Why VST??

[sysrqer]

There are that many plugins (for me within linux now) that most i don't even use, while i use some favorites who do the job like i want. I already have to much options. Do i need even more?

Probably not but some people do very different things than you do and need a very different array of tools to achieve that.

[Luc]

Sorry, no. We can't have "very good alternatives" to the vast catalogue of Windows VST plugins. They are far too many and some of them can be quite valuable.

Consider you have two headphones. Now, you want to measure which one has the highest audio quality. [snip]

I can't disagree with any of what you said. I just should perhaps clarify something about myself, which impacts my decisions:

Your post is completely focused on high fidelity and otherwise technical aspects of plugins. I don't care that much about such aspects. I spend a lot of time just auditioning plugins and taking notes on the ones I like the most, and I build a mental catalogue of sounds, effects and possibilities. When auditioning, I only care about the first, immediate impression a plugin causes on me. I listen to it and I immediately envision a song, an intro, outro, bridge or something. It's all about the impression it causes on me and what kind of ideas or feelings it invokes. It might be dirty, distorted, inaccurate, etc. and I don't care much. I just care about the inspiration it brings.

I can and I have done that with Linux plugins, but I can obviously go a lot farther with that kind of exercise by auditioning a much larger and more diverse collection, and Windows plugins are many many many. Like stars. It's a hell of a lot of inspiration!

A purist is likely to spot flaws in some of the plugins I like, but I have this sort of sentimental disposition that makes me think that sometimes an error, distortion or "flaw" actually adds some kind of spice and magic to a track. I tend to think that a sound has to be very wrong to be deemed wrong. Very often, it's not wrong. It's just its character!

In that same vein, I find it annoying when someone says that a certain plugin is "not good because it doesn't really sound like the actual instrument." Excuse me? It is an actual instrument! It just doesn't sound like that other, and I think it doesn't have to. It's a new sound. I'll bet Mozart never used it only because it didn't exist then. I seriously picture Mozart going nuts and locking himself in his bedroom for months with all the parafernalia we have today, ordering pizzas and soda to keep himself alive.

Moreover, there is this very important aspect:

(another realm of distinction lies in ones musical endeavors. Home producer? Commercial composer? Singer/songwriter? Cover Band? Touring band? Recording studio owner? Mad/happy scientist? Many different needs among these diverse titles.)

Yes, a considerable portion of my very eclectic taste includes shoegaze, so I like thick textures, nature-altering effects, and instruments that nobody can name. That can hide a lot of rough stuff. You can't get away with it if you make folk music, extreme electronica (like Kraftwerk), or classical music. Classical music buffs are particularly fussy and will think you're a barbarian if your sound is anything less than pristine. The original poster himself has come to my rescue at that:

Have you ever listened to lots of hitsongs? How 'bad' the sound is? How bad some play or vocal is? Hitsongs for instance many times are NOT of the highest quality. Many famous bands or singers grab there audience NOT with there high quality of playing or singing. It's more than that.
Many great songs are well known to be bad mastered. But yet they are respected hitsongs.

However, he kind of contradicts himself with this:

I think that i am a linux purist where it is the OS. I'm so glad to not be depending of that other os that i'm a bit restrained on going back using some of it, not even by a trick.

Don't let imaginary obstacles get in the way of your creativity. The tools are there, they are readily available, someone has put love and effort into them, often without any kind of retribution. The very least we can do for those developers and for Mother Music is to use those tools and make the world an even noisier place.

[CrocoDuck]

Your post is completely focused on high fidelity and otherwise technical aspects of plugins. I don't care that much about such aspects.

I will clarify something too. I am indeed focused on that 'cause I am an audio nerd . However, I don't think that psychological or otherwise less objective things are necessarily less important. As an example, a company next door to mine works on the noise of closing cars doors. That very specific thing. The reason is that, even if car A might be better in every possible regard with respect car B, the client at the concessionaire will often try (even without realizing it) to open and shut the door. If the sound doesn't communicate, somehow, an idea of robustness and high quality the chances of the client buying that car get smaller and smaller. And this is mostly unconscious. For these (and actually other) reasons, there is a conspicuous branch of research in acoustics into the noise of shutting doors...

What you say makes sense to me. A plugin is like a brush for musicians... or something like that. So I totally get it can open up new doors in your mind even just depending on how it feels. Instead, I tend to judge things the most objective way possible. Which at the end is not so much more objective really... But for example at the beginning I was using Guitar Rig under Linux and big part of the reason was the cool interface. Then I decided to listen to things with critical ear... and I found I actually prefer Guitarix much more. Same thing happened with Calf (the old one with the ugly interface) VS Waves Diamond. If you want, trying to put the psychological stuff in second order can open new doors too!

Oh by the way, I am not claiming that all the people that use Win plugins on Linux does it because the above. There were examples of plugins not existing in the Linux world. I just wanted to put this often discarded (and actually very important) fact on the table.

