Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Audacity 4.0

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 278 posts

Re: Audacity 4.0

#141

Post by Lio »

korzinka wrote: post #124
Lio wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indirectly related his video on music notation itself, "Notation Must Die: The Battle For How We Read Music"[1], is really good IMHO. > Many people feel that western notation makes it unnecessarily hard to read music. If we want to sight read, learn music theory or just practice an instrument, surely there's a better way? Right? This has been a hot topic for almost 1000 years... AND I PUT IT TO BED RIGHT HERE! 1. htt…

Notation is cool and just right, the more I learned the more I appreciated how great contemporary notation is. Yes it's challenging to read sometines but the subject is challenging too, surely you could try to simplify it for certain applications but you'd lose a lot of flexibility. Fighting notation is like fighting piano keyboard which is also extremely convenient thing to play compared to other stuff, even to grid…

> Fighting notation is like fighting piano keyboard

Interestingly, the current form of a piano keyboard isn't only way keyed instruments have been laid out.

My mind was blown when I first saw a harpsichord with separate flat and sharp keys for example because I never considered the concept. I grew up with pianos so in my ignorance I never really thought about them being different.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Split_sharp

Re: Audacity 4.0

#142

Post by Joel_Mckay »

ndiddy wrote: post #130
Joel_Mckay wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people that have never maintained >=Qt5 projects assume free wxWidgets native cross platform OS interface support is less hassle. Refactoring the application core means their team should have forked the project to audacity-qt rather than inject long term Qt library and license dependency issues into the original package. Qt on occasion has proven to cause problems with license term changes, GL library bugs on Li…

They went over why switching to Qt was the best option for their team here: https://youtu.be/QYM3TWf_G38?t=840 .

I actually alluded to the design choice compromise in my post. But thank you =3

Re: Audacity 4.0

#143

Post by azatom »

After I change from "Program Files" to a user's folder it brings up the UAC.

Why? The "files association still needs it" is not an answer. It is plain unnecessary risk, does not matter that the original author is trusted, still can be hacked.

Re: Audacity 4.0

#144

Post by majewsky »

kvemkon wrote: post #134
LtWorf wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No person who has written software with both prefers GTK :D

I can still use and develop GTK2 software in Debian out-of-the-box, but not Qt3 or even Qt4.

Yes, because GTK2 is so difficult to upgrade to new versions, whereas Qt4 to Qt5 usually only involved replacing a few identifiers (cannot speak to Qt6 since I don't do Qt anymore). That's why distros need to drag GTK2 along even though we are already at GTK4.

Re: Audacity 4.0

#145

Post by cheeze »

azatom wrote: post #143

After I change from "Program Files" to a user's folder it brings up the UAC. Why? The "files association still needs it" is not an answer. It is plain unnecessary risk, does not matter that the original author is trusted, still can be hacked.

Simple solution here, use a high quality OS.

Re: Audacity 4.0

#147

Post by embedding-shape »

dwringer wrote: post #66
embedding-shape wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> or getting a "clicking" noise across clips that I had to remove by manually fading in/out each end of the clip Are you sure this isn't just the typical "clip/crop a sample at the wrong moment, in the middle of a soundwave, and you'll get a pop/click"? This problem happens all across DAWs and hardware samplers and such, usually there is a way to "align to zero-crossings" when you wanna avoid it, or called something…

At least with Reaper, if you cut an audio clip it will, by default, automatically apply small adjustable fade in/out envelopes to the ends so you specifically don't have to manually do it.

Yeah, every software/hardware seems to deal with this differently. The sampler I use the most (Octatrack) only jumps by zero-crossings when holding SHIFT, otherwise lets you freely create entirely new pops and cracks in your songs :)

Re: Audacity 4.0

#148

Post by kvemkon »

majewsky wrote: post #144
kvemkon wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can still use and develop GTK2 software in Debian out-of-the-box, but not Qt3 or even Qt4.

Yes, because GTK2 is so difficult to upgrade to new versions, whereas Qt4 to Qt5 usually only involved replacing a few identifiers (cannot speak to Qt6 since I don't do Qt anymore). That's why distros need to drag GTK2 along even though we are already at GTK4.

> so difficult to upgrade to new versions

Perhaps, because GTK developers insist, that GTK2, GTK3, GTK4 are different toolkits.

> Qt4 to Qt5 usually only involved ...

I'd start with Qt3 to Qt4.

Re: Audacity 4.0

#149

Post by TLLtchvL8KZ »

Mashimo wrote: post #59
pelagicAustral wrote: post #53

Whatever happened with the post-telemetry fork debacle projects? Tenacity, Sneedacity, or something...

Someone mentions it here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49549040 https://tenacityaudio.org Seem like they have a few commit every week. 32 Issues closed in a year: https://codeberg.org/tenacityteam/tenacity/activity/yearly Looks healthy?

I know it's not a proper metric to judge by, but Tenacity is 10k commits behind Audacity. That's quite a lot to get behind since the split. I'd be interested if Tenacity is actively developed or pretty much just maintaining the software from where they split.

Re: Audacity 4.0

#150

Post by binaryturtle »

TLLtchvL8KZ wrote: post #149
Mashimo wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Someone mentions it here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49549040 https://tenacityaudio.org Seem like they have a few commit every week. 32 Issues closed in a year: https://codeberg.org/tenacityteam/tenacity/activity/yearly Looks healthy?

I know it's not a proper metric to judge by, but Tenacity is 10k commits behind Audacity. That's quite a lot to get behind since the split. I'd be interested if Tenacity is actively developed or pretty much just maintaining the software from where they split.

If they don't have to re-code half the app (new UI kit, not required features, etc.) then what does it matter if they are 10k unrelated commits behind?

I like it's there as a choice for us who prefer the old-timey Audacity for some quick sample editing.

Post reply on HN