On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 14:50:36 -0700 "Mark Knecht" <mknecht@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > It always strikes me as strange that people in here suggest Audacity and
> > virtually ignore snd.
> >
> > { http://linux.oreillynet.com/pub/a/linux/2001/10/05/snd_partone.html }
> >
> > Snd seems more capable to me, uses the same plugins, has an easy
> > interface and is easily {guile
> > http://www.gnu.org/software/guile/guile.html }
> > extensible and has more depth {potential depth}
> Or maybe there's room for both, based on what your needs, interests and
> temperaments are...
I'm not disputing that at all.
> I know I'm just a lowly Windows Pro Tools user who keeps trying to use Linux
> apps, but every time I've tried Snd it's always seemed so high-maintenance
> compared to Audacity, so I've tended to like Audacity. Maybe I've missed the
> point, but it feels (to me anyway) like if you don't program you won't enjoy
> working with Snd.
I don't actually program... I muck about with scripts. It's the same as emacs...
with the same potential. I've not actually messed with snd that much... I'm still
making an effort at other stuff {web pages - http://www.cs.auc.dk/~normark//laml/ ,
a consistent set of applications - http://gemacs.sourceforge.net/
http://www.sgi.com/software/inventor/ , http://glame.sourceforge.net/index.var ,
opendx, vtk, common music, etc, etc... which I'd eventually like to try to tie
together with this sort of interface. http://www.rocklyte.com/athene/index.html
{needless to say... the overall learning curve is a little steep.}} like learning to
use scheme to the point that it will actually do something useful.
The default in debian is pretty complete and fairly enabled. As far as maintianance...
it's one of few applications that require none on the systems I've set up.
> I agree that, on the surface Snd does seem like it might, possibly, some day
> be more capable overall, but the extra stuff has not proven important enough
> to me to warrant the pain of getting over the learn curve. I didn't find the
> interface very intuitive, at least for what I needed to do.
I've used emacs for years... the interface seems pretty natural to me. I've not
noticed that there is a learning curve.
> I think those of us that are Sound Forge users find Audacity's interface
> pretty intuitive. Sound Forge is pretty popular in the Windows world and
> Audacity, while not a copy at all, feels pretty similar. Things are done
> pretty much the same way and in the same places.
I use soundforge in win.... I like snds interface better. It seems more like a
drawing to me {if that makes any sense}
http://ccrma-www.stanford.edu/software/snd/snd/snd.html ...It seems more
"graphical". but like you're actually manipulating the drawing rather than
buttons and knobs.
> Anyway, I'm not disagreeing with you at all, but just pointing out that
> there are some of us who have tried both and like Audacity. I'm not ignoring
> Snd. It's just not my cup of tea.
Alright...