[rghvdberg]

Greetings,

An anecdote:

Last year I posted a piece on KVR that got some nice feedback from some serious KVRians I respect. The comments praised the music but noted a certain problem in the mix. Due to the nature of the original recordings the bass parts drifted across the stereo panorama. I had to agree with the comments that it was a disturbing phenomenon, so I asked if there was any way to correct the sound. I was directed to the Sanford Bass Tightener, downloaded it, Airwave'd it, and applied it in Ardour with no problems, using settings suggested on KVR.

My piece was accepted for the initial concert for the Csound 30th anniversary held at Maynooth Ireland. I feel strongly that it probably would have been rejected without the bass fix.

The point ? As far as I can tell, the Linux plugin armory includes no such creature as the Sanford plugin. If it does, and if it works as well as the Windows VST plugin, please point me to it.

I use the right tools to get the job done right. No, it doesn't have to be "perfect". "Better" will suffice. In this instance an Airwave'd Windows VST processor was the only solution I could find, i.e. it was the right tool.

Best,

dp

This one is a good one for the "What do we have? What do we need?" thread!
Good one.

[Luc]

Can you please explain the contradictie while i don't see it.
In my oppinion the quotes are about two different subject so can't contradict.

You're right. I wasn't clear.

Now I don't remember what I meant. I remember I edited it, moving an entire paragraph around and deleting another two. It was many hours ago so now I forget the connnection I had made in my mind.

Sorry about that.

[glowrak guy]

So, does music need to be 'perfect'? Do we have to go on an endless quest for the perfect (group off) plugins? Does that exist?
Is a song good when well enough to listen to? Or does an analytic curve has to be perfect?
(Yeah off course. There's a difference between styles of music. I know. But overall...)

1. Perfect, in the case of meeting airplay, streaming, or CD technical demands, yes.
2. Perfect in the case of artistry, you don't want your theme/message diminished
by performance flaws, or radical deviations from the genre's norms.
3. Good enough to listen to? I think you might mean 'good enough to get heard' at first,
the judgement crucible of the music industry, peers, and friends/family.
After acceptance in one or more of those groups, then, it's on to
'good enough to listen to'...
...but how often? Twice? Thrice? And hopefully make someones playlist,
land some gigs, place some tunes in commercial deals, get a local following,
maybe front for a rising star? Or become one?

Or absolutely none of the above, one can love creating music,
and
not give a tepid toss
for gain or loss,
cause you da man,
an you da boss

and all you need is just,


wait for it...






one_ more_ vst

[glowrak guy]

That assumes some clearly understood definition of 'lots', and 'professional',
and 'producer'. Things are changing dramatically in the muzak industry.

One could say 'lots' of U.S. Senators support xyz, but there are
only 50 Senators.

One could be 'professional', if they just filled out certain tax forms

And the lines are all blurry around 'producer', the catcher of alll spears,
but we can assume a producer facilitates creation of a saleable product,
downloads, streams, CD's, concerts, collaborations, and generate some publicity etc

Are professional producers counted in millions, or just thousands?
At the high end, there will be solid entrenchment among renowned studios
primarily using hardware, with $engineers$ mixing and mastering, because it works,
and that without crashing, licensing, or malware.

At the midrange level of projects, lets use 50 tracks and a city
of 200,000 people, for example, it's a lot easier and far more affordable
to try new software, and innovative hardware, and the client base will likely be
less demanding of name-brands, as long as there is evidence of quality results,
at a good price. In small towns, there may be little competition,
and someone with skillz could maximise their lack of a win/mac OS

My guess is that there will be continual slow erosion of the industry standard brands,
with more integration of linux at various various duties, with some software standard brands
being ported to linux, and lots more hardware running with a linux under the hood.

And then there are those sly divils who work in whatever they choose,
and present their clients the results on a pro-tools screen

[GMaq]

Is there one studio which produces famous hitsongs of famous artists known and to be mentioned that uses Linux in core?
Is there one real hitsong known and to be mentioned that's made and produced on Linux in core?
And than it doesn't matter if the answer is a global top 40 hitsong or a hitsong within a significant subculture. We all know what a hitsong is i think.

Hi beck,

By your standards I think the current answers are NO and NO...BUT!

Glowrak is going in the right direction, Let's say there are 3 producers using Windows, Mac and Linux... all of them are using Bitwig, Harrison Mixbus and U-he plugins. The applications are all cross-platform and they are using the same code simply compiled for different platforms... The obstacle now is not the Operating System or hardware but the skills of the artist and producer. In this scenario maybe the Linux guy will be the one to produce the next hit

I'm NOT saying anything bad about the Open-Source choices, simply that the BEST probability of Linux gaining entry to the arena of professional production (meaning 'hit' songs by your own definition) is by showing that Linux is equally capable of supporting industry-standard applications and programs already in use by the other platforms..

