industry.
You need to get out more. I know studios that are professional, made many hits, etc., have a large clientèle or however you measure "professional" - that are strictly old school and use only analog mixing boards and 24-track tape machines. I also know completely professional studios making money and having steady customers that use Windows only (Cubase, Sonar, Tascam, etc. etc.). Is someone using protools and a Mbox2 thingie more professional in your eyes than someone who uses four Tascam X-48 (with Windows software) to havew 192 tracks (e.g. Record Plant). Are Alesis recorders not professional? Are Mackie recorders not professional? Do you really believe that every pro musician in the world uses MAC, and everyone else is an amateur? Breking News! There's a large world out there beyond MAC.


I don't understand what you're thinking. If there was Linux support, that certainly would be a large bump in Linux users. Every Digidesign certified school, State and Government accredited colleges for Audio Engineering would seriously consider adoption of Linux.
ProTools is the defacto standard largely because it was one of the pioneers of the digital audio field.[/QUOTE]
It's admirable that you measure ProTools as the only possibility for digital audio. However I don't believe that EVERY State and Government Accredited college of Audio Engineering uses only Digidesign equipment and Macintosh computers. In fact, I'm willing to bet that if you review the entire market, more pro-musicians use Windows-based solutions than Mac based solutions. Ask companies like Sony, Tascam, Roland, Mackie, Steinberg, Sonar if they are "bust". I don't think so.


In reply to the part I bolded, what you're requesting is absolutely ridiculous. Don't get me wrong, I like the Linux philosophy. Thats why I'm using the OS. But your request is like asking the only company who has the engineered schematics for a saw with a certain distinct features that makes it competitive. Every professional owns one, they happily payed for it because its a great product. And you're asking them to hand over schematics so you can manufacture and give it away the product with blueprints at your free store? Are you joking? YOU should be grateful if they want to work with you because you only carry handsaws.
This is a typical dismissive attitude towards other Os'es that is prevalent with MAC elitist users. I don't happen to accept that because something if free, it must be second-rate or at a "handsaw" level. Isn't the MAC OS-X taking advantage of an open-source (free) kernel. Hardly a handsaw.

As I stated originally, Digidesign could release an open-source version to the linux community. Why would that hurt them? Their largest customer base probably wouldn't dream of straying beyond the OS-X umbrella.


Again, don't get me wrong. Open source is great. But you need to understand why some things cannot be open source. They're called trade secrets.

I'd hate to see the Linux community adopt "trade secrets".


But here is the gist of where I'm getting at.

You NEED a OS to make computing easier and secure
You NEED a web browser to securely surf the net
You NEED a Word processor to write and print documents
You DO NOT NEED a DAW as a basic function of a computer

A serious DAW is a professional tool. Its not a hobby. Go find me a hit record or Hollywood movie that was mixed in Ardour. You can't because it doesn't exist. Ardour's competitor who sells their products for thousands of dollars trumps them in every single aspect for a reason. Smell the coffee.

I'm sorry but ProTools isn't the only game in town. For example, a recent YES DVD and album was mixed on Sony Vegas Pro - which happens to be a fantastic multi-track audio workstation, supporting VST plugins, plus an excellent multi-camera Video Editor, SOmething that is beyond the capability of ProTools. For Video editing, Vegas, with its real-time effects editing, forced Final Cut Pro and Premiere to play catch-up for years. Of course, you wouldn't know this if you don't venture beyond the world of MAC. Also, consider Sony Acid for loop-based music generation. Another PROFESSIONAL music package that forced Apple to play-catch-up. Acid is the basis for many Hip Hop hit records, which happens to be the biggest selling music genre. Maybe I need to smell the coffee, but I can avoid drinking the Protools kool-aid.

[abyssius]

Somewhere someone has to pay.
If they can't make money out of software they have to make it out of hardware. Then their hardware is uncompetitive.

At the moment there is amongst professionals that ProTools is worth them investing in.

That is the way of the market.
I read a great article that I believe correctly asserted that the biggest competitor for Linux is free,illegal Windows.
Why pay for something you don't know if you are happy with what you have and it is free?

I often laugh at people getting hung up about proprietary software used for hardware when the BIOS on their computer is proprietary software that runs all of the time.
Why should any other device be required to be open source when BIOSes are not?

