On Thu, 16 Nov 2017 09:02:55 -0500, Paul Davis wrote: >On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 8:49 AM, David Kastrup <dak@xxxxxxx> wrote: >> I find Ardour has a nice interface talking to its users, but the >> users get an awful interface for talking to Ardour. >?? Given that the OP pointed out to need a DAW for "10-15 hours in a whole year" a GUI as provided by Cubasis 2 and similar apps for iOS, is much more intuitive to use. I don't know if non-free software for Linux (Tracktion? or EnergyXT?) follows a similar policy, let alone that I don't know if those DAWs are stable. However, if I would be the OP, I would consider to pay a little bit for a DAW that is similar powerful as Ardour is, but at the same time with a more intuitive to use user interface and I wouldn't care about an open source code at all. It's worth the money _especially_ when not using it very often. Indeed, Ardour's GUI is good in giving visible information a user needs, but its one of the most worth user interfaces for some tasks. For most people she's dancing counterclockwise. http://www.stangl-taller.at/ARBEITSBLAETTER/GRAFIK/taenzerin.gif I'm completely unable to see her dancing counterclockwise. If I see something as concave or convex, I'm usually able to concentrate or to relax and to experience it vice versa, too. Until now she's only dancing clockwise for me and I even wasn't creative today. IMO Ardours user interface is completely ignoring the way most creative people think, at least when being creative. It's possible for everybody to use Ardour, but at least for some people it's more or less impossible, if they want to use the software for around 15 hours a year or a similar short time. Using Ardour without getting the needle requires to keep it rolling. _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
