Quantcast

OT: Monitor setups

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
21 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

OT: Monitor setups

Antony Gelberg
Hi all,

As somewhat-on-topic posts seem to be welcome here:
  1. When working with audio, do you use more than one monitor?
  2. If so, how do you generally divide things up between the monitors, for different stages of the process?
Antony

--

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: OT: Monitor setups

Moshe Werner


On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Antony Gelberg <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi all,

As somewhat-on-topic posts seem to be welcome here:
  1. When working with audio, do you use more than one monitor?
  2. If so, how do you generally divide things up between the monitors, for different stages of the process?
Antony

--

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user

Hi Antony,

I didn't really understand your question.
Do you mean working with different pairs of monitors or more than one monitor (e.c. stereo, surround)?

Best 
Moshe

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: OT: Monitor setups

Jeremy Jongepier
On 05/02/2017 02:44 PM, Moshe Werner wrote:
> I didn't really understand your question.
> Do you mean working with different pairs of monitors or more than one
> monitor (e.c. stereo, surround)?

I think this is about displays, so video monitors.

Jeremy


_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user

signature.asc (853 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: OT: Monitor setups

Antony Gelberg
In reply to this post by Moshe Werner
Oops, indeed I meant video monitors. *blush*

On 2 May 2017 at 15:44, Moshe Werner <[hidden email]> wrote:


On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Antony Gelberg <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi all,

As somewhat-on-topic posts seem to be welcome here:
  1. When working with audio, do you use more than one monitor?
  2. If so, how do you generally divide things up between the monitors, for different stages of the process?
Antony

--

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user

Hi Antony,

I didn't really understand your question.
Do you mean working with different pairs of monitors or more than one monitor (e.c. stereo, surround)?

Best 
Moshe



--

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: OT: Monitor setups

Len Ovens
On Tue, 2 May 2017, Antony Gelberg wrote:

> Oops, indeed I meant video monitors. *blush*
>
> On 2 May 2017 at 15:44, Moshe Werner <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
>       On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Antony Gelberg
>       <[hidden email]> wrote:
>       Hi all,
> As somewhat-on-topic posts seem to be welcome here:
>  1. When working with audio, do you use more than one monitor?
>  2. If so, how do you generally divide things up between the
>     monitors, for different stages of the process?

Two monitors... 4 workspaces. Not really standard I would imagine. One
workspace is all online stuff, browser on one side, terminal logged into
the server for irc, mail, server maint (using screen) on the other.

Workspace 2 is all audio, editor on one side and mixer on the other
(Ardour)... also some terminals around as I run from command line (makes
testing easier) and Open-Stage-Control because I do OSC testing right now.

Workspace 3 is open in case my wife asks for a scan or I want to update
the family web site with new pictures or whatever.

Workspace 4 (lower right) is my development set. left has Geany and right
has various terminals and file browsers open.

It used to be that if I was using a softsynth or hydrogen I would have
them in a separate workspace as well, but plugins have replaced
most of that any more. I also do more analog recording than synth as I
have not gotten the sound/feel I want from drum machine stuff... though
this may change things:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrr9lr_Pbkg&t=54s
(Developed in Ardour, thanks Nick)


--
Len Ovens
www.ovenwerks.net

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: OT: Monitor setups

Crojav
In reply to this post by Antony Gelberg

Antony

I separate as much as posible over workspaces. In Ardour for example I have mixer in the workspace direct on the right from the main window. So workspaces by me.  


Op 02-05-17 om 14:14 schreef Antony Gelberg:
When working with audio, do you use more than one monitor?
  1. If so, how do you generally divide things up between the monitors, for different stages of the process?
Antony



_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: OT: Monitor setups

Brent Busby
I suppose I'll go ahead and describe my setup...

