• MakeMosik: The Open Source, Donation Funded DAW
    24 replies, posted
LINKAGE: [url]http://igg.me/at/makemosik/x/3171420[/url] [I]Background[/I][B]:[/B] My whole life I've been surrounded by music, and a lot of people would probably agree that if you're a musician, creating it can be one of the best experiences life has to offer. From the first time I experimented with garageband on my dad's laptop, I was fascinated by making music on the computer. Unfortunately, for many people, they simply don't have the money to shell out on the required software that's required for this process. I was thinking about how expensive music software is the other day, and then it hit me: Why doesn't someone just create a piece of software that people can pay whatever they want for? We already have this for the Office Suite - it's called open office. We already have this for video games - it's called the humble indie bundle. So, why has nobody made a cross-platform system that supports features like VST and ASIO drivers? Because it's an industry driven by money. This really made me think. I wondered if there was anything I could do to help the situation out. Then it hit me again - I could assemble a team, and do it myself. [B][I]What it is:[/I][/B] Well, it's a Digital Audio Workstation (DAW). It will be compatible with Mac OS, Linux (we will more than likely be testing on Ubuntu because it seems to be one of the most popular distros), and Windows XP through 8. It will serve the purpose of recording music, producing instrumentals, and audio editing. [B][I]How:[/I][/B] We will have team members working towards getting the job done most of the day. The money will go towards getting rights, website costs, the cost to get a dedicated office, paying team members for their hard work, and extensive testing (different configurations, different operating systems, requirements, and paying for VSTs to test compatibility). We have also considered experimenting with making a bootable, OS-like version of the software. [B][I]Why:[/I][/B] This could change the face of the music industry. Many people would have access to software that would never normally be available to someone of their social class. So, if this sounds like your cup of tea, donate! Thanks!
Why: This could change the face of the music industry. Many people would have access to software that would never normally be available to someone of their social class. So, if this sounds like your cup of tea, donate! Thanks! I dispute this because of reaper, but okay sounds really cool
It's a neat little idea, but people aren't really big fans of what they can't see. Basically stating, you need a proof of concept, something that shows you're capable of making said device. A picture and a promise isn't very convincing, especially due to recent debacles of people taking the money and running.
[QUOTE=Water-Marine;40562769]It's a neat little idea, but people aren't really big fans of what they can't see. Basically stating, you need a proof of concept, something that shows you're capable of making said device. A picture and a promise isn't very convincing, especially due to recent debacles of people taking the money and running.[/QUOTE] I'm working on putting together a proof-of-concept VST version of said DAW. It's hard right now because one of our main programmers is in Dublin, Ohio, and we live near Cleveland. We're trying to work out our schedules to the best of our abilities, but year completely understandable. Hopefully we'll have a proof of concept ready to go soon.
[QUOTE=lemonlimecom;40563995]I'm working on putting together a proof-of-concept VST version of said DAW. It's hard right now because one of our main programmers is in Dublin, Ohio, and we live near Cleveland. We're trying to work out our schedules to the best of our abilities, but year completely understandable. Hopefully we'll have a proof of concept ready to go soon.[/QUOTE] Alright, just making sure. Probably would've been wiser to make the proof-of-concept, THEN upload the campaign, but it's cool. Can't wait to see how this turns out!
[QUOTE=Water-Marine;40564429]Alright, just making sure. Probably would've been wiser to make the proof-of-concept, THEN upload the campaign, but it's cool. Can't wait to see how this turns out![/QUOTE] Alright man I'll keep you all updated.
[QUOTE=Water-Marine;40562769]It's a neat little idea, but people aren't really big fans of what they can't see. Basically stating, you need a proof of concept, something that shows you're capable of making said device. A picture and a promise isn't very convincing, especially due to recent debacles of people taking the money and running.[/QUOTE] It's a fixed funding campaign. If they don't get 100k they won't get a dime. Though, I understand your point
[QUOTE=deggie;40571497]It's a fixed funding campaign. If they don't get 100k they won't get a dime. Though, I understand your point[/QUOTE] Still, there have been numerous times when the creator has made a lame excuse to cancel the project AFTER they receive the money. Not saying that this would do the same, but people need some proof that the makers have the possible skills to make it. I really want to see this funded.
[QUOTE=Water-Marine;40579139]Still, there have been numerous times when the creator has made a lame excuse to cancel the project AFTER they receive the money. Not saying that this would do the same, but people need some proof that the makers have the possible skills to make it. I really want to see this funded.[/QUOTE] Thanks, I appreciate your concern and your desire to see us succeed. I have a programming related question - if anyone knows anything about C++ based VST Hosts, then PLEASE message me. I'm working out some kinks here and there in the proof on concept and I'm having some trouble when implementing the dll loader.
I don't feel like the indiegogo page has enough information or convincing proof that this project will be successful. More visuals and concepts would be appropriate to add to get people excited to fund.
