[LMMS-devel] LMMS vs qtractor

Discussion:

Dan MacDonald

2014-01-14 10:45:48 UTC

Hi list!

First, I want to say that I'm happy to see the renewed interest in LMMS'
development, I wish it the best and I look forward to seeing it improve.
However, after reading many of the recent posts on this list I get the
distinct impression that many people on this list either don't know about
qtractor or haven't used it properly recently and I think thats a shame.

Let me summarise:

Advantages of LMMS over qtractor:

* LMMS is available for Windows, OSX and Linux/BSD etc

* LMMS has a range of integrated instruments

Advantages of qtractor over LMMS

* qtractor supports every plugin format in use on Linux. This means you can
use fantastic synths like Loomer's Aspect. TAL Noizemaker and other great
plugins like Linuxsampler, samplv1, CALF etc.

* qtractor is not only a fully featured MIDI sequencer (complete with
proper undo etc.) but also a moderately powerful audio production tool.
Whilst not as powerful for audio as Ardour, it is good enough for most
semi-pro users for audio production

* qtractor now has fully featured automation for both audio and MIDI,
complete with copy/paste etc.

* qtractor is likely the most lightweight of all modern DAWs - its binary
is barely over 1MB

* qtractors dev is friendly and very responsive when it comes to fixing
bugs. Its rare for Rui to take longer than 24 hours to fix a reported bug
in qtr.

As I've already stated, qtractor is Linux only and will remain so unless
someone else steps up to do all the work to port it to other OSs but it
seems most people on this list are Linux users so I don't understand why
they aren't already using qtractor, presuming they're aware of it? The
plugins I've mentioned are much more powerful than the integrated
instruments of LMMS so that is not a draw for me.

I just had to get that off my chest. I'd like to see LMMS become a real
alternative to qtractor but as far as I'm concerned its got a lot of
catching up to do!

Best of luck improving LMMS!

Dan

Tobiasz Karoń

2014-01-14 14:17:43 UTC

Permalink

I've tried qtractor once years ago, but I couldn't easily figure out what
does what - LMMS was much more intuitive and easy to learn for me (as a
former Fruity Loops user).

Post by Dan MacDonald
Hi list!
First, I want to say that I'm happy to see the renewed interest in LMMS'
development, I wish it the best and I look forward to seeing it improve.
However, after reading many of the recent posts on this list I get the
distinct impression that many people on this list either don't know about
qtractor or haven't used it properly recently and I think thats a shame.
* LMMS is available for Windows, OSX and Linux/BSD etc
* LMMS has a range of integrated instruments
Advantages of qtractor over LMMS
* qtractor supports every plugin format in use on Linux. This means you
can use fantastic synths like Loomer's Aspect. TAL Noizemaker and other
great plugins like Linuxsampler, samplv1, CALF etc.
* qtractor is not only a fully featured MIDI sequencer (complete with
proper undo etc.) but also a moderately powerful audio production tool.
Whilst not as powerful for audio as Ardour, it is good enough for most
semi-pro users for audio production
* qtractor now has fully featured automation for both audio and MIDI,
complete with copy/paste etc.
* qtractor is likely the most lightweight of all modern DAWs - its binary
is barely over 1MB
* qtractors dev is friendly and very responsive when it comes to fixing
bugs. Its rare for Rui to take longer than 24 hours to fix a reported bug
in qtr.
As I've already stated, qtractor is Linux only and will remain so unless
someone else steps up to do all the work to port it to other OSs but it
seems most people on this list are Linux users so I don't understand why
they aren't already using qtractor, presuming they're aware of it? The
plugins I've mentioned are much more powerful than the integrated
instruments of LMMS so that is not a draw for me.
I just had to get that off my chest. I'd like to see LMMS become a real
alternative to qtractor but as far as I'm concerned its got a lot of
catching up to do!
Best of luck improving LMMS!
Dan
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services.
Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For
Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between.
Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
LMMS-devel mailing list
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lmms-devel