I'm running a WindowMaker desktop with two monitors.  One is very tall
and setup as a portrait mode monitor, and the other to the right of it
is smaller but landscape mode.  When I'm running Ardour, the editor and
mixer window pretty much cover 100% of the tall portrait mode screen, so
I have the other monitor for everything else (Ardour transport bar,
QJackCtl, Hydrogen, Muse, QMidiArp, Seq24, hdspmixer, Emacs, etc,
etc.).  If I need more space, of course there are other virtual desktops
I can flip to.

--
- Brent Busby + ===============================================
                + With the rise of social networking
--  Studio   -- + sites, computers are making people
--  Amadeus  -- + easier to use every day.
----------------+ ===============================================
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: OT: Monitor setups

Maurizio Berti
I used to have 3 displays, the center one is a 16:10 display (1440x900), while the laterals were 5:4 (1280x1024).
For normal usage I used the right one (which was slightly bigger than the left one) for web navigation, the center for other programs, video/streaming, and programming IDEs, the left for system audio mixer (jack_mixer, I always have jack running), shells and system monitoring; for audio I used the central display for the Ardour main track window, the left for the mixer strip/qjackctl/qsampler/plugin GUIs, with jack connections in the background with Patchage, while the right one was for other programs (music notation or sequencing, Hydrogen, Renoise, scripting, etc).
Some months ago the right display broke down and, while I think I'll replace it someday, the setup remained pretty similar, with programs that usually run on the right splitted between central and left, according to the size needed. I started using virtual desktops much more than in the past (I use fluxbox with 4 virtual desktops), so the second desktop is usually dedicated to music players, social networks and chat apps, with the third and fourth used as "backup" spaces when I need to access to a program easily without activating it from the taskbar, for example when using virtualization softwares (I configured the shortcut Win key+mousewheel to cycle between virtual desktops).

2017-05-03 18:32 GMT+02:00 Brent Busby <[hidden email]>:
I suppose I'll go ahead and describe my setup...

I'm running a WindowMaker desktop with two monitors.  One is very tall
and setup as a portrait mode monitor, and the other to the right of it
is smaller but landscape mode.  When I'm running Ardour, the editor and
mixer window pretty much cover 100% of the tall portrait mode screen, so
I have the other monitor for everything else (Ardour transport bar,
QJackCtl, Hydrogen, Muse, QMidiArp, Seq24, hdspmixer, Emacs, etc,
etc.).  If I need more space, of course there are other virtual desktops
I can flip to.

--
- Brent Busby   + ===============================================
                +       With the rise of social networking
--  Studio   -- +       sites, computers are making people
--  Amadeus  -- +       easier to use every day.
----------------+ ===============================================
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user



--
È difficile avere una convinzione precisa quando si parla delle ragioni del cuore. - "Sostiene Pereira", Antonio Tabucchi
http://www.jidesk.net

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: OT: Monitor setups

Antony Gelberg
In reply to this post by Brent Busby
Crojav, do you use multiple workspaces on one monitor?

Brent, isn't it a bit cramped with the tracks and mixer on the same screen?

Maurizio, you're a hero! Three monitors! But it does sound like two is okay as well. Also, Patchage looks interesting, what does it offer over qjackctl?

Does anybody get by with only one monitor? Does anybody have a certain setup for recording, then a different setup for mixing? Screenshots / photographs welcome!

My reason for asking is that I'm just getting back into DAW work, I don't have a control surface any more, and I'm not quite sure how to get my workflow going. Using ardour, hydrogen, qjackctl, with a bit of guitarix, yoshimi, qsynth... Not sure everything needs to be open at once, but want to retain flexibility.

It's really interesting seeing people writing about workspaces. I haven't been into them in the slightest since I went back to a "normal" window manager (xfce) from my ratpoison / ion3 days. I guess I just like to have most things in front of me, and I can always Alt-Tab or use the taskbar to get to another program. Let's face it, 90% of our lives are in the web browser when we're not doing audio, right? ;)

PS This is the first time I've participated meaningfully on a mailing list for many years, and in the meantime, top-posting has become the norm. Really hard to quote your posts, sorry. :(

On 3 May 2017 at 19:32, Brent Busby <[hidden email]> wrote:
I suppose I'll go ahead and describe my setup...

