I haven't used it yet, but I assume http://bristol.sourceforge.net/ is currently the best synth emulator solution for linux. On 1/6/07, osbusters@xxxxxxxxxxxx <osbusters@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Thx: Anyone that's run Arturia's Moog Modular or mini-moog, or any of a dozen great vsti's, will realize that they just CAN't Do without them. And Wine makes a mess out of these plugins for starters, from what I can tell. So I guess I've made the right choice. No doubt linux is coming into it's own and I'll be able to dump the horrid Windohs for good one day. But not today. Cheers Lars Luthman writes: > On Sat, 2007-01-06 at 20:42 -0700, osbusters@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: >> Gordon JC Pearce writes: >> > osbusters@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: >> > >> >> what I can tell, Rosegarden is not to difficult for anyone familiar with >> >> Cubase, Sonar or Logic...but without the capacity to run Virtual Synths, >> >> it's mostly of no use to me. >> > >> > It does support soft synths. You might not have a build with DSSI >> > enabled. I found that the "real" Ubuntu version has DSSI disabled (or >> > at least, it didn't work for me), so I built it from source. >> >> Yes, I built mine from source too....it does have DSSI....but I've >> had enough frankly, see you guys in a few years when it's all worked >> out. It's not worth the effort, as far as I can see. > > If you mean VSTs on Linux, I doubt it will ever be all worked out. Wine > has been in progress for more than 13 years, it has never been perfectly > compatible with Windows and it probably never will be. My suggestion is > to use Windows if you want to run Windows software, and use Linux if you > want to run Linux software. > > -- > Lars Luthman - please encrypt any email sent to me if possible > PGP key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x04C77E2E > Fingerprint: FCA7 C790 19B9 322D EB7A E1B3 4371 4650 04C7 7E2E
-- daneasley@xxxxxxxxx dan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx dan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://towndowner.com http://burntpossum.com
