From: Geoff B. <ge...@la...> - 2008-10-25 23:38:32
|
Dear Devs (friends) just looking at my options here and have to say just a few points most of which have already been mentioned by me and others before. Muse 0.9x is without peer for serious midi work full stop. It is feature (very) rich where it REALLY matters (time and tempo variables,playback timing, window management, editing interface,stability etc), and although it has a few quirks, they are manageable and I'm quite used to them ;) However, there has been for a long time now the issue of Muse suffering from being abandoned by the primary dev, namely Werner, for other projects. Laudable as they are,(muse score and muse2) watching Muse fade utterly from the LA world has both amazed and frustrated me. Most distro's I have seen have packages no later that v 0.8x which as we know is full of really serious bugs and problems; most of which have been to a very large extent repaired. However, anyone installing and trying to use these versions will soon find the bugs are total showstoppers for serious work and walk away. Tim as we all know has done a remakable amount of really good work this last year on the .9x branch and has singularly kept it alive and usable. However, his development platform is behind the current 'state-of-play' relative to compilers,libraries and kernels and this has meant that he cannot reproduce the issues seen by those who have 'up-to-the-minute' systems in production such as I do. I'm often forced to 'upgrade' frequently to keep up with latest moves in the audio/midi arena and therefore have perhaps seen this more than most. It seems such a waste of everyones' efforts so far to just leave Muse here....there is nothing close to Muse in Linux. Can we give Muse .9x one last polish so she can live on a current machine and be the best she can be for a little while longer? Then realese v1 with a splash! Could it be updated to QT4 perhaps? That would see most of the UI issues vanish, no? Werner, you use a current system don't you ? Perhaps you can see if Muse 0.9x will build for you ? Maybe it's just me....alsa-1.0.17, jack-0.115,kernel-2.6.25.4-rt5,gcc-4.3.2 etc In fact I would consider it important,for Muse 2 to achive wide acceptance, that Muse 1 needs to lift it's profile and earn it's place in the LA world again and make it's mark. To lift it's current reputation as an old,unsupported,buggy app to it's 'real' current status of a stable,reliable and musical midi app; that's what i consider it as. Werner, Robert,Mathias,Tim and anyone else involved; can we put this right? If a couple of you were to work in tandem in 'real-time' perhaps there is only a few hour work in it ? This is such good software; to see it left here like this is such a shame.I would be devestated to have to leave Muse behind. If I'm deluded and speaking out of turn you must tell me; I'm a mere end user not a dev; but one who cares. I am indebted to you all for your past and current efforts with Muse. I really mean that. Anyway, I now have to go and create a Jingle Bells sequence on Rosegarden :( ...pray for me.. just my 2 feeble cents. best, g. |
From: Joachim S. <js...@du...> - 2008-10-26 01:20:12
|
On Sonntag 26 Oktober 2008, Geoff Beasley wrote: > Dear Devs (friends) > > just looking at my options here and have to say just a few points most of > which have already been mentioned by me and others before. > > Muse 0.9x is without peer for serious midi work full stop. It is feature > (very) rich where it REALLY matters (time and tempo variables,playback > timing, window management, editing interface,stability etc), and although > it has a few quirks, they are manageable and I'm quite used to them ;) > > However, there has been for a long time now the issue of Muse suffering > from being abandoned by the primary dev, namely Werner, for other projects. > Laudable as they are,(muse score and muse2) watching Muse fade utterly from > the LA world has both amazed and frustrated me. Most distro's I have seen > have packages no later that v 0.8x which as we know is full of really > serious bugs and problems; most of which have been to a very large extent > repaired. However, anyone installing and trying to use these versions will > soon find the bugs are total showstoppers for serious work and walk away. it seems other softwares have a far better promotion and are therefore included in recent distributions in no time. this is not the case for muse. for some unknown reason ppl don't understand what muse is about. i'm sure this will change in the future ;-) muse 0.x - 1.x which is forced to use qt3 is the only working branch. development has split since the version 2.x of muse uses new