I'm running a WindowMaker desktop with two monitors.  One is very tall
and setup as a portrait mode monitor, and the other to the right of it
is smaller but landscape mode.  When I'm running Ardour, the editor and
mixer window pretty much cover 100% of the tall portrait mode screen, so
I have the other monitor for everything else (Ardour transport bar,
QJackCtl, Hydrogen, Muse, QMidiArp, Seq24, hdspmixer, Emacs, etc,
etc.).  If I need more space, of course there are other virtual desktops
I can flip to.

--
- Brent Busby   + ===============================================
                +       With the rise of social networking
--  Studio   -- +       sites, computers are making people
--  Amadeus  -- +       easier to use every day.
----------------+ ===============================================
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user



--

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: OT: Monitor setups

David Jones
In reply to this post by Antony Gelberg
At work where I work with enterprise content management systems via Windows 7 (no multiple desktops, sorely missed!), I have 2 17" 1280x1024 displays side by side.

At home where I write, draw, photograph and make music, I have a single 24" 1920x1080 display, I spread things over multiple desktops. I like being able to put QJackCtl's transport bar on my main composition desktop while the rest of the program sits on another desktop, out of the way.

IIRC, doesn't AVLinux or Musix or some other media creation distro come already set up with multiple task-specific desktops?

David W. Jones
[hidden email]
authenticity, honesty, community
http://dancingtreefrog.comOn May 3, 2017 12:08, Maurizio Berti <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> I used to have 3 displays, the center one is a 16:10 display (1440x900), while the laterals were 5:4 (1280x1024).
> For normal usage I used the right one (which was slightly bigger than the left one) for web navigation, the center for other programs, video/streaming, and programming IDEs, the left for system audio mixer (jack_mixer, I always have jack running), shells and system monitoring; for audio I used the central display for the Ardour main track window, the left for the mixer strip/qjackctl/qsampler/plugin GUIs, with jack connections in the background with Patchage, while the right one was for other programs (music notation or sequencing, Hydrogen, Renoise, scripting, etc).
> Some months ago the right display broke down and, while I think I'll replace it someday, the setup remained pretty similar, with programs that usually run on the right splitted between central and left, according to the size needed. I started using virtual desktops much more than in the past (I use fluxbox with 4 virtual desktops), so the second desktop is usually dedicated to music players, social networks and chat apps, with the third and fourth used as "backup" spaces when I need to access to a program easily without activating it from the taskbar, for example when using virtualization softwares (I configured the shortcut Win key+mousewheel to cycle between virtual desktops).
>
> 2017-05-03 18:32 GMT+02:00 Brent Busby <[hidden email]>:
>>
>> I suppose I'll go ahead and describe my setup...
>>
>> I'm running a WindowMaker desktop with two monitors.  One is very tall
>> and setup as a portrait mode monitor, and the other to the right of it
>> is smaller but landscape mode.  When I'm running Ardour, the editor and
>> mixer window pretty much cover 100% of the tall portrait mode screen, so
>> I have the other monitor for everything else (Ardour transport bar,
>> QJackCtl, Hydrogen, Muse, QMidiArp, Seq24, hdspmixer, Emacs, etc,
>> etc.).  If I need more space, of course there are other virtual desktops
>> I can flip to.
>>
>> --
>> - Brent Busby   + ===============================================
>>                 +       With the rise of social networking
>> --  Studio   -- +       sites, computers are making people
>> --  Amadeus  -- +       easier to use every day.
>> ----------------+ ===============================================
>> _______________________________________________
>> Linux-audio-user mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
>
>
>
>
> --
> È difficile avere una convinzione precisa quando si parla delle ragioni del cuore. - "Sostiene Pereira", Antonio Tabucchi
> http://www.jidesk.net
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: OT: Monitor setups

Brent Busby
In reply to this post by Antony Gelberg
Antony Gelberg <[hidden email]> writes:

> Brent, isn't it a bit cramped with the tracks and mixer on the same screen?