--
Tobiasz *unfa*

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GIT/MU/P d->-- s+:-(--)> a? C++(+++)>$ ULC+(++)>$ !P? L+++>++++$ E? W++>$
!N-? !o--? K-? !w-- O? !M-- V? PS++ PE++ !Y+ !PGP+? !t(+) 5? !X !R+ tv
b+>+++ DI>+ D+ G e h-->- !r y--()
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

Dan MacDonald

2014-01-14 17:03:37 UTC

Permalink

Hi Tobiasz!

qtractor has one of the best PDF manuals of any FLOSS program - I'd highly
recommend you refer to that if you have problems working it out. Its linked
on qtr's homepage.

There are also a number of instructional vids on YouTube if that works
better for you.

Dan

Post by Tobiasz KaroÅ
I've tried qtractor once years ago, but I couldn't easily figure out what
does what - LMMS was much more intuitive and easy to learn for me (as a
former Fruity Loops user).

--
Tobiasz *unfa*
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GIT/MU/P d->-- s+:-(--)> a? C++(+++)>$ ULC+(++)>$ !P? L+++>++++$ E? W++>$
!N-? !o--? K-? !w-- O? !M-- V? PS++ PE++ !Y+ !PGP+? !t(+) 5? !X !R+ tv
b+>+++ DI>+ D+ G e h-->- !r y--()
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

Tobiasz Karoń

2014-01-14 17:07:07 UTC

Permalink

Thanks!
However I'll probably be more focused on improving LMMS though ;)

Is qtractor able to use ZynAddSubFX?

Post by Dan MacDonald
Hi Tobiasz!
qtractor has one of the best PDF manuals of any FLOSS program - I'd highly
recommend you refer to that if you have problems working it out. Its linked
on qtr's homepage.
There are also a number of instructional vids on YouTube if that works
better for you.
Dan

Post by Tobiasz KaroÅ
I've tried qtractor once years ago, but I couldn't easily figure out what
does what - LMMS was much more intuitive and easy to learn for me (as a
former Fruity Loops user).

Post by Dan MacDonald
Hi list!
First, I want to say that I'm happy to see the renewed interest in LMMS'
development, I wish it the best and I look forward to seeing it improve.
However, after reading many of the recent posts on this list I get the
distinct impression that many people on this list either don't know about
qtractor or haven't used it properly recently and I think thats a shame.
* LMMS is available for Windows, OSX and Linux/BSD etc
* LMMS has a range of integrated instruments
Advantages of qtractor over LMMS
* qtractor supports every plugin format in use on Linux. This means you
can use fantastic synths like Loomer's Aspect. TAL Noizemaker and other
great plugins like Linuxsampler, samplv1, CALF etc.
* qtractor is not only a fully featured MIDI sequencer (complete with
proper undo etc.) but also a moderately powerful audio production tool.
Whilst not as powerful for audio as Ardour, it is good enough for most
semi-pro users for audio production
* qtractor now has fully featured automation for both audio and MIDI,
complete with copy/paste etc.
* qtractor is likely the most lightweight of all modern DAWs - its
binary is barely over 1MB
* qtractors dev is friendly and very responsive when it comes to fixing
bugs. Its rare for Rui to take longer than 24 hours to fix a reported bug
in qtr.
As I've already stated, qtractor is Linux only and will remain so unless
someone else steps up to do all the work to port it to other OSs but it
seems most people on this list are Linux users so I don't understand why
they aren't already using qtractor, presuming they're aware of it? The
plugins I've mentioned are much more powerful than the integrated
instruments of LMMS so that is not a draw for me.
I just had to get that off my chest. I'd like to see LMMS become a real
alternative to qtractor but as far as I'm concerned its got a lot of
catching up to do!
Best of luck improving LMMS!
Dan
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services.
Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For
Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between.
Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
LMMS-devel mailing list
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lmms-devel

--
Tobiasz *unfa*
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GIT/MU/P d->-- s+:-(--)> a? C++(+++)>$ ULC+(++)>$ !P? L+++>++++$ E? W++>$
!N-? !o--? K-? !w-- O? !M-- V? PS++ PE++ !Y+ !PGP+? !t(+) 5? !X !R+ tv
b+>+++ DI>+ D+ G e h-->- !r y--()
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

Dan MacDonald

2014-01-14 17:16:18 UTC

Permalink

Yes, you can use Zyn from within qtractor either as an LV2 plugin or
connect it externally via a session manager like NSM. I'd recommend the
former.

