jonetsu wrote:It's more than obvious that artists' concerns are not about which OS the studio runs, let alone which plugins they use and which DAW they work with. An artist concern is totally different from that.
That was one of my statements in one of my first reactions.
So who eventually decides with what that big artists will be recorded and mastered? The big compagnies.
jonetsu wrote:Nobody is saying that Linux is popular in pro studios. This is more than obvious.
That was part off the question, was it not? Big artists record in big studios on their software.
Somebody said it. I did. Answering the question as it was asked. This was one of the first thing i said too. And i tried to explain why. Forced by the deciding big companies.
jonetsu wrote:Not sure what you're trying to prove.
I am not trying to prove anything. I am just answering the question.
jonetsu wrote:This said and put aside, not sure how you would tell there's "linux on the screen".
Most linux DAW software is easy to recognize when in a documentary a professional recording studio recording a known artist comes by. And i saw no other DAWs then like pro tools, ableton, cubase passing by. And they do not work with calf plugins so those are not used either. Simple.
But big artists once were small. And small artists many times have to work on budget. FOSS is budget. So with the linux which is FOSS usage statistics in mind it can't be otherwise then that there must be big artists who recorded some of their first songs on FOSS software when they still were small.