Not too bad..  It's a high res screen..  :)

--
- Brent Busby + ===============================================
                + With the rise of social networking
--  Studio   -- + sites, computers are making people
--  Amadeus  -- + easier to use every day.
----------------+ ===============================================
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: OT: Monitor setups

Crojav
In reply to this post by Antony Gelberg
Antony

Yes I do you use multiple workspaces on one monitor. A 22" 16:10

* first workspace is always JackCtl

* Second Ardour sequencer

* Third  Ardour mixer

* Workspaces 4/9 GxTuner + KMeter, Htop,  Atom editor

I don't do recording.

My work centers on Ardour Midi + ZynaddsubFx/Plugin's

I also have a script what opens all of this and bring it on the right
workspaces.

Regards Crojav


Op 04-05-17 om 00:28 schreef Antony Gelberg:

> Crojav, do you use multiple workspaces on one monitor?
>
> Does anybody get by with only one monitor? Does anybody have a certain
> setup for recording, then a different setup for mixing? Screenshots /
> photographs welcome!
>
> It's really interesting seeing people writing about workspaces. I
> haven't been into them in the slightest since I went back to a
> "normal" window manager (xfce) from my ratpoison / ion3 days. I guess
> I just like to have most things in front of me, and I can always
> Alt-Tab or use the taskbar to get to another program. Let's face it,
> 90% of our lives are in the web browser when we're not doing audio,
> right? ;)

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: OT: Monitor setups

Maurizio Berti
In reply to this post by Antony Gelberg
Maurizio, you're a hero! Three monitors! But it does sound like two is okay as well. Also, Patchage looks interesting, what does it offer over qjackctl?

Two is fine, but I really miss the third sometimes. Btw, just yesterday I had to rent what was going to be the new third display, because a friend got his second monitor burn too, after his first one broke some months ago... So, it could be worse ;-)
I really prefer Patchage over QjackCtl's patchbay (actually, I don't even use QjackCtl anymore) because it allows you to have everything on one viewport, Jack audio, and both ALSA and Jack midi, and place everything where you need, allowing you a better graphical organization of the patchbay. When you have projects with more than 30-40 ports, that could be a mess in QjackCtl.
 
(xfce) from my ratpoison / ion3 days. I guess I just like to have most things in front of me, and I can always Alt-Tab or use the taskbar to get to another program. Let's face it, 90% of our lives are in the web browser when we're not doing audio, right? ;)

Well, does programming count? :-)


PS This is the first time I've participated meaningfully on a mailing list for many years, and in the meantime, top-posting has become the norm. Really hard to quote your posts, sorry. :(

I know, I don't like that too, and I usually do that for work messaging or when my answer is clear enough without the need of citing the original message.
Beyond that, I still love old-style bottom posting.

Cheers,
Maurizio
--
È difficile avere una convinzione precisa quando si parla delle ragioni del cuore. - "Sostiene Pereira", Antonio Tabucchi
http://www.jidesk.net

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: OT: Monitor setups

Len Ovens
On Thu, 4 May 2017, Maurizio Berti wrote:
> I really prefer Patchage over QjackCtl's patchbay (actually, I don't even use
> QjackCtl anymore) because it allows you to have everything on one viewport, Jack
> audio, and both ALSA and Jack midi, and place everything where you need, allowing
> you a better graphical organization of the patchbay. When you have projects with
> more than 30-40 ports, that could be a mess in QjackCtl.

It starts to get to be a real mess in patchage too, pretty quick, even
with full screen. Even 10 tracks with a few effects busses gets to that 30
or more ports. Add drums... and the numbers go up quick. Grid based,
sectioned starts to look really good. That is splitting the midi from
audio, inputs from outputs, hardware from software, etc.



--
Len Ovens
www.ovenwerks.net

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: OT: Monitor setups

Will Godfrey
In reply to this post by Antony Gelberg
Single fairly high res monitor here, and switching workspaces. Usually, one for
Yoshimi, another for Rosegarden and a third for any other soft synths etc.

