G
generalchaos316
New member
Not sure if this is exactly the best place to post this, but (since I am a newbie to the recording services industry) here it goes:
I hold a high regard for the concept of open source products. The whole thought of essentially donating one's time to selflessly expanding the development and spreading education of a passion is something that certainly should spark the 'romantic' in all of us. At the same time there is no denying that it is incredibly difficult to disregard the 'selfishness' of the human psyche ("Well shit, why waste time on this if I am not getting paid/compensated?!").
Either way, I am interested to hear some opinions of the idea of an open-source recording studio. This would be a studio that only uses open source software as its recording environment. As I envision it, this would be an audio recording studio that would license its recordings under a Creative Commons license of some sort (note: just the recordings of the songs...not the actual songs themselves). Such a studio would record, mix (and master?) and artist for no charge. However, the artist would have to agree to allow their recorded work to be distributed and reused for no charge (to fulfill the open source philosophy). Of course this philosophy typically means that even if a work is "forked" into a new one...the original copyright owner is cited as the inspiration, which could potentially lead to more exposure for the artist and studio.
Also, I don't necessarily think that a studio would have exclusively be "open-source" or "closed-source" only. A studio could offer free recordings (or donation-based) using the stipulations of the CC license as a potential "detriment". Or the artist could simply pay the studio for a traditional service and retain full rights to the recordings.
For the record, I understand that nothing technological will ever be "truly" and fully open source (i.e. computer hardware, outboard effects, microphones, i/o, etc). I also understand that currently open source DAWs leave a lot to be desired but in their current form, but they certainly must be volumes better than the first DAWs that early adopters were willing to jump all over and gush about. Finally, it can be pretty much be assumed that commercial applications will usually trump open source applications, but that does not mean the the open source alternatives do not bring something worthwhile to the table. I am just beginning to research this, so please make any and all comments/concerns known. If you already know of some studios embracing this ideal, by all means, bring their attention to me.
Discuss...
I hold a high regard for the concept of open source products. The whole thought of essentially donating one's time to selflessly expanding the development and spreading education of a passion is something that certainly should spark the 'romantic' in all of us. At the same time there is no denying that it is incredibly difficult to disregard the 'selfishness' of the human psyche ("Well shit, why waste time on this if I am not getting paid/compensated?!").
Either way, I am interested to hear some opinions of the idea of an open-source recording studio. This would be a studio that only uses open source software as its recording environment. As I envision it, this would be an audio recording studio that would license its recordings under a Creative Commons license of some sort (note: just the recordings of the songs...not the actual songs themselves). Such a studio would record, mix (and master?) and artist for no charge. However, the artist would have to agree to allow their recorded work to be distributed and reused for no charge (to fulfill the open source philosophy). Of course this philosophy typically means that even if a work is "forked" into a new one...the original copyright owner is cited as the inspiration, which could potentially lead to more exposure for the artist and studio.
Also, I don't necessarily think that a studio would have exclusively be "open-source" or "closed-source" only. A studio could offer free recordings (or donation-based) using the stipulations of the CC license as a potential "detriment". Or the artist could simply pay the studio for a traditional service and retain full rights to the recordings.
For the record, I understand that nothing technological will ever be "truly" and fully open source (i.e. computer hardware, outboard effects, microphones, i/o, etc). I also understand that currently open source DAWs leave a lot to be desired but in their current form, but they certainly must be volumes better than the first DAWs that early adopters were willing to jump all over and gush about. Finally, it can be pretty much be assumed that commercial applications will usually trump open source applications, but that does not mean the the open source alternatives do not bring something worthwhile to the table. I am just beginning to research this, so please make any and all comments/concerns known. If you already know of some studios embracing this ideal, by all means, bring their attention to me.
Discuss...
