[ubuntu-studio-devel] Elementary OS

bart deruyter bart.deruyter at gmail.com
Wed Sep 9 07:56:48 UTC 2015

Hi all,

I've been following this series of mails with much interest.
Because I'm not active as contributor I am reluctant to join in, but I do
would like to help because I really like ubuntu studio. This thread has
moved quite far away from the idea of what the subject says, and one of the
things that I've read was the issue of PR.

A lot of popular and very successful open source projects have end results
they can show and show off with. I am talking about blender, krita, lmms,
even synfig which is growing in popularity since their latest release.

What I am suggesting is that we look around for projects that actually use
ubuntu studio as its base and ask if ubuntu studio can add it to a kind of
'portfolio' of work created with ubuntu studio (I'm not sure, but I think
something like that has been made in the past, I might be wrong of course).

It is not only good for ubuntu studio it also is publicity for the projects
that are being created with ubuntu studio. In my view that is a win - win

There is another comment I want to add here. A few emails up there was the
discussion about hardware support for professional use, and the lack of
really professional software in many areas. I'm not a full time
professional, I'm a music teacher doing his own thing and chances are very
slim that I do end up as a full time professional requiring a really
professional studio.
But if I really would need professional equipment and software, I would not
build a studio for my own. I would look out for a recording studio and hire

What I want to say with this is that with ubuntu studio one has to make a
choice which public you want to reach. Or you want to reach the music
enthusiast and offer whatever is possible to make it easier to create a
small home studio, or you want to reach the real professional who wants to
make a living with their music and you try to offer the most professional,
reliable, expandable and configurable system for live performance,
recording purposes etc...

In the first case I see a lot of possibilities with ubuntu studio. In the
latter case there are hardware requirements that yet have to be fulfilled,
supported and indeed software requirements still lacking as I've read in
this list.

So far, in the years that I have used ubuntu studio, it seems that the
first case is the public you want to reach, the music enthusiast. That is
very good for me, but don't make the mistake of getting confused in which
public you want to target.
Of course quality matters, and of course we want the best possible software
and hardware to run, but keep in mind that garageband is more widely by
music enthusiast then pro tools, and of course pro tools is way better, but
pro tools does not target the music enthusiast, it targets the
professional, who makes a living from his/her music.
The music enthusiast and semi-professional who uses pro-tools is most
likely using an illegal copy anyway because it is way too expensive :-) .

I hope this mail was not too long and I hope my opinion might be of help.



On Twitter <https://twitter.com/#%21/Bart_Issimo>
On Identi.ca <http://identi.ca/bartart3d>
On Google+ <https://plus.google.com/u/0/b/116379400376517483499/>

2015-09-09 1:55 GMT+02:00 Len Ovens <len at ovenwerks.net>:

> On Tue, 8 Sep 2015, ttoine wrote:
> In term of free software, yes, the offer is poor. But some great stuff are
>> available:
>>  - Ardour
>>  - LMMS (equivalent of Fruity loops, not of Ableton Live)
>>  - Qtractor
>>  - Kdenlive
>>  - Cinerella
>>  - Blender
>>  - Gimp
>>  - Inkscape
>>  - Scribus
>>  - Some plugins are very good, some bad, let's highlight the good ones.
>> Most of
>> people have a lot of free and cracked plugins, but actually are using
>> only a few
>> ones. And even on Windows and Mac, plugins can make a sequencer crash,
>> they are
>> used to it.
> Speaking only of the audio applications. One of the problems we have, is
> that the good apps in most cases need a running Jack. So the user who is
> trying things out finds that they are drawn to the poorer applications
> because they just start and work. Having a running jack from session start
> might turn some of this around.
>  - Do someone know if we could package and distribute Open AV apps ?
> The licence is not bad (by debian standards), but the dev has no time to
> package or maintain a package. He is not the only one.
> Those are not finished products, they are open source projects. However,
>> it is
>> possible to achieve the creation of great content when you know how to
>> use them.
> True.
> On the non free software side, there are:
>>  - Mixbus
>>  - Lightworks
>>  - Bitwig (equivalent of Live, made by former Ableton employees)
>>  - Many people own licenses, and have hardware for that. We need to
>> attract them
>> with a simple and stable system. With a place where they can find
>> documentation
>> and support.
>>  - Let's highlight them !
> That is good too. Some of the free/open projects are sponsored by the
> non-free ones. Pointing them out as a good idea and providing a good stable
> platform for them to run on is a great idea.
> --
> Len Ovens
> www.ovenwerks.net
> --
> ubuntu-studio-devel mailing list
> ubuntu-studio-devel at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-studio-devel/attachments/20150909/98cc0993/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the ubuntu-studio-devel mailing list