LinuxMusicians

42low wrote:Or should we at each production also name all other contributors (and all instruments ... and gear):

Lead guitar played on a Fender 1960 duo sonic in solid wood with D’Addario NYXL Nickel Plated Strings and amp ... and blablabla

BTW, this does matter for those who knows all that guitar stuff, so i'd rather would like it was available somewhere.
to speak about synths, many of them have character, so it's always interesting to know at least a model.
all this stuff is probably not relevant for an average listener, but musicians listen to recordings too )

Look at any movie credits.

42low wrote:

chaocrator wrote:all this stuff is probably not relevant for an average listener, but musicians listen to recordings too )

I totally agree. But as it is common that no one tells me how he did it ........ why should i ... ?
My music is mainly for the average listener. The musicians who want to know more i would love to talk with to both learn.

well, it's complicated.
i'd happily tell to anyone interested what the sound was made with.
but would not give away any of my custom patches, just because people mostly want just switch presets instead of learning synthesis, and i strongly dislike it.

I would not credit linux, since i don't consider it the actual instrument being used in my cases. It'd be like crediting the room that's housing my instruments or the chair I'm sitting on. What I would do though is credit the actual software being used to generate sound or the environment for the actual sound creation, for instance Alsa Modular Synth, Supercollider, Cellular Automata Synth, DIN, etc....

Crediting linux to me feels like routing /dev/random into /dev/audio and scream at the top of your lungs that it's all free software, misguided evangelism that distracts from the product. Of course it's important to let people know that they can do basically anything they want with free software, but doing it like this feels to me like restricting the listener to their either positive or negative bias towards open software.

greetings;;

Personnaly I don't write it on the back of the booklet, because I'm not into the whole endorsement/sponsoring thing. I much prefer to thank my dear old friends, that kind of stuff.

But on another hand, I will notify it's been produced on Linux on the internet, and post links on Ardour/Mixbus forums. I think it's important to make people know you can get incredible results using Linux today.

My first album was produced entirely using free software, including amp simulation using rackarrack, which turned out to be really convincing. Since then I turned my hand to putting mics in front of cabs and I suddenly happened to realise that amp simulation is cheating compared to this

Anyway, I think donating or subscribing to your favourite software is more efficient and more relevant than listing them at the back of a booklet. Well, that's my POV

When I finally do release the project I've been working on, I think I will credit Linux. I don't know if I would list each and every program used, but I would definitely say something along the lines of "recorded, mixed, (etc) with free and open-source software (insert Linux distro)". I think it's great to mention that, as it brings more attention to the Linux audio production scene. Which is a good thing

"Acknowledegments and thanks to all who have assisted me in any way (even if they didn't know it)." - simples

On the hardware/software side I always make mention of stuff I got for free, I'm proud of using or I promised to do so. I don't feel the need to mention e.g. the manufacturer of my graphics hardware - I paid for it and I'm not overly proud of it (could be any other graphics board, too). Linux, Ardour and what else was something I got for free which I'm very grateful about, so credits is the least thing I can give back. Same for outstanding sample libraries - did I pay for? GTFO. If not and it's some essential stuff I'm very happy to use then why not give some credit. This means that I might mention stuff I even paid for but I am some kind of proud to use, e.g. if I would use the MOD Duo I would definitely mention it. For me there's no need to throw around already well known brands but the small, underrated ones would get some credit. If there was some musician involved I definitely give some credit, even if I paid for. But I wouldn't mention the guy running the hamster wheel at the electricity distributor.

i remember back in the day, commercial CD music bands would list a ton of their gear within the CD liner jacket notes.
I think it's a good idea to credit Linux and the plugin makers.

I'm going to start doing this more and more.
I just recently started crediting Linux on my music webpages.
Eventually I will try and list all plugins used per tune.
All of them except for one, "Vember Surge" are freeware, so that's pretty cool.

My stance on the matter has changed along the years. I used to credit Linux and stick logos wherever I could. But at a certain point, stating the fact so much started to feel a bit forced to me. Like when a country with a small film industry launches a movie and they say things like "a movie that has nothing to envy from Hollywood's superproductions..." The fact that you have to state that explicitly, in you consider it, reveals a bit of a complex of inferiority. "A music software that has nothing to envy from big commercial DAWs..."

I now prefer to focus on making music that kicks ass, and let the mentions just appear organically, in my blog, at forums or whatever; I don't make so much of a "banner" of it, but I always left open the possibility of a "happy accident" for those interested ("I wonder which software this guy used... Jesus! I didn't know you could do that with open source!")

(Here I consider myself a "publishing musician" for practical reasons, although my shipping speed lately has been quite snaily... )

I have yet to release any music I've written on GNU/Linux but I don't think I'd credit the OS. However if I do any kind of write up or anyone asks me I would definitely make mention of it.

Greetings,

I usually mention that Linux was used in my productions. If someone should hear and like my music I want them to know that it was made with a machine running Linux. The point I want to make by doing so is that Linux is as good as any other OS when it comes to making viable productions, and yes, I think that's important. You don't have to look very far on KVR and elsewhere to find ignorant commentary regarding what can't be done with Linux.

That said, I want my music to be judged for its own value, not what gear was used to make it.

Best,

dp