Comments on: energyXT2: Low-Cost Plug-in, Sequencer, DAW, for Windows and Now Linux

By: Create Digital Music » Renoise, Unique Music Tracker, Now in Demo on Linux

Create Digital Music » Renoise, Unique Music Tracker, Now in Demo on Linux — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 21:52:10 +0000

[...] you give Renoise a try on Linux, we’d love to hear about it. Renoise joins EnergyXT, another unique music creation tool — but hopefully with better native Linux support, which [...]

By: volikitu

volikitu — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 15:23:51 +0000

xt2, even ,in this state, is by far easiest and by far most stable, pro audio app on linux.
many windows musicians are starting to experiment with linux because ext2, and thrugh it discover work of p.davis and others. and that has to count something even for zeliots. more musicians then ever before, consider now linux for serious audio work, and that can be only good.

By: Michael

Michael — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 15:53:44 +0000

XT2 is starting from scratch, but i’m already liking the foundation of this one more than that of xt1. While xt1 is a full-featured and wonderful application, to be sure, this next iteration is a lot easier to get into, i reckon. I’ll be using both versions together for a while longer, but i’m looking forward to the day that xt2 surpasses xt1 in functionality.

By: GaryG

GaryG — Wed, 06 Jun 2007 12:16:18 +0000

Just to say it again: for a couple of years now it’s been the policy that you get a free upgrade to eXT2 when you bought v1. So I’ve had a year or twos use of eXT with eXT2 on the horizon for £27 (uk). Cool. :)

By: myles

myles — Wed, 06 Jun 2007 05:30:46 +0000

Hurray! eXT has been my main host for a number of years now, I think it’s something to do with the fact that it loads up in 0.4 seconds and handles VSTs effortlessly..

Will be switching to eXT 2.0 when it gets out of beta, did you know that eXT 2.0 is free to anyone who purchased eXT?

Big it up to the lone-music app coders Jorgen, Justin F. (Reaper) et al.

By: Peter Kirn

Peter Kirn — Mon, 04 Jun 2007 16:45:48 +0000

Applications without compiling is a bit like dehydrated water…

So the JACK code itself is open?

This is the case where, whether something is officially open source or not, it would of course benefit from good design and contact with, well, Paul, when it comes to JACK implementation.

By: Paul Davis

Paul Davis — Mon, 04 Jun 2007 16:35:16 +0000

Yes, I saw JACK support, but thats why I added “out of the box”, which I figured was about as justified (or more so) that the comment about “without compiling”, which as you noted Peter seems totally nonsensical. “yum install hydrogen” doesn’t involve compiling …

However, I took a quick look at the JACK code and oh my, there’s a big fat mutex right in the middle of the main process() callback. Run that puppy in a situation with lots and lots of MIDI input, and its going to be clicking up the wazoo. This just isn’t real-time safe coding. I can only hope that the rest of XT2 is better designed (and note: I don’t mean this sarcastically - I believe it probably is)

By: Peter Kirn

Peter Kirn — Mon, 04 Jun 2007 16:11:45 +0000

It appears to support JACK, after all. (But via “source code”? Guess I need to try it out on Linux and see.) That’s definitely a must.

They do have a curious statement on their webpage: “but there has not been any serious music-software for Linux without compiling.” Well, not sure what they mean there; compiling isn’t that hard on modern distros, there are prepackaged releases, and even whole distros full of music software. But I do think there’s a niche to be filled for this kind of app on Linux, even with stuff like Aldrin out there. (and, ironically, more people might use Aldrin if more people were on Linux, and energyXT2 might help them make the leap … the more ‘killer apps’, the better.)

By: seismo

seismo — Mon, 04 Jun 2007 15:59:23 +0000

i think the XT2 beta already supports JACK, no?
http://www.energy-xt.com/xt2.php

the massiva license key is identical/interchangeable for both versions of XT. and the price is dropped to $49 right now in a pre-release “sale.” GO!

By: Peter Kirn

Peter Kirn — Mon, 04 Jun 2007 15:44:41 +0000

Right, and there’s also the example of Unreal Tournament shipping for Linux. Most Linux users I know were excited by that.

You definitely lose the advantages of open source, but does commercial, proprietary software *hurt* Linux? I think quite the opposite. Free, open source code isn’t the right answer for everyone. You have the fact that commercial models may be the best way for a developer to support their efforts. You have code that for legal reasons can’t be open sourced. And there are times when an open development process isn’t appropriate, because there isn’t the tool, the contributors, the process in place to support it — and, in fact, the “closed” efforts of a single developer or handful of developers might be the best solution. I’ve heard plenty of open advocates make exactly these points, so this isn’t just a simple set of binary camps on this issue.

So, yeah, I hope that philosophical issues don’t hold this up. I certainly understand the benefits of open source, as Paul mentions, and even understand someone choosing an open alternative for those reasons. But that still doesn’t seem to me like it should automatically rule out a robust alternative, especially since for many people this will mean the difference between running Linux and running Windows, and there are many issues there that go far beyond just open/closed.