196

16224 readers

3089 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

622

Open Source Rule (lemmy.dbzer0.com)

submitted 3 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

47 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 10 points 3 months ago (3 children)

Well, Reaper is more popular with musicians than Audacity, and it follows the Winrar business model

[–] [email protected] 12 points 3 months ago

I'd argue that Audacity (audio recording/editing/processing suite) is a little different niche than Reaper (full-fledged DAW). If your use case is "I'm doing a podcast and I need to do an audio recording from multiple mics and mix them down", Audacity is good enough that there's no point in paying extra for a DAW. If you're a musician and you need to mess nondestructively with recordings and MIDI and filters, then you know you need to go bigger.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Ardour.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It's paid unless you know how to compile it.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago

Easy enough to compile...

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago

Didn't know that. Fair enough for them.