[Ardour-Users] Plugin help

[Ralf Mardorf]

Thomas Vecchione wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 11:20 AM, Ralf Mardorf
> <ralf.mardorf at alice-dsl.net> wrote:
>   
>> IMO LADSPAs and LV2s should be good for recordings and "normal"
>> postprocessing (mastering), but not to repair anything.
>> Very often I'm not fine with Linux effects, but to expect that there should
>> be effects that should be able to repair mistakes IMO is the wrong
>> direction.
>>     
>
> Hmm here again I have to disagree.  Some restoration works in
> 'realtime' in as far as it works as a process inserted on the audio
> signal chain and can be non-destructive in as far as it never modifies
> the original recordings as a result, only the output.  CEDAR is the
> king of this hill of course with their standalone units, but the
> WaveArts AU plugins I use also work like this, work great in
> Ardour(<20mS latency on them in fact), and to be honest I can't think
> of a reason off hand that they couldn't be implemented in LADSPA or
> LV2 format.
>
>       Seablade

Okay, this seems to be an interesting application: 
http://wavearts.com/uploads/docs/Master_Restoration_Manual.pdf
Btw. are there any gates, limiters, compressors for Linux that are able 
to do (adjustable) lookahead?
What I'm missing for Linux FX is musical sync for delays. Assumed that 
the BPM will change in a song, values in ms aren't a good thing.

I never asked any proprietary software company to sell their products as 
LADSPA or LV2. Proprietary software for Linux is a double-edged sword ;).

When I started with Linux I missed a lot FX, but step-by-step there are 
FX I like :), IMO the only annoying issue is that dependencies for some 
distros are to old to use some of the FX I like. OTOH they are for free, 
so I'm patient. I wouldn't be able to buy all the proprietary FX and 
instruments I like and the usage of cracks is something I don't like. 
Not because it's outlawed, but because I like the idea of sharing 
knowledge and cracks don't share the source code.

Some mails before Thomas Vecchione wrote:
> find them to be lagging far behind what is availiable on other
> platforms.  This isn't meant to be a put down, the other alternatives
> have teams of engineers that get paid to work on the DSP full time

There's an disadvantage for proprietary software, that comes with one 
advantage :D. There are some bosses that can force the development in 
one direction, thus there will be less richness, but also less discord. 
IMO the advantage for Linux having this richness, has an unwanted side 
effect that isn't related to the money issue. A problem for free 
software is the consensus. From my viewpoint as a user, there are to 
many "eating babies" discussions, but I do understand this. I don't like 
to discuss about a consensus what other want me to add to the music or 
to remove from the music I compose.

Cheers,
Ralf