The qjackctl window I make sticky and top dead centre.

I usually do one-pass recording to Audacity, and depending on exactly how I'm
working I'll either have that on the rosegarden workspace (as that's where I
usually trigger it) or if I'm doing something more complex I'll make that
sticky too.

--
Will J Godfrey
http://www.musically.me.uk
Say you have a poem and I have a tune.
Exchange them and we can both have a poem, a tune, and a song.
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: OT: Monitor setups

Ralf Mardorf
In reply to this post by Len Ovens
On Thu, 4 May 2017 11:15:54 -0700 (PDT), Len Ovens wrote:

>On Thu, 4 May 2017, Maurizio Berti wrote:
>> I really prefer Patchage over QjackCtl's patchbay (actually, I don't
>> even use QjackCtl anymore) because it allows you to have everything
>> on one viewport, Jack audio, and both ALSA and Jack midi, and place
>> everything where you need, allowing you a better graphical
>> organization of the patchbay. When you have projects with more than
>> 30-40 ports, that could be a mess in QjackCtl.  
>
>It starts to get to be a real mess in patchage too, pretty quick, even
>with full screen. Even 10 tracks with a few effects busses gets to
>that 30 or more ports. Add drums... and the numbers go up quick. Grid
>based, sectioned starts to look really good. That is splitting the
>midi from audio, inputs from outputs, hardware from software, etc.

IMO QjackCtl is the second best tool to organize connections. The best
way isn't to use a separated tool at all. In my experiences there's no
need to use QackCtl, when using Ardour. However, Qjackctl follows a
patchbay approach and Patchage simulates messy placed gear. In the real
world we are using a patchbay, to easily connect messy placed gear.In
short, QjackCtl does the right thing, while IMO the approach of
Patchage is (to put it politely) absurd.

--
"Access to all language versions of Wikipedia was blocked in Turkey on
29 April 2017." -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_censorship_of_Wikipedia#Turkey
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: OT: Monitor setups

Thorsten Wilms-2
On 05.05.2017 04:26, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> In the real
> world we are using a patchbay, to easily connect messy placed gear.In
> short, QjackCtl does the right thing, while IMO the approach of
> Patchage is (to put it politely) absurd.

There's nothing polite about that. Likewise, there's nothing polite to
say about that dimwitted comparison to physical gear.

Are you even aware of Patchage's automatic layout feature?


https://i.stack.imgur.com/XYfo7.png
vs
http://www.penguinproducer.com/Blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/screenshot542.png

When I'm still busy carefully tracing the lines and double checking
which rows they belong to in Qjackctl, for a handful of connections, I
could have grokked an entire setup shown in Patchage in the same time.


--
Thorsten Wilms

thorwil's design for free software:
http://thorwil.wordpress.com/
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: OT: Monitor setups

Maurizio Berti
2017-05-05 9:42 GMT+02:00 Thorsten Wilms <[hidden email]>:
On <a href="tel:05.05.2017%2004" value="+390505201704" target="_blank">05.05.2017 04:26, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
In the real
world we are using a patchbay, to easily connect messy placed gear.In
short, QjackCtl does the right thing, while IMO the approach of
Patchage is (to put it politely) absurd.

There's nothing polite about that. Likewise, there's nothing polite to say about that dimwitted comparison to physical gear.

Are you even aware of Patchage's automatic layout feature?