Have you ever tried TAL Noizemaker? I think its much better than Zyn,
certainly UI wise there's no competition IMO!

Post by Tobiasz KaroÅ
Thanks!
However I'll probably be more focused on improving LMMS though ;)
Is qtractor able to use ZynAddSubFX?

Post by Dan MacDonald
Hi Tobiasz!
qtractor has one of the best PDF manuals of any FLOSS program - I'd
highly recommend you refer to that if you have problems working it out. Its
linked on qtr's homepage.
There are also a number of instructional vids on YouTube if that works
better for you.
Dan

Post by Tobiasz KaroÅ
I've tried qtractor once years ago, but I couldn't easily figure out
what does what - LMMS was much more intuitive and easy to learn for me (as
a former Fruity Loops user).

Post by Dan MacDonald
Hi list!
First, I want to say that I'm happy to see the renewed interest in
LMMS' development, I wish it the best and I look forward to seeing it
improve. However, after reading many of the recent posts on this list I get
the distinct impression that many people on this list either don't know
about qtractor or haven't used it properly recently and I think thats a
shame.
* LMMS is available for Windows, OSX and Linux/BSD etc
* LMMS has a range of integrated instruments
Advantages of qtractor over LMMS
* qtractor supports every plugin format in use on Linux. This means you
can use fantastic synths like Loomer's Aspect. TAL Noizemaker and other
great plugins like Linuxsampler, samplv1, CALF etc.
* qtractor is not only a fully featured MIDI sequencer (complete with
proper undo etc.) but also a moderately powerful audio production tool.
Whilst not as powerful for audio as Ardour, it is good enough for most
semi-pro users for audio production
* qtractor now has fully featured automation for both audio and MIDI,
complete with copy/paste etc.
* qtractor is likely the most lightweight of all modern DAWs - its
binary is barely over 1MB
* qtractors dev is friendly and very responsive when it comes to fixing
bugs. Its rare for Rui to take longer than 24 hours to fix a reported bug
in qtr.
As I've already stated, qtractor is Linux only and will remain so
unless someone else steps up to do all the work to port it to other OSs but
it seems most people on this list are Linux users so I don't understand why
they aren't already using qtractor, presuming they're aware of it? The
plugins I've mentioned are much more powerful than the integrated
instruments of LMMS so that is not a draw for me.
I just had to get that off my chest. I'd like to see LMMS become a real
alternative to qtractor but as far as I'm concerned its got a lot of
catching up to do!
Best of luck improving LMMS!
Dan
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services.
Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For
Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between.
Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
LMMS-devel mailing list
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lmms-devel

--
Tobiasz *unfa*
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GIT/MU/P d->-- s+:-(--)> a? C++(+++)>$ ULC+(++)>$ !P? L+++>++++$ E?
W++>$ !N-? !o--? K-? !w-- O? !M-- V? PS++ PE++ !Y+ !PGP+? !t(+) 5? !X !R+
tv b+>+++ DI>+ D+ G e h-->- !r y--()
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

--
Tobiasz *unfa*
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GIT/MU/P d->-- s+:-(--)> a? C++(+++)>$ ULC+(++)>$ !P? L+++>++++$ E? W++>$
!N-? !o--? K-? !w-- O? !M-- V? PS++ PE++ !Y+ !PGP+? !t(+) 5? !X !R+ tv
b+>+++ DI>+ D+ G e h-->- !r y--()
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

Tobiasz Karoń

2014-01-14 22:09:53 UTC

Permalink

I've spent *years* now *studying* *ZynAddSubFX*, so I know it pretty well.
Looking at TAL Noizemaker quickly makes me want to say that you can't even
compare these synths - however I might be greatly wrong. TAL's capabilities
look to me more like Synth1 VST. Zyn is capable of making extremely complex
sounds layering virtualy unlimited amount of voices...

