Is Open Source a diversion from what users really want?

Blender isn’t a DAW. I think the comparison was for a different reason.

Thank you, I apologize for my confusion. I meant Reaper. Thank you, @anon60445789 :slight_smile:

IMO Louigi Verona is methodically wrong in so many ways. but it would be out of scope to develop a criticism of his text here, and of course there are valid points and it is good to think and talk about the future of development open source / software libre here.

1 Like

As an “acoustic” musician preferring real instruments to synth plugins I have never ever used any scripting in my entire life, only some automation, and I think this is the way most of musicians use sequencers. I may be wrong.

4 Likes

The most important consideration pro open-source is this: any data has no value without a program they are intended for. If you do not completely own the program, which is possible only if you have its sources, you effectively do not own your data. The biggest evil are closed-source data formats, of course, but closed-source software comes second, as only when all the links in the data-production chain are human-comprehensible the final result can be precisely recreated, and only that means you actually own the production data.

P.S.: Sorry, I’m not too good at explaining my logic, I am no English native-speaker.

2 Likes

This morning I watched a fascinating interview on the BBC with the singer/songwriter James Taylor, who’s apparently in the UK promoting his new album. Admittedly James is getting on a bit these days and it was pretty early in the morning but the gist of what he said was this:-

Back in the sixties, the whole attraction of music for young kids was that it allowed them to collaborate with other youngsters. He described working with the Beatles at Abbey Road and how it introduced him to talented musicians / producers / engineers etc. And how everyone wanted to hone their particular skill, primarily so they could impress the people around them. Back then, it was the same in most walks of young life - not just music…

The supposed ‘advantage’ of technology is that it allows people to get great results in their own bedroom. But because they’re not interfacing with anyone any more, young people don’t see much merit in developing a very difficult skill (there’s rarely anybody around to appreciate it). These days, they tend to want stuff that ‘just works’ without them needing to put in too much effort.

Perhaps there’s a lesson for Ardour here? Maybe C++ is simply too hard for modern youngsters and lua really is the best way forward now? It’d be interesting to know the average age of C++ programmers, compared to Ruby / Python / PHP and even Java - often described as the “gold standard” of modern programming languages. It’s certainly much more common now to find job opportunities for those kinda skills, rather than C++. And while C++ is still managing to hang on - it’s only just about managing…

So maybe the open-source aspect of Ardour isn’t (per se) it’s problem. For someone young and wanting to get into programming these days, maybe C++ is just seen as needing too much effort.

2 Likes

As an “acoustic” musician preferring real instruments to synth plugins I have never ever used any scripting in my entire life

The sort of scripting we’re talking about doesn’t have anything to do with the type of music you make or the instruments you prefer. We’re talking about building little scripts to do simple tasks, for example slice up an audio region, analyze signals, rename regions, add markers, etc. Basically anything you can do manually but you want to automate so you can do it more quickly or do it in a batch operation.

1 Like

Oh, I see ))) I always thought that those Lua scripts are made for further automating the automation, something like quick-and-dirty plugins. I don’t know, I actually feel quite comfortable with the Ardour’s stock set of tools. I know I could possibly do something faster with some custom extensions but it would require too much effort to learn how to make one. If there would be a repository of ready-made scripts as suggested above, then it would be great, of course.

1 Like

With all respect for your opinion, I hope this discussion is not drifting toward a discussion of languages. I don’t think rewriting the ardour code base is the discussion here.

But it’s true that younger people shun the old languages, so it’s definitely an explanation why not more people join the coding.

1 Like

Yes, that’s the point I was making (about why it’s become so difficult to attract programmers). I wasn’t suggesting that we convert Ardour to Java! :grinning:

From my understanding, C++ is still one of the most sought after languages in the computer science field. I think we are making a mistake in generalizing the “younger generation” based on the majority who aren’t professional programmers. I believe that people who code for a profession, regardless of age, respect C++ and if they don’t know it probably plan on trying to learn it.
But anyways, this thread has gone off the rails. It seems to me, that Lua scripting isn’t the problem. The “problem” is that Lua scripting doesn’t extend to aspects of the UI. Okay, big deal. Maybe, eventually, this functionality/customization will be integrated into the code. Until then, I just think its not a big enough of deal to question the nature of Ardour. As it stands, Ardour is incredibly powerful. I wonder how many people here are exclusively FOSS users. I can’t think of any software I’ve used in the last 13 years that has impressed me like Ardour. I’ve seen basic media players come and go, Operating Systems that get better then worse then better then worse with release cycles, but Ardour has only gotten better. And by God, is it powerful. I used Ableton at my buddy’s studio a year ago and I couldn’t believe how complicated simple routing was. Studio One, ProTools, all these industry standard DAWs are surprisingly unimpressive compared to Ardour. This software is the pride and joy of the FOSS community and I really don’t understand how more people aren’t talking about it. Can anyone here (Aside from Paul and Robin :slight_smile:) even imagine what it would take to write a basic DAW, much less develop it to the point that we have now?

1 Like

The challenge of allowing broad customization via a scripting engine is the potential disruption of critical real time behavior of the DAW. Where customization makes more sense, and can do less damage, is more where things like GIMP’s filters batch process things, offline. Personally, I don’t see a need to allow script customization where it might damage responsiveness and/or real time audio handling behavior.

I also don’t see that Open Source in any way is a negative to Ardour users. The proposition has always been, “if you don’t like it, you change it”. If users don’t like the project, or are technically unable to change the code, they are free to use something else. They are also free to advocate for the features they want in forums such as this one. @paul should not lose any sleep over this. Its great that the topic is open for discussion, but I see no need to change anything about Ardour’s direction.

Just my 2 cents.

