i was looking into trying out Qtractor, but was wondering how is it in performance compared to ardour 5,
i use ardour often and i like it, but i also want to try out Qtractor,
if you ask me, with my author's hat on, i'd say that my opinion would be profoundly biased, don't you think? add to that that i don't load ardour any often'round here ;)
the best answer you can get is about trying yourself and do all the judgement from your POV.
i'd rather let other folks here and there speak for them selves now :)
> in performance compared to ardour 5
You mean your performance, or the software's? Event if it's the latter, it's still a weird question : Each of them does its best ;p
If we talk about performance and stability, I think that Qtractor is the winner,
In addition the speed with which it develops is simply terrifying, to be the (80% or more Rui code).
When it came out, ardour 4, had a bug in loop midi, (the midi part is essential for me, I abandon it)
When it came out ardour 5 I tried again and in bug was still there. 5.4.
Rui is constantly correcting bugs,
A bug so important will not last a whole version, (at least I think).
Qtractor, it's only solid ..
i guess i will try it out,
its funny cause ardour has a lot of people working on it, maybe it is too large in code or something
Until now I used Ardour, I'm very new to digital recording and I started with it. Actually I once tried Cubase on Windows but maybe once or twice, then I had other things to do and quit.
But since I went on Linux I thought about recording so in the past few months I started.
Being new I didnt' know, and still don't know, many things. So I went for Ardour and also supported it until I discovered there's no way to make midi works.
To me it's something I don't understand. The most of my tracks are audio since I mainly use guitars and bas through amplis. But if I have to record a synth, or an orchestra, I have to go for midi. And Ardour doesn't do that.
So I came to Qtractor and I'm still trying it. If everything will work fine, I'll trash Ardour.
For me it's quite silly having being forced to use two different daws because one doesn't allow midi and the other audio or other.
Also, for a newbie like me, I find that the explanations in Ardour are very lacking clarity. Several sections of the manual are yet to be written, other sections tell you what a certain button does but not why, how and when. So I'll never understand anything in this way.
What comforts me is the fact that is not me, or totally me being dumb. Some days ago I met a friend I haven't seen for years, who always did digital recording. He used quite all daw in history and now it's on windows and Protools. We were talking about it and he told me he tried Ardour, even though it was the 3 version, and he was about getting insane with jack, all the connections to do and so on.
He suggested me to get back on windows and protools which "doesn't require any effort: you just plug what you have to do, and protools does everything by itself".
But I want to stay with free stuff, so I'm trying to learn Qtractor.
So I went for Ardour and also supported it until I discovered there's no way to make midi works
well, that must be something strange going on this world, ardour does work with MIDI since its V3 incarnation, i believe, which is more than 3 years ago from now--whether it has been satisfaction to all souls is quite another story though ;)
More information about text formats
Copyright (C) 2006-2017 rncbc aka Rui Nuno Capela. All rights reserved.
Powered by Drupal