On 07/02/13 20:44, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 4:42 PM, Simon Wise wrote:
so is the lack of FLOSS VST host distribution because nobody bothered to ask
Steinberg for a license? or is it because Steinberg said no when asked?
What lack?
Qtractor? Check.
MusE? Check.
LMMS? Check.
Ardour? Check.
Except LMMS which as discussed uses non-Steinberg reverse engineered sources to
try to avoid Steinberg licensing clauses the others distribute binaries without
VST enabled and provide instructions for compiling with VST enabled after
downloading the appropriate files from Steinberg. You can certainly find
compiled versions around in places that defy the license and redistribute
anyway. You can alsp find lots of expensive commercial software available for
download without payment if you want as well, that's not the point.
This thread is at least in part about the perceived issues in Linux such as
having to compile your own versions and similar so-called geekishness. I am not
really convinced this matters much, someone who will benefit most from a Linux
set up will get over their fear of compiling, the command line and so forth soon
enough. But it does mean that most of the standard distributions will come with
VST disabled in these apps when first installed, and that the new user is forced
to learn some things sooner than is comfortable.
I think if someone wants a quick plug-and-play set up with defaults to suit the
'average' user and minimal exposure to the underlying system then they would
probably be better off using OSX anyway, and just hope all works as expected and
their chosen applications do what they wanted. Indeed for many what their
application can do becomes what they want soon enough, and quite often the
available tools determine the style rather than the other way around.
What a linux system offers is quite different - its modularity is a strength not
a weakness, it is much more configurable, it can be adapted to all kinds of
devices and workflows. But these advantages come at a cost ... a new user must
spend time finding out exactly what workflow they want, and then more time
understanding the system and setting it up to work well. A Linux system is more
suited to a musician that wants to use and understand it as one of their
instruments, or to someone who wants a more specialised and configurable
recording studio. A musician does not just pick up a guitar for the first time
one day and be happily producing music on it the next day, and a Linux system
also has a learning curve.
Simon
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