If I ran a pro studio I would possibly go digidesign / Mac.
For a good home studio RME / Ardour / Linux is more than adequate.

I'm not hung up about proprietary software, And, I'd never propose that every device be open-source. That is a simplistic concept. I wouldn't be able to make a living without using "proprietary" software and hardware.
I started experimenting with the Linux Desktop OS because I liked the "open-source" and "free" philosophy. I admit I haven't yet found Linux software that can replace all the applications I need to use to make a living. However, I don't look at the Linux Desktop OS as a commercial venture. Commercial Linux resides in the enterprise server market, fueled by huge companies like Sun, IBM, Novell, etc. I like the idea that for personal use, the OS is free.

In the Windows world, many software manufacturers issue both commercial and free software. Perhaps, the most famous is Grisoft's AVG. They charge a pretty penny for their commercial licenses, and their freeware version is the top download for AV/Spyware software. They've allowed free use of their software, with updates, to millions of users without giving away "trade secrets". This has only enhanced Grisoft as a AV software company. Digidesign could apply this model if they wanted to. That's why Ubuntu allows the use of "restricted" software.

I agree with the illegal Windows analogy. But, it's a fact that with proprietary systems, there will always be "illegal" software users. I've been guilty of this myself. The fact that one doesn't have to resort to dishonesty is another great attribute of the Linux philosophy. This might be anecdotal but I've conversed with many ProTools users, and to a fault when I mention something like the expense of purchasing plugins, They all seem to brag about how they got their collection illegally, thus saving them thousands of dollars. This goes on even in the evangelical MAC world.

Finally, be aware that if you ran a pro studio, there are many other options available for DAW hardware, software. Using anything other than ProTools does not automatically make you an amateur. That's an extremely narrow point of view.

[domokunrox]

You need to get out more. I know studios that are professional, made many hits, etc., have a large clientèle or however you measure "professional" - that are strictly old school and use only analog mixing boards and 24-track tape machines. I also know completely professional studios making money and having steady customers that use Windows only (Cubase, Sonar, Tascam, etc. etc.). Is someone using protools and a Mbox2 thingie more professional in your eyes than someone who uses four Tascam X-48 (with Windows software) to have 192 tracks (e.g. Record Plant). Are Alesis recorders not professional? Are Mackie recorders not professional? Do you really believe that every pro musician in the world uses MAC, and everyone else is an amateur? Breking News! There's a large world out there beyond MAC.

Love the enthusiasm, as much as you want to be right, you've shown that you nothing about quality and effectiveness in recordings. Record labels have shunned from the analog recording process because editing, cleanup, and everything else is far easier in digital (particularly ProTools). Record labels don't like wasting money. Its just quicker to just use a studio that has quality mics, preamps, EQ, compression, and superior standalone ADC like BLA or Apogee offerings. Mix it elsewhere with a PT HD system for dirt cheap. Hand the mixes over to a mastering engineer who uses great DACs and uses analog tape in their process for their analog tape saturation. Go home, the record is done for a fraction of what you're telling me. No one cares if the Recording studio has an X-48 Tascam.

We all know that Studer has the best ADC on a console. Thats why Korea bought six D950 M2 consoles in 2003, and thats why they bought 6 more.

lol, are you sure you want to have this conversation with me?



ProTools is the defacto standard largely because it was one of the pioneers of the digital audio field.
It's admirable that you measure ProTools as the only possibility for digital audio. However I don't believe that EVERY State and Government Accredited college of Audio Engineering uses only Digidesign equipment and Macintosh computers. In fact, I'm willing to bet that if you review the entire market, more pro-musicians use Windows-based solutions than Mac based solutions. Ask companies like Sony, Tascam, Roland, Mackie, Steinberg, Sonar if they are "bust". I don't think so.

Digidesign isn't just the pioneer of digital audio, its the market leader. I don't even know what you're going on about now.



This is a typical dismissive attitude towards other Os'es that is prevalent with MAC elitist users. I don't happen to accept that because something if free, it must be second-rate or at a "handsaw" level. Isn't the MAC OS-X taking advantage of an open-source (free) kernel. Hardly a handsaw.

What? Are you confused. Mac OSX is fully Unix BSD compliant, but what does that have to do with the fact that ProTools or nothing that compares to its technological girth is even remotely available for ANY FreeBSD distro?


