On Mon, 2009-08-31 at 20:56 -0400, Brett McCoy wrote: > I have to admit complete ignorance here, but what is it about Live > that makes it advantageous over DAWs like Ardour, Reaper, Sonar, Pro > Tools, etc? Is it primarily loop/clip/synth based rather than a hard > disk recorder/mixer like a traditional DAW? My knowledge is based on reading about it in magazines early on and much later using the trial version for a bit. When it came out, using software for live performance was seen as novel idea (there might have been an "underground" scene thinking differently). The minimalistic graphics optimized for clearness were a revelation. Dialogs are avoided, it's all in one window. AFAIK it allows tempo changes and immediately stretches/shrinks all audio to fit. Sony Acid might have been earlier with that. You can also add markers on clips and then move these markers and the material between markers will be stretched/shrunken to accommodate. The version I tried would do so "only" linearly :) I think the central new concept was having a matrix view, where you have columns for tracks/instruments and rows for "Scenes". Have a look at: http://digisound.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/3-big-rocker.jpg All those rectangles with play symbols are patterns. If you look down the "Master" column, it should become clear what scenes are about. Note that you can trigger any of the patterns any time. There's a sync feature that can make sure patterns will be started on the beat/next-measure. There's also a "traditional" arrangement view: http://www.kaosaudio.com/images/software/ableton-live-7-le-arrangement.png Nowadays there's a collection of deeply integrated synth "plugins". GUI-wise, you could always add such a matrix to an existing DAW/sequencer (not a small project, of course). But you need a backend that can play any pattern any time, with a sync-to-beat trigger feature. And live time stretching. So, none of the linux audio apps comes even close. A set of separate tools can never be a replacement (except with a not-seen-before sophisticated level of optional integration, perhaps). People can talk about the real or perceived shortcomings of linux audio tools all day. Doesn't change a thing. The vague and sometimes silly comparisons and the very foggy ideas what some commercial apps actually offer are damn frustrating. Would surprise me to read something *new*. -- Thorsten Wilms thorwil's design for free software: http://thorwil.wordpress.com/ _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user