4 Likes

I’ll add my 2 cents, which will be worth about … 2 cents. lol

As you’ve noted before, this is niche software in the first place. What percentage of people use DAWs? And of those, what percentage of them just happen to also be programmers – in ANY language? And of those, what percentage can do rocket sciency C++ AND have spare time AND would rather give that spare time to developing a DAW?

I don’t think changing the language or the license would change that fundamental equation.

You could get some cool add-ons via scripting if well-documented, especially if there is a standard graphics widget set usable in those scripts. (It doesn’t have to be very elaborate – just sliders, labels and buttons.) But core developers are going to be rare.

As a DAW hobbyist, given the approx 4 years between having to pay for Reaper releases, I actually pay more for Ardour than I do for Reaper. I’m happy to do it, since it supports good people doing good work. I also bought Mixbus even though I don’t use it, just because I know its based on Ardour, lol.

The license is good. Developers of the core will be rare just due to its nature. Make scripting abilities of ardour more well-known, and package some of the better community scripts with Ardour.

Ardour is great software, I really appreciate it, and I’m thankful to those who work on it.

A slightly different angle: Reapers most powerful advertising is Kenny Goia who does a constant stream of Reaper tutorials using the latest Reaper. Someone doing that for Ardour … now THAT would be powerful advertising. The more widespread and accessible it seems, the more people will be inspired to assist in whatever way. Also, reaper has a sort of playground where people can contribute and download scripts. Something like that would promote ardour scripting.

Maybe I could use a screen-video capture for the next song of my Dad’s I produce using Ardour and other FOSS software (e.g. LV2 and other plugins). It wouldn’t be the level of Kenny’s stuff, but it could be useful because it would be an entire workflow. I also produce sermons for my church using Ardour combined with Audacity, which might also be an interesting video. I have rather unique setups.

Anyway, I love Ardour. It’s great. It’s beyond me to contribute to the core even though I’m a programmer of sorts. But maybe I can make a video or two.

4 Likes

7 posts were split to a new topic: Suggestion: Video Tutorials for Ardour

Just for the sake of completeness: completely means completely including compilers, libraries and all other tools required to build and run the program. In practice that means a free operating system like Linux, FreeBSD and alike.

I’m fully confident that I will be able to view a jpeg photograph or play a music file or video now and in the near future. But for complex and --for me-- valuable data (e.g. music production data, video production data, also books I’ve written) the reproduction environment must be trustworthy, not for years but decades. Preferrably centuries.

I gave this some more thought overnight and I’ve come to the view that Ardour’s ‘balance’ is probably about right… For users who have no interest in programming they can use the pre-built versions. And for users who want to dabble with coding at an introductory level, there’s lua. And for users who’d really prefer to dive in at the deep end, they can learn C++ and download the source code. I think that’s quite a good range of options.

The lack of people wanting to get involved must have some other explanation…

3 Likes

I was using ardour version 2 then went to ableton now I am back for this exact reason. I get tried of being locked in. I wanted to transfer my license from one computer to another but, they wouldn’t let me do that. Then I recorded at my school’s local studio in a newer version of Ableton that I own and they would not let me save it in a compatible format . I did not not use any new plugins so it was just audio tracks but, I had to export it at the studio and then reorganize the stems (ableton doesn’t support broadcast wave). I can still open my old ardour projects. That is why I switched back to a completely open source flow. When I reinstall my os I am not i trouble with the activation police. I get my work done. I have never made changes to the ardour source code but, I have built it from source successfully.

6 Likes

Just to +1 for the accounting of this kind of poll. Scripting is a world I know is there but never had the need of researching it, so I am very ok if everything goes on as it is now.

Now the long version: if in the future there is a script bank from where you can easily download and turn on scripts that just do cool stuff like we do with plugins then awesome, but I believe there is a big chunk of users that won’t ever complain about not having it, precisely because in the wide set of skills we have to develop, music and audio related, there is not much more space for adding even the most basic programming ability. I also see here a pyramid in which the majority would want to use something that just works, then there will be a middle group with time and some ability to dive into tweaking things, and finally the reduced group of capable and commited people that would take the steps to help a program this complex get to the next levels. And that is alright, it is also comforting to know that there are some chosen ones in charge of this, maybe better than having a lot of people developing big branches of Ardour and we users getting lost in the picking (ala Linux distros, don’t you think there are too many of them? xD)

For the philosophical part I am just glad that by contributing to this program, financially or just by using it and spreading the word, I support the **concept of open source ** so other people with the right knowledge can develop it. Hopefully we will get to the point where a third or ten more full time programmers can be hired so the development of this beautiful thing can sky rocket and beat anything in its way – in that regard it could help that just everybody with screen recording can upload one or two videos about whatever long or short Ardour matter to youtube, so it can start showing results by just entering “SIDECHAIN COMPRESSION” xD – .
We need just a bit of patience, and inspiration from looking back at the great progress made in the last few years. In the meantime we programming ignorants still get to choose working with a software that matches our values and workflow needs :cowboy_hat_face:

1 Like

Just an FYI, I have moved the discussion of Video Tutorials to Suggestion: Video Tutorials for Ardour

Nothing wrong with the discussion, but it wasn’t necessarily about this post, and while I want it to continue, I want to make sure this stays a bit on topic, so lets move that discussion to there please.

    Seablade
2 Likes

I don’t see Open Source as synonymous with the aversion of a steep learning curve. But multithreaded c++ looks Sisyphusian to the inner eye of my untrained think maker. Regardless, I don’t think you picked your poison, but maybe haven’t tended all the vine. If you want more participants then train them in a pay for mentoring program. I’d schedule sessions to grade the top off the lua curve. Maybe mentoring wouldn’t grow a line around the block, but it might produce some vintage classes. Well, that’s my 2 cents.