TAL for sure has better-looking GUI than Zyn, though ;)

If you want to hear what ZASFX can do, put my latest album on the deck -
the instrumental layer is 100% ZynAddSubFX inside LMMS (yes, drums too).
With some additonal plugins in the mixer but that for mixing mostly.
http://jamen.do/l/a128977/

Post by Dan MacDonald
Yes, you can use Zyn from within qtractor either as an LV2 plugin or
connect it externally via a session manager like NSM. I'd recommend the
former.
Have you ever tried TAL Noizemaker? I think its much better than Zyn,
certainly UI wise there's no competition IMO!

Post by Tobiasz KaroÅ
Thanks!
However I'll probably be more focused on improving LMMS though ;)
Is qtractor able to use ZynAddSubFX?

Post by Dan MacDonald
Hi Tobiasz!
qtractor has one of the best PDF manuals of any FLOSS program - I'd
highly recommend you refer to that if you have problems working it out. Its
linked on qtr's homepage.
There are also a number of instructional vids on YouTube if that works
better for you.
Dan

Post by Tobiasz KaroÅ
I've tried qtractor once years ago, but I couldn't easily figure out
what does what - LMMS was much more intuitive and easy to learn for me (as
a former Fruity Loops user).

Post by Dan MacDonald
Hi list!
First, I want to say that I'm happy to see the renewed interest in
LMMS' development, I wish it the best and I look forward to seeing it
improve. However, after reading many of the recent posts on this list I get
the distinct impression that many people on this list either don't know
about qtractor or haven't used it properly recently and I think thats a
shame.
* LMMS is available for Windows, OSX and Linux/BSD etc
* LMMS has a range of integrated instruments
Advantages of qtractor over LMMS
* qtractor supports every plugin format in use on Linux. This means
you can use fantastic synths like Loomer's Aspect. TAL Noizemaker and other
great plugins like Linuxsampler, samplv1, CALF etc.
* qtractor is not only a fully featured MIDI sequencer (complete with
proper undo etc.) but also a moderately powerful audio production tool.
Whilst not as powerful for audio as Ardour, it is good enough for most
semi-pro users for audio production
* qtractor now has fully featured automation for both audio and MIDI,
complete with copy/paste etc.
* qtractor is likely the most lightweight of all modern DAWs - its
binary is barely over 1MB
* qtractors dev is friendly and very responsive when it comes to
fixing bugs. Its rare for Rui to take longer than 24 hours to fix a
reported bug in qtr.
As I've already stated, qtractor is Linux only and will remain so
unless someone else steps up to do all the work to port it to other OSs but
it seems most people on this list are Linux users so I don't understand why
they aren't already using qtractor, presuming they're aware of it? The
plugins I've mentioned are much more powerful than the integrated
instruments of LMMS so that is not a draw for me.
I just had to get that off my chest. I'd like to see LMMS become a
real alternative to qtractor but as far as I'm concerned its got a lot of
catching up to do!
Best of luck improving LMMS!
Dan
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services.
Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For
Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between.
Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
LMMS-devel mailing list
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lmms-devel

--
Tobiasz *unfa*
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GIT/MU/P d->-- s+:-(--)> a? C++(+++)>$ ULC+(++)>$ !P? L+++>++++$ E?
W++>$ !N-? !o--? K-? !w-- O? !M-- V? PS++ PE++ !Y+ !PGP+? !t(+) 5? !X !R+
tv b+>+++ DI>+ D+ G e h-->- !r y--()
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

--
Tobiasz *unfa*
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GIT/MU/P d->-- s+:-(--)> a? C++(+++)>$ ULC+(++)>$ !P? L+++>++++$ E? W++>$
!N-? !o--? K-? !w-- O? !M-- V? PS++ PE++ !Y+ !PGP+? !t(+) 5? !X !R+ tv
b+>+++ DI>+ D+ G e h-->- !r y--()
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

Rob Kudla

2014-01-14 16:40:16 UTC

Permalink

Post by Dan MacDonald
seems most people on this list are Linux users so I don't understand why
they aren't already using qtractor, presuming they're aware of it?