As I stated originally, Digidesign could release an open-source version to the linux community. Why would that hurt them? Their largest customer base probably wouldn't dream of straying beyond the OS-X umbrella.

I disagree, but ok.


I'd hate to see the Linux community adopt "trade secrets".

I wasn't talking about the linux community. I was talking about Digidesign's competitors.




I'm sorry but ProTools isn't the only game in town. For example, a recent YES DVD and album was mixed on Sony Vegas Pro - which happens to be a fantastic multi-track audio workstation, supporting VST plugins, plus an excellent multi-camera Video Editor, SOmething that is beyond the capability of ProTools. For Video editing, Vegas, with its real-time effects editing, forced Final Cut Pro and Premiere to play catch-up for years. Of course, you wouldn't know this if you don't venture beyond the world of MAC. Also, consider Sony Acid for loop-based music generation. Another PROFESSIONAL music package that forced Apple to play-catch-up. Acid is the basis for many Hip Hop hit records, which happens to be the biggest selling music genre. Maybe I need to smell the coffee, but I can avoid drinking the Protools kool-aid.

Sony Vegas? Really? Whats next? Abelton Live for Eagles concerts?

Acid basis for Hip Hop records? Biggest selling music genre?

Are you sure about your statements there? I'll give you a chance to revise them.

[abyssius]

Love the enthusiasm, as much as you want to be right, you've shown that you nothing about quality and effectiveness in recordings.
So there has never been a recording made with quality and effectiveness before ProTools and digital? You're showing your intelligence here. If you insist that there are NO professional analog studios in existence. How can I argue with that? It is fantastically wrong, but you'll never acknowledge this. Maybe in your world the movie industry doesn't use 35mm film any more either. After all, digital is blah, blah blah... And, of course professional artists don't use canvas and paint anymore... it's inefficient, when there's PhotoShop...


Record labels have shunned from the analog recording process because editing, cleanup, and everything else is far easier in digital (particularly ProTools). But not necessarily ProTools...


Record labels don't like wasting money. Its just quicker to just use a studio that has quality mics, preamps, EQ, compression, and superior standalone ADC like BLA or Apogee offerings.
I agree with the quicker part. But, as for "Record Labels don't like wasting money..." I wasn't aware that music was only produced by record labels under their criteria for creating music. This is sad...


Mix it elsewhere with a PT HD system for dirt cheap.
Or, mix it with any of several other HD systems available...


Hand the mixes over to a mastering engineer who uses great DACs and uses analog tape in their process for their analog tape saturation.
You love to use absolutisms. Not everyone chooses to produce music like this. For example, some producers don't bother with the analog tape saturation. Is this not true?


Go home, the record is done for a fraction of what you're telling me.

Thankfully, not every musician considers cost the top criteria for producing their art form. FYI, the music industry isn't just commercial record labels. IMHO, those "labels" are dinosaurs that are pretty much ignored by many musicians nowadays. Where I'm from, most of the music is made by independent producers/artists. If they happen to choose to sell their music to a label, that label doesn't care how it was made, or how long it took, or what it cost, because more than likely they are not going to pay for the production anyway. If they like the product, they're going to talk about distribution, etc. There are many facets to the professional music industry (you might not be aware of this).


No one cares if the Recording studio has an X-48 Tascam.
The Tascam Sales Department does.


We all know that Studer has the best ADC on a console. Thats why Korea bought six D950 M2 consoles in 2003, and thats why they bought 6 more.
Is all this supposed to establish your industry credentials? Wow, is there a better ADC than what comes with a ProTools system?


Digidesign isn't just the pioneer of digital audio, its the market leader. I don't even know what you're going on about now.
I think that "digital audio" is a pretty wide swath to make a claim like this. Many different devices and systems fall within the "digital audio" umbrella, even soundblaster cards.


What? Are you confused. Mac OSX is fully Unix BSD compliant, but what does that have to do with the fact that ProTools or nothing that compares to its technological girth is even remotely available for ANY FreeBSD distro? I don't know.


I disagree, but ok.
Ok


I wasn't talking about the linux community. I was talking about Digidesign's competitors.
I'm curious. What technology did Digidesign actually invent?



Sony Vegas? Really? Whats next? Abelton Live for Eagles concerts? Is this sarcasm? Do you know anything about Sony Vegas?


Acid basis for Hip Hop records? Biggest selling music genre?

