[Ardour-Users] Hm...

Thomas Vecchione seablaede at gmail.com
Tue Aug 31 11:19:30 PDT 2010

On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 12:24 PM, David Kastrup <dak at gnu.org> wrote:
> You mean, a typical hardware studio offers good modularity, a DAW by
> necessity not?
> --
> David Kastrup

Try taking your single purpose hardware processor and have it run
simultaneously on multiple tracks, processing each individually.  On
the contrary a DAW offers a LOT of modularity.  You can still insert
hardware processing should you choose, and many people do, provided
you have the IO for it.  But the DAW, and Ardour in particular,
replaces the patchbay, and the plugins replace many racks of
processing in itself, and you can slot in whatever processing you want
into the DAW, replaces the tape machines, and the mixing console for
many people....

And you consider this not modular at all?  You can replace DSP at
will, you can choose to continue to use your old hardware as you want,
change around the audio routing at will....  I would consider this
taking the studio modularity and making it _nearly_ infinite in
comparison.  You are taking your entire studio, in fact one many times
larger than most studios, and putting it inside a box with a total of
two controls, a keyboard and a mouse, for many people.


More information about the Ardour-Users mailing list