programming paradigms as: - qt4 models - the ctrllistedit uses a QAbstractItemModel this models are the most elegant solution to make viewfilters efficient - qt4 can be ported to windows and mac - the old 0.x - 1.x code base was ported to mac by robert. i talked with him about it and he reported that it was running and that he could use internal softsynths which then produced a sound which was hearable by using portaudio. - since jackdmp (next generation jackd implementation for SMP computers) has support for all 3 platforms it is a important goal using qt4 instead of qt3. only qt4 is legally usable for open source projects on windows. qt3 didn't have a GPL release on the windows platform. i talked to werner about current state of muse2 and he replied that development will continue soon. - muse 2.x has also some internal reimplementations: - major parts of midi handling were changed - muse uses jackd-midi instead of the alsa midi sequencer this is much more portable code now! - this fixes timing issues as well which were introduced since jack didn't handle timing stuff in midi. i'm not sure if the latest patch of tim fixed this issue. tim, did it? - signals and slots in qt4 are thread safe, which is very cool - internal synthesizers support with proper session handling of course this list could go on but ... i don't know all the details. maybe i should finally mention that we have midi effects now. my current effort is to port muse 2.x to windows using mingw with gcc 4.3.2 and qt 4.3.x i'm currently replacing this pkg_config tool with cmake default library handling measures since pkg_config is a unix tool. i've managed to compile all minimally needed libraries (which are not many) - qt - libsndfile - libsamplerate didn't have a look at this yet. but i will need that later: - jackdmp_0.71/ once that is done we extend our user pool to the windows platform. hopefully it'll work there ;-) just my 3 cents > Tim as we all know has done a remakable amount of really good work this > last year on the .9x branch and has singularly kept it alive and usable. > However, his development platform is behind the current 'state-of-play' > relative to compilers,libraries and kernels and this has meant that he > cannot reproduce the issues seen by those who have 'up-to-the-minute' > systems in production such as I do. I'm often forced to 'upgrade' > frequently to keep up with latest moves in the audio/midi arena and > therefore have perhaps seen this more than most. > > It seems such a waste of everyones' efforts so far to just leave Muse > here....there is nothing close to Muse in Linux. Can we give Muse .9x one > last polish so she can live on a current machine and be the best she can be > for a little while longer? Then realese v1 with a splash! Could it be > updated to QT4 perhaps? That would see most of the UI issues vanish, no? > > Werner, you use a current system don't you ? Perhaps you can see if Muse > 0.9x will build for you ? Maybe it's just me....alsa-1.0.17, > jack-0.115,kernel-2.6.25.4-rt5,gcc-4.3.2 etc > > In fact I would consider it important,for Muse 2 to achive wide acceptance, > that Muse 1 needs to lift it's profile and earn it's place in the LA world > again and make it's mark. To lift it's current reputation as an > old,unsupported,buggy app to it's 'real' current status of a > stable,reliable and musical midi app; that's what i consider it as. > > Werner, Robert,Mathias,Tim and anyone else involved; can we put this right? > If a couple of you were to work in tandem in 'real-time' perhaps there is > only a few hour work in it ? This is such good software; to see it left > here like this is such a shame.I would be devestated to have to leave Muse > behind. > > If I'm deluded and speaking out of turn you must tell me; I'm a mere end > user not a dev; but one who cares. I am indebted to you all for your past > and current efforts with Muse. I really mean that. > > Anyway, I now have to go and create a Jingle Bells sequence on Rosegarden > :( ...pray for me.. > > > just my 2 feeble cents. > > > best, > > g. > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's > challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win > great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere > in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ > _______________________________________________ > Lmuse-developer mailing list > Lmu...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lmuse-developer |
From: Geoff B. <ge...@la...> - 2008-10-26 08:38:59
|
all good new Jochim; but doesn't solve the "real" issue as i see it. which is the only useable Muse is borked atm. perhaps one of the other devs will add some good news?? best, g |