1. I can build entire songs in LMMS project files, which I can then email
to other people or backup safely without adding

$ dpkg -l >projectname-possible-dependencies.txt

to my workflow, and have done so. It's too bad that you don't find its
built-in instruments useful, but most of us here do. It allows me to get
around the problem that the rest of the Linux audio community has tried
again and again, with initiatives like LASH and LADISH, to combat, and
they've failed every single time. So, using qtractor or any other MIDI
sequencer without its own instruments is essentially like going back to the
bad old days of the '80s for me, when I had a couple racks of synthesizers
and had to remember the patches and settings (and save sysex files, in some
cases) for each one of them in order to reconstruct a track.

2. I can run LMMS without remembering how to start and configure JACK. I
just launched qtractor and it immediately complained I had no JACK or ALSA
midi server running, requiring a restart after I had jumped through its
hoops. One of my biggest issues with most Linux audio production tools is
that they require you to learn a whole workflow (start JACK server, set up
audio routing, set up MIDI routing) before you hear a single note, while
with LMMS you start the program, double-click a track and hear a note in
the default instrument.

3. With LMMS, when you're happy with what you have, Project/Render will
make you a wav file of your song. With every other Linux MIDI program I've
used, and unless I totally missed something in its interface, qtractor is
no exception, you have to record the song in real time and hope for no JACK
hiccups, which got very, very, VERY tedious when I was in the final stages
of tweaking a track.

LMMS is not meant to be a MIDI sequencer or HDR. It occupies the space
between MOD trackers and MIDI sequencers, having its own built-in sound
generation options that go far beyond sample playback, but totally capable
of producing a track from start to finish. I'm told this is similar to the
Fruity Loops workflow, but Fruity Loops appeared after I'd already dumped
Windows. Yes, the Unix way is to have 10 different tools connected via IPC
-- on the command line it's pipes, in the audio world it's JACK and MIDI.
That's great on the command line where you can copy and paste a huge
pipeline of commands or save them as a shell script, but when the 10
different tools are all individual X programs, it's a huge pain in the ass.

That workflow also impedes my creativity hugely. I couldn't get through a
single song from 2002, when I recorded my last track in the late, great
Buzz before ditching Windows, until 2009 when I started using LMMS
seriously. I have five old MIDI synthesizers in the den. They haven't been
powered up since I moved into this house six years ago, because I can do
more with LMMS than I can with any of them (a CZ-101, a DX7, an M1, and two
newer sample-playback workstations I inherited when my mom died). My piano
has been on, but I'd only really use that for input; I have piano sample
sets that sound far better and there's no analog barrier between its
waveforms and my song.

Apart from the lack of arbitrary routing, to me LMMS is the closest thing
Linux has to Buzz, and that's what I've used LMMS to replace. When I'm
recording a song based on guitar or piano, sure, I use something else, but
usually it's Audacity because I don't need or want real-time effects.

So, the last thing I want is for LMMS to be more like qtractor (or MUSE or
Rosegarden or any of the other MIDI sequencers I banged my head on before
finding LMMS).

Why is this on the devel list, again?

Rob

Dan MacDonald

2014-01-14 17:13:54 UTC

Permalink

Hi Rob!

Aha! The eternal 'I don't like JACK' argument arises yet again! This is the
most common complaint raised against Linux audio. The truth of the matter
for most is that JACK is very useful to have around once you've got your
head round it and most learn to love it pretty quickly - its very powerful
and the unquestioned standard in Linux audio. Thats not to say its for
everyone of course. What is? Distros like KXStudio and AVLinux remove most
of the pain of getting JACK configured, should that be an issue.

qtractor allows you to save projects as .qtz files which wraps everything
up required to move a project from one machine to another, bar plugins of
course. This is a common pitfall of plugin-based DAWs, thats true, buts its
not a big deal if you stick to using freely available plugins available in
most distro repos.

