On Jan 15, 2008 10:37 PM, Geoff Beasley <songshop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > So far you haven't listed a *single* feature you want that is missing > > from any of these, nor have you detailed any bugs. > > guy's, read the post. this thread was not a list of required features. this > thread was from a midi-centric composer/arranger/performer who has been using > seq's scince 1990, 5-6 days a week.I have run a full time Linux studio for 4 > years now. this thread is about the fact that there isn't a midi equivilent > to ardour. that's all. MusE has a full compliment of features, it's just a > little buggy ( but they are important bugs), and not moving forward. I think Muse is a promising little program. Quite possibly its problems have to do with its not being widely used; if it could attract more developers- and a spiffier GUI along the way- it might be taken more seriously by neophytes and become more of a priority. Alas, like everyone else, I don't have time to even consider helping out. > If I wan't to expose a weakness in LA's audio fabric I'll do so. And this is > the place for it. If you used these softs as often as I do you would be > aware of these failings and their extent. I'm not whinging, I'm exposing an > important hole in the LA fermament. It could also be said, though, that the more well-developed things are the exception, not the rule. That the level of this hole is sea-level, and the areas which have risen are to be commended heartily rather than used as a measuring stick. > As for bug reports I have been very > active with these in MusE, as I have been with Ardour and Qjackctl etc etc, > and have also had dealings with Chris with Rosegarden. The Muse team have > been very supportive but don't have the time. There really isn't anything > else sequencer wise,that I can see, and there needs to be. Without it LA > risks not getting wider acceptance. I agree, and I would love to see it get wider acceptance- I was specifically told by a devoted Mac musician that lack of software is his only reason for not embracing Linux- but really, whose responsibility is it? No one owns Linux. It improves IF someone decides to fill a need. Perhaps Windows software would say "If you build it, they will come," but I think Linux is more like, "If they come, someone will build it." -Chuckk -- http://www.badmuthahubbard.com _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user
