On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 10:23 AM, Paul Davis <p...@linuxaudiosystems.com> wrote: > 2011/7/3 Dave Phillips <dlphill...@woh.rr.com>: >> Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote: >> >>> ... none of the audio stuff i routinely do everyday would be possible >>> without jack. >> >> Amen to that. > > I disagree with both of you. I think what you really mean is "none of > this would be possible without some system for interconnecting > processing elements together in flexible, creative,possibly > unanticipated ways that also leaves the developers of those elements > free to do things in their own way". > > that much i'd agree with. but this is not a description that requires > that the solution be at the process level.
While technically I'm sure you're correct, I'd add a further caveat that puts me on the side of Dave and Jörn. The specific and existing applications and inter-application communication that JACK has permitted is not easily replicable with any other given existing modular system, and there are plenty of modular systems available from PD to Max/MSP to audiomulch to bidule to Reason to ... you get the point. Given that the solution that I enjoy using the most is JACK on Linux with all of the process level folly that it entails, even though it needn't have to be that way given the plethora of non-process level alternatives, surely this must say something good about the system as a whole (or admittedly, bad about me)? -Michael _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