You should note I never suggested LMMS should try to become like qtractor -
I'm not advocating that at all! I just wanted to make people on this list
aware that Linux users already have a great FLOSS sequencer/DAW that is
good enough for most workflows/users. qtractor has improved a lot over the
last couple of years so I urge people to give it another go if they've not
tried it recently - thats all!

Dan

On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 4:40 PM, Rob Kudla

Post by Rob Kudla

Post by Dan MacDonald
seems most people on this list are Linux users so I don't understand why
they aren't already using qtractor, presuming they're aware of it?

1. I can build entire songs in LMMS project files, which I can then email
to other people or backup safely without adding
$ dpkg -l >projectname-possible-dependencies.txt
to my workflow, and have done so. It's too bad that you don't find its
built-in instruments useful, but most of us here do. It allows me to get
around the problem that the rest of the Linux audio community has tried
again and again, with initiatives like LASH and LADISH, to combat, and
they've failed every single time. So, using qtractor or any other MIDI
sequencer without its own instruments is essentially like going back to the
bad old days of the '80s for me, when I had a couple racks of synthesizers
and had to remember the patches and settings (and save sysex files, in some
cases) for each one of them in order to reconstruct a track.
2. I can run LMMS without remembering how to start and configure JACK. I
just launched qtractor and it immediately complained I had no JACK or ALSA
midi server running, requiring a restart after I had jumped through its
hoops. One of my biggest issues with most Linux audio production tools is
that they require you to learn a whole workflow (start JACK server, set up
audio routing, set up MIDI routing) before you hear a single note, while
with LMMS you start the program, double-click a track and hear a note in
the default instrument.
3. With LMMS, when you're happy with what you have, Project/Render will
make you a wav file of your song. With every other Linux MIDI program I've
used, and unless I totally missed something in its interface, qtractor is
no exception, you have to record the song in real time and hope for no JACK
hiccups, which got very, very, VERY tedious when I was in the final stages
of tweaking a track.
LMMS is not meant to be a MIDI sequencer or HDR. It occupies the space
between MOD trackers and MIDI sequencers, having its own built-in sound
generation options that go far beyond sample playback, but totally capable
of producing a track from start to finish. I'm told this is similar to the
Fruity Loops workflow, but Fruity Loops appeared after I'd already dumped
Windows. Yes, the Unix way is to have 10 different tools connected via IPC
-- on the command line it's pipes, in the audio world it's JACK and MIDI.
That's great on the command line where you can copy and paste a huge
pipeline of commands or save them as a shell script, but when the 10
different tools are all individual X programs, it's a huge pain in the ass.
That workflow also impedes my creativity hugely. I couldn't get through a
single song from 2002, when I recorded my last track in the late, great
Buzz before ditching Windows, until 2009 when I started using LMMS
seriously. I have five old MIDI synthesizers in the den. They haven't been
powered up since I moved into this house six years ago, because I can do
more with LMMS than I can with any of them (a CZ-101, a DX7, an M1, and two
newer sample-playback workstations I inherited when my mom died). My piano
has been on, but I'd only really use that for input; I have piano sample
sets that sound far better and there's no analog barrier between its
waveforms and my song.
Apart from the lack of arbitrary routing, to me LMMS is the closest thing
Linux has to Buzz, and that's what I've used LMMS to replace. When I'm
recording a song based on guitar or piano, sure, I use something else, but
usually it's Audacity because I don't need or want real-time effects.
So, the last thing I want is for LMMS to be more like qtractor (or MUSE or
Rosegarden or any of the other MIDI sequencers I banged my head on before
finding LMMS).
Why is this on the devel list, again?
Rob
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services.
Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For
Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between.
Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
LMMS-devel mailing list
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lmms-devel

Rob Kudla

2014-01-14 17:39:16 UTC

Permalink

Post by Dan MacDonald
Distros like KXStudio and AVLinux remove most
of the pain of getting JACK configured, should that be an issue.

