| |||||||||||||
Demo Recoding Suggestions?Demo Recoding Suggestions?Posted Aug 15, 2012 20:09 UTC (Wed) by daglwn (subscriber, #65432)Parent article: The Linux digital audio workstation - Part 2
Thanks for the info! I didn't realize there were so many DAWs available for Linux.
I've got an ongoing project to create a set of simple demo CDs. Two tracks at its most basic, perhaps 6-8 at the most. These would be very homebrew-ish things.
I've tried Ardour but it seems like overkill for this project. Does anyone have suggestions for Linux software to easily record and mix multiple tracks and arrange various recordings into a CD? Mastering would be nice too but not critical.
(Log in to post comments)
Demo Recoding Suggestions? Posted Aug 16, 2012 11:30 UTC (Thu) by phedders (subscriber, #14685) [Link]
Sounds like you want Ardour.... you can use it in a simple setup - or massively complex one. It works brilliantly. Suggest to use Ardour 3 beta 5 (A2 has known and unfixable bugs - which you may not hit... but you might, and A3 is better in soooo many ways.)
Try Audacity Posted Aug 16, 2012 14:47 UTC (Thu) by hannada (subscriber, #4633) [Link]
Not to take anything away from Ardour, but what you describe is well within the capabilities of Audacity insofar as preparation of audio tracks in the form of separate files is concerned. I give Audacity high marks for ease of use and intuitive GUI. It excels at using multiple tracks as input to produce stereo mixed tracks as output.
This leaves mastering as a separate question, but ALL mastering applications are happy to take audio tracks in the form of separate files as input. IMHO that is the best approach, because you need accept no compromises on either the audio editing side or on the CD mastering side.
Author's reply Posted Aug 16, 2012 17:48 UTC (Thu) by StudioDave (subscriber, #84346) [Link]
I agree, Audacity is a good fit for relatively uncomplicated recordings. It is widely used in preparing podcasts, and it is very easy to learn.
Best,
dp
Author's reply Posted Aug 22, 2012 15:25 UTC (Wed) by man_ls (subscriber, #15091) [Link] Audacity is great, but it can only do destructive editing: once a filter is applied the original sample is lost (unless the operation is undone). This limitation is not important for trivial projects, but it is felt more and more as the mix becomes more complex. Some years ago I did a project with Audacity, and at the end I was regretting that I had not used something like Ardour, which applies filters in real time. There is a space for each kind of editor; be sure to pick the right one!
Author's reply Posted Aug 23, 2012 13:47 UTC (Thu) by StudioDave (subscriber, #84346) [Link]
Greetings,
Very good point re: destructive editing. If a user thinks he will be working with numerous edits and added effects he may well prefer one of the DAWs presented here to avoid the problems you encountered. Audacity is a powerful soundfile editor, no doubt, but it may not always be a recommendable substitute for a full-featured DAW. As you wrote, there's a place for each kind of program. Choose carefully. Or as the rastas have it, "Measure twice, cut once." :)
Best,
dp
Try Audacity Posted Aug 29, 2012 12:18 UTC (Wed) by philomath (guest, #84172) [Link]
Interesting, Audacity is featured in "The Art of Unix Programming" as an example of very good UI design which is "subtly excellent and worthy of emulation".
http://catb.org/esr/writings/taoup/html/ch06s01.html
Try Audacity Posted Aug 29, 2012 12:24 UTC (Wed) by andresfreund (subscriber, #69562) [Link]
I don't get why people so much worth into what ESR writes? Read his blog, read his code.
|
|||||||||||||