Are you sure about your statements there? I'll give you a chance to revise them.

Unlike you, I wasn't talking in absolutisms. Is it your contention that Acid has never been used to produce Hip Hop? I will revise the Hip Hop sales statement, however. This probably belongs to Country music. However, in NY, Hip Hop/R&B is more the rule.

[domokunrox]

So there has never been a recording made with quality and effectiveness before ProTools and digital? You're showing your intelligence here. If you insist that there are NO professional analog studios in existence. How can I argue with that? It is fantastically wrong, but you'll never acknowledge this. Maybe in your world the movie industry doesn't use 35mm film any more either. After all, digital is blah, blah blah... And, of course professional artists don't use canvas and paint anymore... it's inefficient, when there's PhotoShop...

No, of course there has been professional recordings before digital existed, but that was a day and age where bands were well rehearsed and talented. Today, anyone could play drums like Steely Dan. I didn't say there are NO professional analog studios in existence, don't be silly. There are plenty of 24 trk machines out there in studios, but few people take that route these days. Why is this so hard for you to grasp?


But not necessarily ProTools...

Until there is another DAW that can edit and fix the same drums to be like a Steely Dan song in 10 minutes, the answer is, "Yes, mostly in ProTools".


I agree with the quicker part. But, as for "Record Labels don't like wasting money..." I wasn't aware that music was only produced by record labels under their criteria for creating music. This is sad...

I'm glad you finally agree and see it my way. But are you suggesting that independent artists know pre production to handing redbook standard CDs to replication factories and everything in between? and never ever screw up somewhere? Don't get me wrong, I've had a lot of fun working on DIY records or demos. There is a difference between creating music and recording music to reach listeners through mediums like TV and national radio. One is fun, the other is fun sometimes but someone else's money is pushing the project forward. We live in a day and age where you can have very little or no talent and not know a thing about the making a record and get to number 1 on Billboard. You know a record is professional if you can get make Ashley Simpson or Hannah Montana sound that awesome. They're weren't DIY projects, I assure you.



Or, mix it with any of several other HD systems available...

Care to explain what other HD system can playback 192 simultaneous tracks with delay compensation and sample for sample accuracy?


You love to use absolutisms. Not everyone chooses to produce music like this. For example, some producers don't bother with the analog tape saturation. Is this not true?

You'd be stupid not to for most cases. Unless you like the harsh, cold way that pure digital recordings sound like. You'd be a complete idiot if you didn't use analog tape or hire someone somewhere who does this for mastering Rap/Hip Hop/R&B.


Thankfully, not every musician considers cost the top criteria for producing their art form. FYI, the music industry isn't just commercial record labels. IMHO, those "labels" are dinosaurs that are pretty much ignored by many musicians nowadays. Where I'm from, most of the music is made by independent producers/artists. If they happen to choose to sell their music to a label, that label doesn't care how it was made, or how long it took, or what it cost, because more than likely they are not going to pay for the production anyway. If they like the product, they're going to talk about distribution, etc. There are many facets to the professional music industry (you might not be aware of this).

I agree with what I bolded, but the rest is a tangent of what you think I don't know. I actually have a Christian contemporary record I've tracked and overdubbed that is going through this process right now.


The Tascam Sales Department does.
Too bad most people look at a studio gearlist and go, "What the hell is that? Where is ProTools? I want HD3"


Is all this supposed to establish your industry credentials? Wow, is there a better ADC than what comes with a ProTools system?

No, but I always make a point to everyone that I didn't start off in this industry as a hobbist. I've paid my dues like anyone else, but I was fortunate in being able to learn the science behind it and apply it daily knowing full well why I did something. Fortunate enough that someone like Jack Douglas has sat behind me and given me good advice at the end of the day. I'm not sure if your last question is sarcasm, but the answer is yes.


I think that "digital audio" is a pretty wide swath to make a claim like this. Many different devices and systems fall within the "digital audio" umbrella, even soundblaster cards.

Are you suggesting that your soundblaster card has more girth then an PT HD core card?


I'm curious. What technology did Digidesign actually invent?

I don't know, How about TDM and RTAS for starters?



Is this sarcasm? Do you know anything about Sony Vegas?