"Just wipe your computer and use a different distro so that you'll like my
pet program more!" Yeah, I'll get right on that.

Post by Dan MacDonald
aware that Linux users already have a great FLOSS sequencer/DAW that is
good enough for most workflows/users.

Dan MacDonald

2014-01-14 17:46:51 UTC

Permalink

Hi Rob!

There is absolutely no need to wipe your computer and install a new distro
to get JACK running - its just easier for Linux noobs to start off with a
distro designed and optimized for audio production / JACK etc. Thats why I
mentioned it. JACK is easily installed via most distros repos with a click
or two.

How hard is it to install and then insert a plugin into a DAW? My gran
could do that. Is is really so hard for you?

qtractor is free and open source software - I'm not selling anything.

On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 5:39 PM, Rob Kudla

Post by Rob Kudla

Post by Dan MacDonald
Distros like KXStudio and AVLinux remove most
of the pain of getting JACK configured, should that be an issue.

"Just wipe your computer and use a different distro so that you'll like my
pet program more!" Yeah, I'll get right on that.

Post by Dan MacDonald
aware that Linux users already have a great FLOSS sequencer/DAW that is
good enough for most workflows/users.

You are suggesting that users of an all-in one music creation app try a
sequencer that can't even make noise on its own and requires a whole
external framework, which even you admit that people have problems with, to
do anything at all. This is like recommending vi to Microsoft Word users,
except that in this case, despite your use of the word "already", lmms
predates qtractor by at least 2 years (qtractor 0.0.1 showed up in 2007,
while lmms appeared in 2005).
LMMS is "already" "good enough" for me and most others here. Please take
your sales pitch to another list.
Rob
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services.
Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For
Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between.
Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
LMMS-devel mailing list
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lmms-devel

Vesa

2014-01-14 18:48:08 UTC

Permalink

Post by Dan MacDonald
qtractor is free and open source software - I'm not selling anything.

Israel

2014-01-15 13:51:29 UTC

Permalink

@Vesa Well said!
LMMS is something we all hold very dear, and have poured many hours of
time into. Many (ALL?) of us have spent countless hours making
incredible music that can't be made with any of the other tools we
tried. Many of us have spent countless hours digging into the actual
program, helping users, and fixing bugs.

Post by Vesa

Post by Dan MacDonald
qtractor is free and open source software - I'm not selling anything.

Regardless, talking about Qtractor is wildly off topic on an LMMS-devel
mailing list. I know your intentions are probably good, but this is the
wrong place for this discussion, and you can probably see why it would
annoy some people.
If you wish to discuss the relative merits of LMMS and Qtractor, I
suggest you take this to a more appropriate forum, for example the LMMS
community forum on Sourceforge. Thanks for understanding.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services.
Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For
Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between.
Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
LMMS-devel mailing list
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lmms-devel

--
Regards

Tobiasz Karoń

2014-01-14 22:20:16 UTC

Permalink

Dan, saying things that sound to us like "switch to qtractor" in this list
sounds at least not too polite.
However, I got your message, so I might try looking at qtractor some time
later, but now I'm focused on LMMS and dedicated to improve it, so spending
time on any other piece of software that does similar things could be at
most good for inspiration. However we have already a lot of things clearly
waiting to be done.

What would you feel if someone came to qtractor developers' mailing list
and said:
"Hey guys, I think LMMS is way beter than qtractor, you should have all
switched already!"
I'm exaggerating, but you get the point.

Post by Dan MacDonald
Hi Rob!
There is absolutely no need to wipe your computer and install a new distro
to get JACK running - its just easier for Linux noobs to start off with a
distro designed and optimized for audio production / JACK etc. Thats why I
mentioned it. JACK is easily installed via most distros repos with a click
or two.
How hard is it to install and then insert a plugin into a DAW? My gran
could do that. Is is really so hard for you?
qtractor is free and open source software - I'm not selling anything.