[QUOTE=Eyefunk;40619093]I don't feel like the indiegogo page has enough information or convincing proof that this project will be successful. More visuals and concepts would be appropriate to add to get people excited to fund.[/QUOTE] I'm still working on a proof of concept app that will be downloadable. I'm trying hard here to get part of this working, but I've encountered some setbacks. It's gonna be ready soon!
If you guys made a phone app for simple songs or song ideas on the go that'd be neat also!
[QUOTE=Mechwarrior;40630593]If you guys made a phone app for simple songs or song ideas on the go that'd be neat also![/QUOTE] haha it would be cool but I'm trying to get this done 1 step at a time. Maybe once we have a decent amount of work done on makemosik.
Bad news: My dumbass is gonna have to reprogram everything we had so far 'cause I formatted and didn't think to back it up. Sorry guys! I WILL HAVE IT UP AS SOON AS POSSIBLE...
aren't you the guy who keeps selling stuff no one wants? this project will fail. [sp]anybody feel free to quote my prediction later this year[/sp]
It's an interesting concept but what will this do that Ardour, REAPER, Audacity and LMMS (all very mature projects) don't already cover? Wouldn't any effort be best spent improving those rather than starting from scratch again? As someone who owns a business that makes audio software I think you may be underestimating how much a chew on Linux audio support is and how difficult nailing down a decent, high quality and low latency mix engine is. You need a good grasp of DSP programming or at least one person who does. Will you be implementing a WineLib adapter to run VSTs on non windows platforms or just dropping support for that in favor of RTAS, LV2 and LADSPA ? I'm not trying to put a downer on the whole thing, I'm all for open source audio software and support it. I just hope you've thought it through. This will be a complicated piece of software.
you have no proof that you're capable of delivering the product, let alone showing any understanding of programming audio software or anything as complex as a DAW, yet you want $100,000 to create a vaguely defined DAW that, even if it were successfully developed, has no features to set it apart from other free DAWs like Reaper? why would you expect anyone to ever donate to this project [editline]30th May 2013[/editline] even in your "What it is" section you haven't bothered to define any specific features for your DAW, this is literally all the technical information we get about it (aside from "compatible with mac/win/linux"): [quote]It will serve the purpose of recording music, producing instrumentals, and audio editing.[/quote] how can you possibly expect anyone to give you $100,000 for a project that nobody really needs, that nobody is sure you can deliver, and that you yourself have failed to give any real definition other than "DAW"? how big is your team? how much experience does your team have? and you lost all your progress on this revolutionary $100,000 open source DAW because you forgot to keep backups? why would anyone take you seriously at this point?
lmfao
"bootable OS-like version" how is this even necessary in any way the entire pitch for your project (ignoring your apparent incompetence and inexperience) is flawed from the start. the entire premise for the project is that there's no cross-platform, free/affordable DAW for the general public? thats flat out not true, Reaper is an entirely usable, stable cross-platform free DAW, so the entire market gap for your product to fill is already nonexistent. not only that but even without free DAWs like Reaper, the market gap is negligible anyway due to the popularity of DAW piracy. if we're being honest here, even if you had the most cutting edge, well polished and featureful free DAW on the market, why would i waste my time with that when i can download ableton 9 suite in literally 10 minutes?
[QUOTE=Kopimi;40838039]"bootable OS-like version" how is this even necessary in any way[/QUOTE] dude are you gonna have MEGA-VST boosting 8000 Ohm XLR headphone PREAMP built into the daw?????????
Also the graphic looks silly
Yeah, this probably needs to die in retrospect. It's totally fine to have a dream like this, but to make it, ESPECIALLY on a deadline, you need to know what you're doing to begin with.
[QUOTE=lemonlimecom;40717247]Bad news: My dumbass is gonna have to reprogram everything we had so far 'cause I formatted and didn't think to back it up. Sorry guys! I WILL HAVE IT UP AS SOON AS POSSIBLE...[/QUOTE] And until then, I'm sticking with Reaper.
I'm certainly interested, but seeing as you have no proof of concept, I'm not likely to donate any time soon. The logo used on the page looks very 2005, not a good thing. I kinda think it would have been better if you actually had at least some proof, screenshots, or even better, a very very basic version of the software, even if it isn't that advanced, and is pre-beta, it'd be better than nothing. When there's a downloadable version, or even just some more proof, I'll be more than happy to donate, and spread it around on a few music sites that I visit, but until then, I'm just going to sit and wait.
You guys should probably put this at a much lower price if you want it to catch on, Reaper already offers what you guys are doing at a lower price and the program itself is incredibly powerful, with really really good effects from the getgo. Hell, even Audacity is a pretty decent program that is completely free. I think what you guys should do is lower the price so that it is a lot cheaper than Reaper, say $15 or so, get in touch with people who can do unique effects for you (not unique in the sense that they are something new, just that they are specific for your own DAW) that does a good job. Most importantly, if you ever want funding (and going for a $100 000 funding when you have nothing to show for) you're going to need a program that people can try.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.