Of course it is. Vegas is a joke for multitrack audio. Great for capturing and syncing video and audio. Not so great for mixing audio. You must be confused at your previous statement. I highly doubt they captured multitrack audio and mixed it there instead of exporting it to a REAL DAW. I could be wrong and they did do it the way you think they did, but man did they clock hours. I would have LOVED getting paid for that project.


Unlike you, I wasn't talking in absolutisms. Is it your contention that Acid has never been used to produce Hip Hop? I will revise the Hip Hop sales statement, however. This probably belongs to Country music. However, in NY, Hip Hop/R&B is more the rule.

No, I'm sure that Acid has been used to produce Hip Hop. Acid was actually my first DAW back when I used contact and Lav mics in my bedroom at my parents house. I had lots of fun automating volume and pan.

I don't know if its obvious, but it sounds like you do Hip Hop/R&B and I'm certain that music production is different there. We do things different here on the West coast. Since you like analog so much, it surprises me that you've openly told me that tape saturation isn't necessary or something to that extent. Don't take this as being a prick or anything because I'm trying to show you something. Do you have access to a 1/4" or 1/2" tape machine? Do you know how to BIAS it? Can you explain what it does in your own words? Do you know why its a excellent production tool for Hip Hop? I'd gladly tell you, but I don't want to be a prick and make assumptions about you.

[thisllub]

Fortunate enough that someone like Jack Douglas has sat behind me and given me good advice at the end of the day.

Ha.
It is 5:30 am here and it took me about a minute to realise you didn't mean Jack Daniels.

[abyssius]

No, of course there has been professional recordings before digital existed, but that was a day and age where bands were well rehearsed and talented. Today, anyone could play drums like Steely Dan. I didn't say there are NO professional analog studios in existence, don't be silly. There are plenty of 24 trk machines out there in studios, but few people take that route these days. Why is this so hard for you to grasp?



Until there is another DAW that can edit and fix the same drums to be like a Steely Dan song in 10 minutes, the answer is, "Yes, mostly in ProTools".



I'm glad you finally agree and see it my way. But are you suggesting that independent artists know pre production to handing redbook standard CDs to replication factories and everything in between? and never ever screw up somewhere? Don't get me wrong, I've had a lot of fun working on DIY records or demos. There is a difference between creating music and recording music to reach listeners through mediums like TV and national radio. One is fun, the other is fun sometimes but someone else's money is pushing the project forward. We live in a day and age where you can have very little or no talent and not know a thing about the making a record and get to number 1 on Billboard. You know a record is professional if you can get make Ashley Simpson or Hannah Montana sound that awesome. They're weren't DIY projects, I assure you.




Care to explain what other HD system can playback 192 simultaneous tracks with delay compensation and sample for sample accuracy?



You'd be stupid not to for most cases. Unless you like the harsh, cold way that pure digital recordings sound like. You'd be a complete idiot if you didn't use analog tape or hire someone somewhere who does this for mastering Rap/Hip Hop/R&B.



I agree with what I bolded, but the rest is a tangent of what you think I don't know. I actually have a Christian contemporary record I've tracked and overdubbed that is going through this process right now.


Too bad most people look at a studio gearlist and go, "What the hell is that? Where is ProTools? I want HD3"



No, but I always make a point to everyone that I didn't start off in this industry as a hobbist. I've paid my dues like anyone else, but I was fortunate in being able to learn the science behind it and apply it daily knowing full well why I did something. Fortunate enough that someone like Jack Douglas has sat behind me and given me good advice at the end of the day. I'm not sure if your last question is sarcasm, but the answer is yes.



Are you suggesting that your soundblaster card has more girth then an PT HD core card?



I don't know, How about TDM and RTAS for starters?




Of course it is. Vegas is a joke for multitrack audio. Great for capturing and syncing video and audio. Not so great for mixing audio. You must be confused at your previous statement. I highly doubt they captured multitrack audio and mixed it there instead of exporting it to a REAL DAW. I could be wrong and they did do it the way you think they did, but man did they clock hours. I would have LOVED getting paid for that project.



No, I'm sure that Acid has been used to produce Hip Hop. Acid was actually my first DAW back when I used contact and Lav mics in my bedroom at my parents house. I had lots of fun automating volume and pan.