Post by Rob Kudla

Post by Dan MacDonald
Distros like KXStudio and AVLinux remove most
of the pain of getting JACK configured, should that be an issue.

"Just wipe your computer and use a different distro so that you'll like my
pet program more!" Yeah, I'll get right on that.

Post by Dan MacDonald
aware that Linux users already have a great FLOSS sequencer/DAW that is
good enough for most workflows/users.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services.
Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For
Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between.
Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
LMMS-devel mailing list
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lmms-devel

Israel

2014-01-15 13:27:17 UTC

Permalink

I know you don't seem to like Jack, but Guitarix/Jack/Ardour (or
Audcaity) is incredible for recording Guitar tracks.

p.s. I really liked your run down of why LMMS is so amazing.

Post by Rob Kudla

Post by Dan MacDonald
seems most people on this list are Linux users so I don't understand why
they aren't already using qtractor, presuming they're aware of it?

1. I can build entire songs in LMMS project files, which I can then email
to other people or backup safely without adding
$ dpkg -l >projectname-possible-dependencies.txt
to my workflow, and have done so. It's too bad that you don't find its
built-in instruments useful, but most of us here do. It allows me to get
around the problem that the rest of the Linux audio community has tried
again and again, with initiatives like LASH and LADISH, to combat, and
they've failed every single time. So, using qtractor or any other MIDI
sequencer without its own instruments is essentially like going back to the
bad old days of the '80s for me, when I had a couple racks of synthesizers
and had to remember the patches and settings (and save sysex files, in some
cases) for each one of them in order to reconstruct a track.
2. I can run LMMS without remembering how to start and configure JACK. I
just launched qtractor and it immediately complained I had no JACK or ALSA
midi server running, requiring a restart after I had jumped through its
hoops. One of my biggest issues with most Linux audio production tools is
that they require you to learn a whole workflow (start JACK server, set up
audio routing, set up MIDI routing) before you hear a single note, while
with LMMS you start the program, double-click a track and hear a note in
the default instrument.
3. With LMMS, when you're happy with what you have, Project/Render will
make you a wav file of your song. With every other Linux MIDI program I've
used, and unless I totally missed something in its interface, qtractor is
no exception, you have to record the song in real time and hope for no JACK
hiccups, which got very, very, VERY tedious when I was in the final stages
of tweaking a track.
LMMS is not meant to be a MIDI sequencer or HDR. It occupies the space
between MOD trackers and MIDI sequencers, having its own built-in sound
generation options that go far beyond sample playback, but totally capable
of producing a track from start to finish. I'm told this is similar to the
Fruity Loops workflow, but Fruity Loops appeared after I'd already dumped
Windows. Yes, the Unix way is to have 10 different tools connected via IPC
-- on the command line it's pipes, in the audio world it's JACK and MIDI.
That's great on the command line where you can copy and paste a huge
pipeline of commands or save them as a shell script, but when the 10
different tools are all individual X programs, it's a huge pain in the ass.
That workflow also impedes my creativity hugely. I couldn't get through a
single song from 2002, when I recorded my last track in the late, great
Buzz before ditching Windows, until 2009 when I started using LMMS
seriously. I have five old MIDI synthesizers in the den. They haven't been
powered up since I moved into this house six years ago, because I can do
more with LMMS than I can with any of them (a CZ-101, a DX7, an M1, and two
newer sample-playback workstations I inherited when my mom died). My piano
has been on, but I'd only really use that for input; I have piano sample
sets that sound far better and there's no analog barrier between its
waveforms and my song.
Apart from the lack of arbitrary routing, to me LMMS is the closest thing
Linux has to Buzz, and that's what I've used LMMS to replace. When I'm
recording a song based on guitar or piano, sure, I use something else, but
usually it's Audacity because I don't need or want real-time effects.
So, the last thing I want is for LMMS to be more like qtractor (or MUSE or
Rosegarden or any of the other MIDI sequencers I banged my head on before
finding LMMS).
Why is this on the devel list, again?
Rob
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services.
Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For
Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between.
Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
LMMS-devel mailing list
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lmms-devel

--
Regards