Mac OS multi-track audio program?

Hi gang,

I'm asking for knowledge for a friend of mine. He'd like to try his hand at learning how to mix audio/music, stuff for his own use. He is a great player and a good ear, but hasn't ever done anything more than work a 4-track cassette (though he has recorded in studios to some extent).

Anyway, I know what is out there for the PC platform (we are talking freeware if possible, as this is a lark for him right now), but even if I could Google all night, I'd never know if an app is any good because I couldn't check it out myself. So, anybody have recommendations for a free or low-cost multi-track digital audio environment on the Mac, either with a modest amount of EQ, reverb, compression, etc or the ability to use VST or AU plugs?

Something like Kristal Audio Engine would be beyond perfect:
http://www.kreatives.org/kristal/

Thanks for any tips...

Cheers,
Jon

One word: Ardour!

http://ardour.org/

I haven't used the program on a mac, but on linux it *rocks.* It's on
the same level as ProTools and those things, but it's completely free
(in both senses of the word).

Your mac buddy can download a pre-compiled .dmg, but he'll also have
to install X-windows and Jack... both of which are good to have
anyway.

-chris

On 1/31/06, Jon Szanto <jszanto@...> wrote:
> Hi gang,
>
> I'm asking for knowledge for a friend of mine. He'd like to try his hand at learning how to mix audio/music, stuff for his own use. He is a great player and a good ear, but hasn't ever done anything more than work a 4-track cassette (though he has recorded in studios to some extent).
>
> Anyway, I know what is out there for the PC platform (we are talking freeware if possible, as this is a lark for him right now), but even if I could Google all night, I'd never know if an app is any good because I couldn't check it out myself. So, anybody have recommendations for a free or low-cost multi-track digital audio environment on the Mac, either with a modest amount of EQ, reverb, compression, etc or the ability to use VST or AU plugs?
>
> Something like Kristal Audio Engine would be beyond perfect:
> http://www.kreatives.org/kristal/
>
> Thanks for any tips...
>
> Cheers,
> Jon
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

--
"... free speech is meaningless if the commercial cacophony has risen
to the point that no one can hear you." -Naomi Klein

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Jon Szanto <jszanto@c...>
wrote:
>
> Hi gang,
>
> I'm asking for knowledge for a friend of mine. He'd like to try
his hand at learning how to mix audio/music, stuff for his own use.
He is a great player and a good ear, but hasn't ever done anything
more than work a 4-track cassette (though he has recorded in studios
to some extent).
>
> Anyway, I know what is out there for the PC platform (we are
talking freeware if possible, as this is a lark for him right now),
but even if I could Google all night, I'd never know if an app is
any good because I couldn't check it out myself. So, anybody have
recommendations for a free or low-cost multi-track digital audio
environment on the Mac, either with a modest amount of EQ, reverb,
compression, etc or the ability to use VST or AU plugs?
>
> Something like Kristal Audio Engine would be beyond perfect:
> http://www.kreatives.org/kristal/
>
> Thanks for any tips...
>

I think Audacity is quite a good, slim freeware doing exactly this:

http://audacity.sourceforge.net/

I know only the windows version, but it is cross-platform (there is
a linux verison as well).

In case that one does not do it, there is a list of others on

http://www.hitsquad.com/smm/mac/MULTITRACK_RECORDING/

That website, BTW, is a good address for music free- and shareware
of any kind.
--
Hans Straub

Chris,

{you wrote...}
>One word: Ardour!

Wow, impressive! I'd love a solution that didn't rely on so many levels of setup, but certainly if he is willing to go through it the app looks quite deep. I'll also have to check his OS level as well. Thanks for the heads-up!

Cheers,
Jon

Hi Hans,

{you wrote...}
>I think Audacity is quite a good, slim freeware doing exactly this:

Yes, I know Audacity, but it isn't quite the same as a multi-track recording/mixing system. While it can have multiple tracks, it doesn't have an independent mixing section with channels for each track, and effects bins or plugins for each track. It does a great job with audio, but this guy is wanting to understand mixing.

>In case that one does not do it, there is a list of others on
>
>http://www.hitsquad.com/smm/mac/MULTITRACK_RECORDING/

SMM has always been a good resource, but I'd like to find something that a person could actually recommend or speak about, as I can't independently test Mac software.

Thanks for the recommendations though!

Cheers,
Jon

Jon Szanto escreveu:
> Chris,
> > {you wrote...}
> >>One word: Ardour!

Yes, Ardour. Other options can be:

- Rosegarden (rosegarden4)
- Muse

--
Hudson Lacerda <http://geocities.yahoo.com.br/hfmlacerda/>
*Nï¿œo deixe seu voto sumir! http://www.votoseguro.org/
*Apï¿œie o Manifesto: http://www.votoseguro.com/alertaprofessores/

== THE WAR IN IRAQ COSTS ==
http://nationalpriorities.org/index.php?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=182

_______________________________________________________ Yahoo! doce lar. Faï¿œa do Yahoo! sua homepage. http://br.yahoo.com/homepageset.html

Hi Hudson,

{you wrote...}
>Yes, Ardour. Other options can be:
>
>- Rosegarden (rosegarden4)

Looks like Linux only, not the Mac OS as I asked for (in the subject line even). Not the ticket for this situation.

>- Muse

I found lots of things with Google named Muse, including corporations, companies, products of all sorts, nothing that was an audio recording situation. Links are always helpful. :)

Cheers,
Jon

Hi Jon,

> a free or low-cost multi-track digital audio environment on the Mac,
> either with a modest amount of EQ, reverb, compression, etc or the
> ability to use VST or AU plugs?