I don't know if its obvious, but it sounds like you do Hip Hop/R&B and I'm certain that music production is different there. We do things different here on the West coast. Since you like analog so much, it surprises me that you've openly told me that tape saturation isn't necessary or something to that extent. Don't take this as being a prick or anything because I'm trying to show you something. Do you have access to a 1/4" or 1/2" tape machine? Do you know how to BIAS it? Can you explain what it does in your own words? Do you know why its a excellent production tool for Hip Hop? I'd gladly tell you, but I don't want to be a prick and make assumptions about you.

I mentioned not using tape, because I know of a mastering lab whose engineer claims to use modeling software that perfectly reproduces the tape head distortion that some describe as "warmness", etc. I am not an audio engineer. Actually my job is video editing, although I am also a musician of many years, and work directly with audio engineers. I agree with you about musicianship. I work exclusively with live video and audio production - which means I work exclusively with musicians that can actually play, and don't need digital correction for drum beats, or vocal pitch correction, etc. I must admit I first took you for a major label exec. However, I'm pleased to hear that you produce independent projects, especially Christian contemporary, as I focus largely on Gospel music myself.

I don't agree with your assessment of Vegas, but that's Ok. I also don't agree that Protools is the "market leader". It is the market leader on a computer platform that I'll be kind and estimate may have 8 percent of the total computer market. There are millions of musicians that fall into the other 92% category that use other solutions besides ProTools to achieve what I consider excellent results. If you believe that is not possible, then either you are extremely biased or you should consider expanding your horizons.

Back to the subject of Linux. You stated in an earlier post that your motivation was to use Linux to save some money, not promote the use of Linux. That's not a motivation I'll get behind. However, since Linux is open-source, the Digidesign engineers could freely use the kernel to develop OS software for Protools. However, as stated earlier that's not what they do.

Finally, to use your technique, are you sure you want to claim that Digidesign invented time division multiplexing?

[domokunrox]

I mentioned not using tape, because I know of a mastering lab whose engineer claims to use modeling software that perfectly reproduces the tape head distortion that some describe as "warmness", etc. I am not an audio engineer. Actually my job is video editing, although I am also a musician of many years, and work directly with audio engineers. I agree with you about musicianship. I work exclusively with live video and audio production - which means I work exclusively with musicians that can actually play, and don't need digital correction for drum beats, or vocal pitch correction, etc. I must admit I first took you for a major label exec. However, I'm pleased to hear that you produce independent projects, especially Christian contemporary, as I focus largely on Gospel music myself.

I don't agree with your assessment of Vegas, but that's Ok. I also don't agree that Protools is the "market leader". It is the market leader on a computer platform that I'll be kind and estimate may have 8 percent of the total computer market. There are millions of musicians that fall into the other 92% category that use other solutions besides ProTools to achieve what I consider excellent results. If you believe that is not possible, then either you are extremely biased or you should consider expanding your horizons.

Back to the subject of Linux. You stated in an earlier post that your motivation was to use Linux to save some money, not promote the use of Linux. That's not a motivation I'll get behind. However, since Linux is open-source, the Digidesign engineers could freely use the kernel to develop OS software for Protools. However, as stated earlier that's not what they do.

Finally, to use your technique, are you sure you want to claim that Digidesign invented time division multiplexing?

You know a mastering engineer who claims to perfectly reproduce the use of analog tape with software? I'm sorry, but hes pulling your leg. The software emulation available is very good, but by all means not perfect at all.

Look, heres my final comment about what I think about other solutions aside from ProTools. They produce results, but Digidesign and ProTools is in a league of their own. Don't take me as biased. I have a Logic 7 certification. I fully enjoy MaxMSP on my own time. I've actually found great use in Nuendo for its distinct mixdown.

Again, you're confused. My motivation in using Linux isn't to save money. Its a great OS. Its easy to use, and free to install and update. But on the subject that you say Digidesign doesn't make software for the kernal, but you know why, right? Creating programs and not sharing source code on an open platform gets them in legal trouble.

lol, sorry, no one is going to say that Digidesign invented TDM as in TDM itself. Multiplexing in general was probably a Bell labs invention. What I was talking about was TDM in the manner that Digidesign has created. Without being too technical about it. TDM as implemented by ProTools HD, is a proprietary interconnect based on time-division multiplexing.

[Cope57]

You could always find something that will run natively on Linux instead of trying to get Windows software to work in WINE.

Sound & MIDI Software For Linux (http://linux-sound.org/)