How do I build on linux? Don't have debian.
I don't know how to build from source (haven't checked), but you can extract .deb files with `ar x whatever.deb` and `tar xf data.tar.gz`.
Show HN: An attempt to rethink a music sequencer design
101–110 of 119 posts
Re: Show HN: An attempt to rethink a music sequencer design
#102I like the idea. I'm a composer, and can never find a simple music sketch app that I like. Everything is either too complicated, too expensive, or some other kind of terrible. I guess Garage Band isn't too bad, but I still have trouble with it. My preferred way of working is with the built-in touch-screen sequencers in Korgs and Yamahas. That workflow is damned perfect. On the desktop, there hasn't been anything usab…
Have you had a look at Korg Gadget on iOS? it's not perfect, but maybe it's model works better for you than GarageBand... I'm a fan.
Re: Show HN: An attempt to rethink a music sequencer design
#103Earlier quoted context omitted.
The trick is how much state you have to keep in your head. Something like Blender requires enormous state about even things like what key combinations mean in different contexts: it's a poster child for impossibly demanding state requirements. Something like the Flash pen tool is much simpler, but still absolutely requires you to maintain some state: clicking versus click-dragging, remembering not to close a shape by…
How about coding a song instead? With the right language or DSL it should be possible. Substitute a Music IDE for the DAW, maybe keep some visualizations (synced to the code of course). I suppose musicians are more comfortable with a visual metaphor. Still the over-the-top skeuomorphism doesn't seem that efficient to me compared to just coding it.
There are numerous examples of music programming languages. I imagine some people have some success with them, but I think they are not widely adopted because it lacks the immediacy and tight feedback loops available in DAW.
In a DAW, as you're playing the track, you crank the reverb knob until you hit the sweet spot.
In a music programming language you fiddle with values and re-compile repeatedly until you find the sweet spot, but even then it's hard to find because you can't remember if it's better this time you compiled or last time.
For musical coding to work, I think it needs a Bret Victor / Swift Playgrounds / Lighttable style IDE, and then... it starts to look a lot like a DAW, just with algorithms instead of a note grid or timeline.
Re: Show HN: An attempt to rethink a music sequencer design
#104"Most of the DAW interfaces often seem overcomplicated, and they only tend to get more and more bloated over time." How much can you simplify the interface and still make it do everything producers want to do? Garageband simplified the interface quite a bit compared to Logic, but even that can get complicated and ultimately isn't as flexible as other DAWs. I've been a fairly loyal user of Sonar and FL Studio for over…
Can anyone explain why none of the major DAW's have a simple step sequencer like FL Studio's? From my observations, FL Studio has a fairly large user base and IMO the step sequencer is the only thing that sets it apart from other DAW's.
I'm not certain, but I suspect it's because step sequencers are a fairly limiting way of looking at melodies. I've not used FL Studio's but I've used many hardware step sequencers, and it's very hard to coax music out of them that doesn't feel very... grid-y? You don't get access to the kinds of nuance in terms of note start and note length that make performances sound human and not... sequenced.
I mean, basically all DAWs have a grid view where you can see notes on a grid and zoom in and out on that grid. If you zoom out to 1/16 notes, that's basically a step sequencer view... but then you can zoom in when you want to add 1/32 or 1/64 note complexity.
Re: Show HN: An attempt to rethink a music sequencer design
#105I would really like the equivalent of Unity in the DAW world. Let me script modulators/sound design while doing arrangement/mixing and stuff in UI.
Logic Pro X has MIDI Scripters, which might do some of what you're looking for, while still being a traditional DAW. Saw a video the other day of Brian Eno describing how he takes a regular drum beat, and adds a stack of Scriptors to it to make it probabilistic and ever-changing.
Re: Show HN: An attempt to rethink a music sequencer design
#106Finally a music tool with version control. I've been wishing for this to happen for so long! The first big player (Ableton etc) to integrate versioning will have a huge advantage.
If it does this for multiple authors, then it would be invaluable for cases where different composers are handling different aspects (such as if one composer is focusing on percussion and another is focusing on wind instruments, as is sometimes the case when composing music for marching groups).
Re: Show HN: An attempt to rethink a music sequencer design
#107Finally a music tool with version control. I've been wishing for this to happen for so long! The first big player (Ableton etc) to integrate versioning will have a huge advantage.
[deleted]
Re: Show HN: An attempt to rethink a music sequencer design
#108Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you're an artist of sound and musical texture, then sure — a powerful DAW can't be replaced. But if you want to specifically focus on composition — harmony, melody, counterpoint — then a DAW becomes a looming, impenetrable fortress. In my experience, musical creativity thrives when you're able to iterate on your ideas in a rapid loop, adding and removing notes almost as quickly as you think of them. There is plent…
>There is plenty of room in the music software landscape for tools that focus entirely on placing notes instead of generating production-quality sound. There's already an industry standard for that - Avid Sibelius. If you're composing in a traditional manner, a DAW probably isn't the right tool. http://www.avid.com/sibelius
Sibelius and Finale used to be the industry standard, but there is a new kid on the block for music notation:
Steinberg Dorico
Other new tools like Staffpad are amazing, but they serve a somewhat different market.
Re: Show HN: An attempt to rethink a music sequencer design
#109I like the idea. I'm a composer, and can never find a simple music sketch app that I like. Everything is either too complicated, too expensive, or some other kind of terrible. I guess Garage Band isn't too bad, but I still have trouble with it. My preferred way of working is with the built-in touch-screen sequencers in Korgs and Yamahas. That workflow is damned perfect. On the desktop, there hasn't been anything usab…
[deleted]
Re: Show HN: An attempt to rethink a music sequencer design
#110As a DAW created by a single person, I must say great job. But one thing that stuck out for me most was the merging of instruments into a single visual track. As a person that designs simple DAW interfaces for a living [1], I highly recommend against that, and instead move to a more traditional instrument/track separated model. Some back story: when we released the first version of Medly, we actually had notes on top…
This is far and away the best thing in this thread.