I'd suggest "AU Lab": just install Xcode with Tiger and you get it.
Comes free with all AU plugs included in OSX + a full documentation.

Screenshot:
<http://developer.apple.com/documentation/MacOSX/Conceptual/
OSX_Technology_Overview/art/au_lab.gif>

HTH ;-)
Philippe

Jon Szanto escreveu:
> Hi Hudson,
> > {you wrote...}
> >> Yes, Ardour. Other options can be:
>> >> - Rosegarden (rosegarden4)
> > > Looks like Linux only, not the Mac OS as I asked for (in the subject
> line even). Not the ticket for this situation.

OS-X is unix-like. Probably not easy, but it seems to be possible run rosegarden4 on it:

http://www.rosegardenmusic.com/getting/requirements/

> > >> - Muse
> > > I found lots of things with Google named Muse, including
> corporations, companies, products of all sorts, nothing that was an
> audio recording situation. Links are always helpful. :)

http://www.muse-sequencer.org/

This seems to be for GNU/Linux only, sorry.

--
Hudson Lacerda <http://geocities.yahoo.com.br/hfmlacerda/>
*N�o deixe seu voto sumir! http://www.votoseguro.org/
*Ap�ie o Manifesto: http://www.votoseguro.com/alertaprofessores/

== THE WAR IN IRAQ COSTS ==
http://nationalpriorities.org/index.php?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=182

_______________________________________________________ Yahoo! doce lar. Fa�a do Yahoo! sua homepage. http://br.yahoo.com/homepageset.html

Phi,

{you wrote...}
>I'd suggest "AU Lab"

Looks promising, will add to the list - thanks!

Cheers,
Jon

> > I'd suggest "AU Lab"
> Looks promising, will add to the list - thanks!

You're welcome, Jon!
Here the "AU Lab" html documentation (1MB):
<http://www.open-tuning.com/mp/AU_Lab-Documentation.zip>

Bye,
Philippe

Hudson Lacerda wrote:

> OS-X is unix-like. Probably not easy, but it seems to be possible run > rosegarden4 on it:
> > http://www.rosegardenmusic.com/getting/requirements/

No, Linux is Unix-like. OSX *is* Unix. But Rosegarden really is a Linux application. It uses the Alternative *Linux* Sound Architecture and KDE. You may be able to get all the dependencies onto OSX. It'd be much easier to dual-boot into Linux. And easier still to use Audacity, or some other tool deliberately packaged for OSX. I really wouldn't mention it to somebody looking for OSX software.

Graham

On 2/1/06, Graham Breed <gbreed@gmail.com> wrote:
> No, Linux is Unix-like. OSX *is* Unix. But Rosegarden really is a

This is getting off topic, but what can this possibly mean? UNIX is
just a trademark which Apple hasn't licensed, so OS X has no more
right to be called UNIX than Linux. On Apple's website they never say
OS X is UNIX, because they're not legally allowed to. They always say
"UNIX-based" or "UNIX users will feel right at home...".

> Linux application. It uses the Alternative *Linux* Sound Architecture
> and KDE. You may be able to get all the dependencies onto OSX. It'd be
> much easier to dual-boot into Linux. And easier still to use Audacity,
> or some other tool deliberately packaged for OSX. I really wouldn't
> mention it to somebody looking for OSX software.

This is true. I really wish there were one widely accepted
cross-platform audio API.

> Graham

Keenan

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, Keenan Pepper
<keenanpepper@g...> wrote:
> right to be called UNIX than Linux. On Apple's website they never say
> OS X is UNIX, because they're not legally allowed to. They always

Actually, they do:

"The most widely-sold UNIX-based operating system, Mac OS X..."

Source URL: http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/unix/

> > right to be called UNIX than Linux. On Apple's website they never say
> > OS X is UNIX, because they're not legally allowed to. They always
>
> Actually, they do:
>
> "The most widely-sold UNIX-based operating system, Mac OS X..."

Did you not read past Keenan's sentence fragment? He specifically
said that Apple describes OS X as "Unix-based," thereby illustrating
the point that that "Unix-based" does not mean "Unix."

I don't mean to be rude, but you should read and understand an e-mail
before you hit the reply button :)

-chris

--- In MakeMicroMusic@yahoogroups.com, "c.m.bryan" <chrismbryan@...>
wrote:
>
> > > right to be called UNIX than Linux. On Apple's website they
never say
> > > OS X is UNIX, because they're not legally allowed to. They always
> >
> > Actually, they do:
> >
> > "The most widely-sold UNIX-based operating system, Mac OS X..."
>
> Did you not read past Keenan's sentence fragment? He specifically
> said that Apple describes OS X as "Unix-based," thereby illustrating
> the point that that "Unix-based" does not mean "Unix."
>
> I don't mean to be rude, but you should read and understand an e-mail
> before you hit the reply button :)

Chris,

This message of yours was indeed rude, but out of respect for Jon's
mandate as group Moderator, I will not respond further nor get dragged
into your silly debate over semantics.

>> right to be called UNIX than Linux. On Apple's website they never say
>> OS X is UNIX, because they're not legally allowed to. They always
>
>Actually, they do:
>
>"The most widely-sold UNIX-based operating system, Mac OS X..."
>
>Source URL: http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/unix/

You trimmed where Keenan said "they always claim it is "unix-based"".

-Carl