After that door opens, who knows what can happen

[sysrqer]

[quote="beck"][/quote]
Professional would mean that it is their profession, that they do it as their job. Working with famous people is something else entirely. Someone recording and producing demos for local artists as a full time job is every bit of a professional as Dave Pensado is. Famous is a rather flexible term anyway. And yes, professionals do use Linux, in your definition and otherwise.

[glowrak guy]

Beyond hit airplay songs, there is a professional market for video-game music,
commercial jingles, short-film productions, and soundtracks a rank below cinematic scoring.
Even theater troupes need music at times. Careers have been launched
from being great at 'jingles'. I'd bet a jingle vocalist who advanced to greater things,
would also remember the composer(s) and producers that helped get things rolling.
And there are several contests each year with very nice prize lists.

[glowrak guy]

And yes, professionals do use Linux, in your definition and otherwise.

And quite a few musicians use hardware that is under linux control, and don't realize it.

[Luc]

I'm NOT saying anything bad about the Open-Source choices, simply that the BEST probability of Linux gaining entry to the arena of professional production (meaning 'hit' songs by your own definition) is by showing that Linux is equally capable of supporting industry-standard applications and programs already in use by the other platforms..
After that door opens, who knows what can happen

I am very pessimistic about that.

There is a very strong culture against Linux, a culture where people always turn to whatever everyone else is using. And everyone else is using it because everyone else is using it.

I've lost count of how many times I've seen or read musicians and producers say that you will never be taken seriously in music production using Linux. They don't say it out of malice, they just think it's true and won't believe otherwise. If a large enough number of people believe something, they enforce it, so it becomes truth. De facto truth.

Beyond hit airplay songs, there is a professional market for video-game music,
commercial jingles, short-film productions, and soundtracks a rank below cinematic scoring.
Even theater troupes need music at times. Careers have been launched
from being great at 'jingles'. I'd bet a jingle vocalist who advanced to greater things,
would also remember the composer(s) and producers that helped get things rolling.
And there are several contests each year with very nice prize lists.

Yes, yes, but in some of those markets, people operate as lone wolves, while others require collaboration, interaction, exchanging project files, etc. Then it becomes difficult.

Above it all, few people can afford the learning curve and comparative isolation of using Linux.

[sadko4u]

There is a very strong culture against Linux, a culture where people always turn to whatever everyone else is using. And everyone else is using it because everyone else is using it.

It's tradition of the averaged human's mental system. Don't forget about duckling syndrome: "I learned this thing, and this is best because I know how to deal with it. Any others are bad because I don't want to spend time to learn them". It's like ducklings start to go behind any moving object that's moving.

I've lost count of how many times I've seen or read musicians and producers say that you will never be taken seriously in music production using Linux.

That's the problem. Everybody can say that. But when clarifying, you understand that that person has spent only one-two evenings understanding how to install Linux and sound producing software (and in most cases failed it!). In most cases the time they've spent installing Linux is much less the time they've spent to study their own software that they use.

They don't say it out of malice, they just think it's true and won't believe otherwise.

Or just don't want to accept their incompetence in this question. There is no success story about installing Windows on the PC because... It's already installed there. The main problem of using linux software is... the necessity to install linux-based distribution. Then fighting with first setup. But it's done once the system has been installed. They forget that in Windows environment... they are fighting with system every day.

If a large enough number of people believe something, they enforce it, so it becomes truth. De facto truth.

It's the deviation of our mind. An inability of people to have critical and objective point of view.

[briandc]

Is there a difference between LV2 and VST in terms of freedom of use? I thought Vst technology was a closed-source thing...


brian

[sysrqer]

Therefore my question. Curious how that is in the world of sound.
Nice, all those promotive contests. But the greatest confirmation of acceptation would be if a global top hit was made with linux only (say ardour). It would be complimental if let's say the last song of Metallica/Adele/Justin Bieber/Taylor Swift/ was recorded, edited and mastered totaly on linux. Thén you can shout out loud Linux is in the game.
It would be nice if would be known that Abbey Road, Sunset Sound, RCA, Aftermath or Shady Records uses Linux only. But i don't believe they are.

This doesn't have any kind of bearing on the OS or software in question. Most professional studios (traditionally) use macs, does that mean that Windows is inferior? Jokes aside, no it doesn't, it just means that's the way it has been. Most hip hop, and a lot of dance music, was made using MPCs. That's not to say that the MPC is the best thing ever for making music but for a very long time it was the best, and possibly only, tool for the job.
Considering linux as 3% market share (as far as I remember) you're doomed straight away for asking this question, this alone makes it much less likely that "hit songs" will be made with this unpopular software.
It's quite likely that these mega studios you speak of do use linux in the capacity of a server though. Not that most people working there would know.

Who cares about acceptance? Why would I need or want to should out loud that linux is in the game? I don't understand why you feel the need to be accepted by the masses for your choice of software. You would be saying the same thing about Windows software such as Reason and Ableton Live not being used by "professionals" 10 years ago so I don't think you question has anything to do with linux. It sounds more like an inferiority complex.

By the way, I know professional engineers who use linux and open source software, they do exist.