In what way modular approach is limiting

Discuss how to promote using FLOSS to make music.

Moderators: MattKingUSA, khz

Vixus
Established Member
Posts: 42
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 1:16 pm

Re: In what way modular approach is limiting

Post by Vixus »

Hi everyone, this is my first post here and I feel I have to add to this discussion.

First of all, music making as it stands on linux is amazing. The sheer number of synths, effects and quirky little tools put it far in front of anything else I've seen.

I've been working with linux music for a few years, well versed in both LMMS and Jack environments. I find sketching song ideas and making a good purely electronic track a lot easier with LMMS.. all I need is my keyboard controller (or even just a mouse and keyboard.)

The modular environment becomes too difficult to work with unless you're seriously going to sit down, lay down some guitar, keys and then polish it up into a working song, spending a good part of the day doing so. Also you don't want to shut down the computer because that would require rerouting everything and reloading presets (I've had no luck with lash or ladish so far). I tried a simple MIDI-only song with chord progression and melody but the amount of work spent in setup was disproportionate to the quality of the outcome.

However there are some aspects of a modular 'wiring diagram' that would be excellent to have in an app like LMMS, especially in the handling of effects that require 2 or more sound sources (sidechaining etc.)

Basically I had this dream of the perfect linux audio app that would exclusively use JACK as a backend but still behave like an IME. It was to be a glorious merger between Ableton Live (session view, mainly, a la seq24) and LMMS. Thus I would be able to use all my synth apps like amSynth and mx44, the vast array of utilities (QMidiArp etc.) in what would be a very lightweight app because most of the functionality required was already programmed. All that needed to be handled was automation, routing and presets (ha!).

I don't know if such an app is possible, I would have thought of working on it if people hadn't told me it was an unbelievable undertaking for someone with no knowledge of audio programming (I do have some programming experience just not audio). Lots of plans and ideas were written up for it too. Perhaps it's not to anyone else's taste.

As it stands, I'll probably end up using my modular setup for any guitar-oriented songs and LMMS for fun electronic tracks. By the way, I don't think giving LMMS jack driver support would benefit it in any way simply because it's unnecessary, it literally contains everything you need with an excellent backend to boot.
StudioDave
Established Member
Posts: 753
Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2008 1:12 pm

Re: In what way modular approach is limiting

Post by StudioDave »

Vixus wrote:Hi everyone, this is my first post here...
Greetings and salutations. Welcome to the group.
... By the way, I don't think giving LMMS jack driver support would benefit it in any way simply because it's unnecessary, it literally contains everything you need with an excellent backend to boot.
I'm sure that LMMS sans JACK is fine and all, but it does not contain everything *I* need. Fortunately, Csound does. :)

Best,

dp
User avatar
autostatic
Established Member
Posts: 1994
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:26 pm
Location: Beverwijk, The Netherlands
Has thanked: 32 times
Been thanked: 104 times
Contact:

Re: In what way modular approach is limiting

Post by autostatic »

Vixus wrote:By the way, I don't think giving LMMS jack driver support would benefit it in any way simply because it's unnecessary, it literally contains everything you need with an excellent backend to boot.
Hello Vixus, and welcome!

I can't use LMMS on my main production machine. ALSA doesn't support my Firewire card so I have to use JACK with FFADO. So in my case JACK support would be great because now I barely use LMMS anymore in favor of apps that do support JACK.

Best,

Jeremy
Vixus
Established Member
Posts: 42
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 1:16 pm

Re: In what way modular approach is limiting

Post by Vixus »

Ah yes, I didn't consider people who would actually need jack to interface with their hardware... my apologies.

In any case I'm not saying jack support wouldn't be bad. Anyway, their new project Unison is designed with jack in mind :D
User avatar
Louigi Verona
Established Member
Posts: 402
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 8:56 am
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: In what way modular approach is limiting

Post by Louigi Verona »

I plan to write an article soon on how I see a perfect modular sequencer, since my views on how I see a perfect integrated music environment are well known already.
Post Reply