And, also, the ability to split/join client ports, which actually can allow you to have a layout similar to that QjackCtl offers.
I tend to agree with Thorsten on this matter. The fact is, there's obviously no better software at all, it all depends on your needs and your habits.
For me, QjackCtl's patchbay isn't good enough for my workflow, expecially when working with a lot of clients and with completely different setups per project. And I don't even use the automatic layout, since I really need to put clients where I want.
Also, comparison to physical gear makes sense only in certain situations: even in the real world, I always use completely different setups and patching, I really wouldn't do much with a "standard" patchbay, which is usually intended for pretty standard (and, possibly, always similar) layouts.
I once had an orchestral setup with 10 virtual instrument clients (with 16 audio output ports each), a couple of custom made mididings script (each of them with 8-10 ports), external effects and, finally, ardour. Trust me, in QjackCtl that would have been a mess of intersected bezier-curves. Not that the Patchage visualisation was perfect, but, at least, I was able to organize clients according to their role and connections; it wasn't easy to work with that project, but, at least, everytime I looked at the Patchage window everything was clear at the first glance. That wouldn't have happened with QjackCtl.
I also don't like very much Ardour's patchbay layout: while it makes sense, it takes a lot of space and you have to do a lot of scrolling and eye-searching when you have a lot of clients active.
But, then again, what's important is that you feel right about the tool you use, so, that doesn't matter: they're completely different approaches, they work fine and make sense in their workflow concept.

Maurizio

--
È difficile avere una convinzione precisa quando si parla delle ragioni del cuore. - "Sostiene Pereira", Antonio Tabucchi
http://www.jidesk.net

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: OT: Monitor setups

Ralf Mardorf
On Sun, 7 May 2017 22:18:15 +0200, Maurizio Berti wrote:
>Not that the Patchage visualisation was perfect, but, at least, I was
>able to organize clients according to their role and connections; it
>wasn't easy to work with that project, but, at least, everytime I
>looked at the Patchage window everything was clear at the first
>glance.

Hi,

the more graphic gimmickry, the less professional. You'll see more
graphic gimmickry on cheap consumer hifi gear, than on better class
consumer hifi gear, let alone professional gear. The same is true for
software. For what purpose do you need a graphical overview of
all connections during a production?

Real gear as well as virtual gear is connected one time, there's no
need to have a picture of all connections. Select the MIDI channel of
the wanted MIDI instrument, name the audio and bus faders, that's it.
On a real mixing console you would use a permanent maker to write on
tape.

If I need to use QjackCtl, than I'm not using the "Patchbay", I'm using
the "Connect" tabs, so I get separated MIDI and Audio patchbays. To
store and restore settings, I'm using aj-snapshot.

If there should be the need to check connections, I don't care about
the connection lines (Bezier curves are disable, I prefer straight
lines), I use mouse or cursor keys, so the ports that are connected get
highlighted.

Assuming e.g. Ardour could do everything, than I even don't use
Ardour's visualisations of all connections, I only use the mixer's
options for track and bus connections. If there should be a reason to
check a connection, I launch QjackCtl and use it as already described.

Keep it simple and straightforward!

Regards,
Ralf
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: OT: Monitor setups

Maurizio Berti
2017-05-07 23:37 GMT+02:00 Ralf Mardorf <[hidden email]>:
the more graphic gimmickry, the less professional. You'll see more
graphic gimmickry on cheap consumer hifi gear, than on better class
consumer hifi gear, let alone professional gear. The same is true for
software. For what purpose do you need a graphical overview of
all connections during a production?

Since when graphical display is a direct symptom of professionalism?
Professional means that *you* are the professional, you know your tools and how to use them to get the best results against the minimum effort need to achieve them.
What's your problem in having different needs for production than yours?
 
Real gear as well as virtual gear is connected one time, there's no
need to have a picture of all connections. Select the MIDI channel of
the wanted MIDI instrument, name the audio and bus faders, that's it.
On a real mixing console you would use a permanent maker to write on
tape.

No, you don't. You use that workflow if, and only if, you are using a permanent setup. I don't.

Keep it simple and straightforward!

Or... keep it as it meets your needs. :-)
I never said that QjackCtl is not valid, it just isn't right for *my* needs (again, MY needs, which are different than yours or than anyone else), and I think that having complex routing layouts it actually doesn't work right. Again, according to MY needs, MY workflow and MY - always different and mutable - setups.

Regards,
Maurizio
--
È difficile avere una convinzione precisa quando si parla delle ragioni del cuore. - "Sostiene Pereira", Antonio Tabucchi
http://www.jidesk.net

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
12
Loading...