Ray Rashif wrote: > 2009/10/11 Dave Phillips <dlphillips@xxxxxxxxxx > <mailto:dlphillips@xxxxxxxxxx>> > > I'm surprised by your comment, and I think you're reading too much > into > my own. > > > Yes, now that I take a look at my reply again it appears to have > mistaken critique for condemnation. My bad, Dave =p No foul. We each have our unique experiences and opinions, they're all valuable. And you're right, we do need to hear from users who are using the program to their benefit. The lack of JACK support hurts for me because I employ JACK in almost everything I do with Linux audio (I think the only time it's not employed here is when I use Audacity or ReZound), but that certainly doesn't mean the program isn't useful. > > It just occured to me that everytime "LMMS" pops up here it's > bombarded with the fact that it doesn't play nice with JACK, and as > such should not be considered as a viable option for a Linux > sequencing/synthesizing application. To an extent that to someone who > does use LMMS, it's FUD. > > Not JACK-friendly = true > Not usable = false > > Personally, it's helped me quite a lot in checking out my compositions > against SF2 banks. And back when it didn't have SF2, it served as my > primary sequencer and VSTi host (from which vestige came along). It > still does. You're definitely having better luck with it than some of us. My attempts at using VSTs were pretty disappointing. I'm afraid I'm guilty of the "No JACK, no utility here" attitude. But in my defense, it's fair to claim that JACK is just too cool to leave out of any Linux audio application. I get anxious when I don't find it, my hands start shaking, I can't see clearly, everything goes dark... Actually, I'm such a fanboy that I even believe that Apache and Open Office should have JACK support. ;) > > > Frankly, if I'm writing an audio app then I would make sure that > critical audio issues receive the bulk of my attention. From what I've > gleaned from the discourse here, I'd conclude that the LMMS devs > do want > to improve their JACK support, but they don't know how. The LAD > and JACK > mail lists exist for just such a purpose, perhaps the LMMS devs can be > directed to those lists for the assistance they need. > > > Correct, but as you and I both know, there are developers who take the > initiative to ask for solutions and those who don't. > Indeed. And I sincerely hope the LMMS guys get the audio issues sorted out. I still believe that LMMS could be a great application for people who might be attracted to FL Studio or Garageband on Windows and the Mac. We need a reliable app in that category. And btw, lest I seem to care not at all for the appearance of things, I think the mock-up GUI improvements displayed on the thread at KVR look great. I do understand the importance of a functional and attractive UI, I just want audio stability above all else in an audio app. I also understand that all good things take time, so hopefully in some time we'll see LMMS mature into the app I and others would like to see & use. Best, dp _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user
