The wonders of NON

[thebutant]

As I haven't used NON, but merely peeked at with curiosity from afar, I wonder if someone could tell me where it shines.

The reason I ask this instead of simply trying it out, is that NON's website claim that programs like Qtractor compared with NON have a very "limited feature set".

As a happy Qtractor user, I would probably try out NON pretty much the same way I use Qtractor. So what I wonder is what I could achieve in NON that Qtractor's not capable of. In which field is NON the best tool? Any happy NON users who can tell?

[CrocoDuck]

The reason I ask this instead of simply trying it out, is that NON's website claim that programs like Qtractor compared with NON have a very "limited feature set".

Maybe that was true in the past, I think Qtractor is pretty features rich nowadays. I use NON sporadically and it shines for low-weight (it is way less heavy than Ardour and Qtractor) which can increase stability in few cases (less xruns). Also, it shines for modularity: NON is more of a suite of programs that combined together in the JACK world make up a DAW system, not a single "monolithic" piece of software. If you like to work that way, i.e. with many programs each one taking care of one or few specialized tasks, then you will like it. I personally enjoy both low-weight and modularity, but even then I tend to use mostly Ardour... perhaps I am just used to it.

[davephillips]

As I haven't used NON, but merely peeked at with curiosity from afar, I wonder if someone could tell me where it shines.

Its self-promotion is really 1st-class :

First and foremost, since our goal is to have a free and open system, we can disregard all non-free DAWs. This excludes virtually every other DAW in existence. Secondly, we require a DAW that runs on the GNU/Linux operating system in conjunction with other free software, such as the JACK Audio Connection Kit, in a modular and cooperative manner. Finally, we require a program that is powerful, fast, and reliable. No other software meets these requirements.

The design of Non differs substantially from others. This is a good thing; for a clone of a bad design is doomed from the start.

There is only one other DAW that is capable and free software, and its name is Ardour. Suffice it to say that the architecture of Ardour is incompatible with the requirements of speed and reliability. Other DAW-like free software programs, including Traverso and QTractor, are similarly limited (being of similar design), but suffer the additional burden of cumbersome legacy ALSA support and very a limited feature set.

(from the NON FAQ)



Best,

dp

[rncbc]

Its self-promotion is really 1st-class :

First and foremost, since our goal is to have a free and open system, we can disregard all non-free DAWs. This excludes virtually every other DAW in existence. Secondly, we require a DAW that runs on the GNU/Linux operating system in conjunction with other free software, such as the JACK Audio Connection Kit, in a modular and cooperative manner. Finally, we require a program that is powerful, fast, and reliable. No other software meets these requirements.

The design of Non differs substantially from others. This is a good thing; for a clone of a bad design is doomed from the start.

There is only one other DAW that is capable and free software, and its name is Ardour. Suffice it to say that the architecture of Ardour is incompatible with the requirements of speed and reliability. Other DAW-like free software programs, including Traverso and QTractor, are similarly limited (being of similar design), but suffer the additional burden of cumbersome legacy ALSA support and very a limited feature set.

maybe we need some carbon14 dating procedure to figure out when this statement was fit and relevant

byee

[gimmeapill]

In french, "non" means "no" - just sayin...

[rncbc]

In french, "non" means "no" - just sayin...

yeah, old latin, dead they say...

now for some reality check: the "non"-suite is still outstanding in its mission to a(n utopic) modular world.

that said, one has or must bow to NSM as (the) one and probably only session management architecture that really deserves its name and function; and for one, non-session-management (NSM) actually do stand to its mission and promise--too bad the world has moved the other way full-tick towards the do-it-all-lock-in-wonder-monolith (eg. ardour, bitwig, etc.).

qtractor still stands--or better said, i'd rather like to stand it as--in something in between: it's not fully-modular--nowadays, given its option to instrument plugins--but, to get this straight and mean, it will never ever be a monolith for x-sake.

call it an hybrid perhaps

cheers

[ssj71]

The developer has a strong personality (typical of us software geeks in my experience) and had a lot of disagreements and was even involved in many arguments on these forums about software design. Clearly this is a subjective promotion of his software and why not? I should hope he believes in the software he writes. The whole non-suite had considerable momentum for a while but has been rather stagnant for several years. Meanwhile Qtractor and Ardour both have had steady work. I don't follow Qtrac as closely but I know Rui keeps improving it. And since that was written Ardour has had a whole GUI backend rewrite and many other improvements that help speed up startup and workflow. Non* had some cool ideas and really IMO proved the feasibility of a modular DAW using JACK. My understanding is that it won't scale well if you start getting very large sessions with hundreds of plugins and dozens of tracks, but it works very well for a lot of people.
EDIT: I really was just trying to say such anecdotal comparisons are a bit petty.

In the end, use what you like. Some objective tests to compare could be cool (e.g. number of clicks to add a track, record, edit, add plugins etc.) but really I'd argue the real speed of a DAW is not a function of its CPU useage.

[chaocrator]

why non-suite apps are my primary tools:
since non-sequencer bug that i reported was fixed, i never had a single crash of any non-suite app.
that's really cool for a live-oriented musician.
moreover, due to modular architecture of the suite, the situation when everything's crashed at once is very unlikely.

non-sequencer has some unusual features that are very helpful for me:
1) it's very easy to have a few instances of sequencer if needed, and they're all synchronised automatically. (now, imagine having a few instances of any regular DAW)
2) trigger mode. that's my favorite feature, very useful for doing improvisations.

[davephillips]

Greetings,

Just to clarify: I think the Non software is quite interesting, and certainly useful for the more modular-minded musician. I agree with Rui, the Non session manager is very good, or at least it was when I last tested it.

Best,

dp

[rncbc]

…imagine having a few instances of any regular DAW)

qtractor also supports multi-instance operation, in fact is one of the requirements to participate on NSM sessions
though i may only think of a problem that being window screen positioning: all instances will show on same/last screen position and size. whatever.
cheers

[chaocrator]

qtractor also supports multi-instance operation, in fact is one of the requirements to participate on NSM sessions

hmm ... indeed )
well, but there's another issue. qtractor with all its features is too much for me )

[rncbc]

qtractor also supports multi-instance operation, in fact is one of the requirements to participate on NSM sessions

hmm ... indeed )
well, but there's another issue. qtractor with all its features is too much for me )

now tell me again about that "very a limited feature set" (insert here your favorite willy-wonka meme:D)

seeya

[chaocrator]

qtractor has very nicely balanced feature set, IMO.
for a long time, it's my #1 recommendation for those who ask for «a good free linux DAW to try».
but my favorite piece of software that you develop is anyway synthv1 ))

[thebutant]

What more could I dream of in this thread?
I got:
- info about NON, which was what I sought. I now have a clearer idea about what I would use it for.
- confirmed my suspicion that the descriptions on the NON website perhaps are a bit dated.
- several posts praising qtractor, the program living in my heart for so long.

Thank you so much!
This forum really is the best forum there is.