Talk:Ardour (software)

Cleanup
Feh. I'll clean it up later. I'm too lazy right now. Cernen 10:25, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Naming
"The name Ardour is probably derived from the acronym ARDAW (A Realtime Digital Audio Workstation), which sounds like the phrase 'our DAW' - an oblique reference to the GPL, which in turn sounds like the word 'ardour'. The reference to 'realtime' is due to the way in which Ardour is designed."

Is this just speculation? If you cite an official source, then feel free to put this back in. --Avochelm 05:13, 16 March 2006 (UTC)


 * says it comes from "HDR" (hard disk recorder) and their struggle to pronounce the acronym. The 'our DAW' retroactive etymology appears to be at least partially right. Not sure about the ARDAW thing though. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 17:29, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Confusing
What does it mean that support for Steinberg's VST plugin standard with Wine is a "compile time option"? --Bensin (talk) 21:09, 9 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree it's confusing. I take it to mean you have to specify an argument when compiling Ardour to support VST, but I dunno how/why Wine is used --157.203.42.132 (talk) 15:38, 29 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I clarified this in the last edit. Hopefully this is clear enough now. Feel free to mark it confusing again if it isn't clear enough. SaBerG (talk) 12:40, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

cross-platform?
AFAIK Ardour works only on POSIX-compliant OS, but I can be wrong. --15:55, 21 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I went to the official site and it says "do not support Windows and have no plans to do so".Lgsoltek (talk) 13:38, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

I notice that someone has added "no Windows port" after "cross-platform" in the Info Box OS section. I looked at the Pro Tools and Cubase articles, and don't see anything there that says "no Linux port". This seems to violate WP:NPOV. Admittedly, the information (i.e., that it doesn't run on Windows) may be of interest to someone investigating Ardour. But wouldn't it be better to list the OSs that Ardour runs on, rather than those that it doesn't support? SoCalDonF (talk) 20:27, 1 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I have updated the infobox. I think it's more neutral now. SoCalDonF (talk) 04:05, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * The site does indeed offer (22aug21) ready-to-install Windows and MacOS versions. However, unlike the Linux version, pre-built Windows and MacOS versions are available only for purchase, or as demos that "periodically [go] silent after 10 minutes". For free, normally working Windows or MacOS versions, only the source code is available, about which the site says: "You'll need to build [these] yourself. That can be a challenging and complex process, especially on Windows and macOS. We don't provide help for this process, and we can't support the end result." And indeed, the Windows build process (I didn't look for the Mac one) seems considerably beyond most computer users' capabilities. (Here's a description of it.) It'd be easy enough for Ardour to provide real Windows and MacOS builds, but apparently their resentment of commercial OSs extends to people who use them (a common attitude in the Linux community). Shouldn't these limitations be mentioned in the article, rather than confusingly saying Ardour is "open source" and that "pre-built binaries... are available for Linux, macOS and Windows"? – AndyFielding (talk) 04:26, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Very precise ;P
"as well as input and output in a number of different file formats." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sasq777 (talk • contribs) 19:13, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Windows support
Claiming the "author refuses to release a Windows version" is most certainly POV against the author. According to the links cited, the author has done some work on a Windows port, but that it's not ready for release, nor does he see value in releasing it. As Ardour is FOSS, anyone who doesn't like it is welcome to fork and support Windows, but attacking the author on wikipedia isn't proper. I just took out the mention of Windows but left the cites (since they do describe the platform release policy, to some extent), since it didn't really add anything (if Windows isn't listed as supported, then it probably isn't). BillG &#124; Talk 21:50, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

3rd party sources
After adding publisher= to all the citations, this article clearly, absolutely, positively needs independent, reliable, verifiable 3rd party sources. Without them, it's on the bubble for deletion due to promotion or notability. I've added a find sources template above to ease this important article improvement. --Lexein (talk) 12:55, 28 October 2010 (UTC) And here are two: --Lexein (talk) 15:10, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
 * An Ecology of Ardour Linux Journal, Sept 20, 2010
 * Harrison Mixbus 1.1 DAW Software Review Mar 1, 2010

Voice prints?
Does Ardour let you view and edit voice prints? Dexter Nextnumber (talk) 07:22, 2 January 2011 (UTC)


 * As far as I know, there are no specific features in Ardour that are related to voice prints. --SoCalDonF (talk) 13:53, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Windows support
The nightly build site does have a windows version and it works. Why does the article say it only supports Mac and Linux? Also, the BSD build hasn't been updated in a while AFAIK. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.56.41.180 (talk) 05:32, 5 November 2015 (UTC)


 * The Nightly Build page also says: "DO NOT DOWNLOAD THESE VERSIONS TO USE ON ACTUAL SESSIONS. The main branch of Ardour, which is used to build the versions available on this site, has entered a development phase that makes it unsuitable for actual work." – AndyFielding (talk) 04:06, 23 August 2021 (UTC)


 * The article is in desperate need of an update, especially since Ardour 4 has been released. It's on my list of things to do. SoCalDonF (talk) 19:19, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Stable release update to 5.0
I can't figure out where the stable release info (which says 4.7 currently) is coming from. Not the infobox, not release versions template, not wikidata. In any case 5.0 has been released. Mike Linksvayer (talk) 15:53, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅ The version number is updated and the backlink problem that had confused is resolved. —Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 18:10, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Ardour (software). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091019020829/http://opensourcemusician.libsyn.com:80/index.php?post_id=531039 to http://opensourcemusician.libsyn.com/index.php?post_id=531039

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:53, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Removing citation needed
For that it is included in the repositories of some Linux distributions. Just take Ubuntu for instance, anyone can check it is in its repositories, also In the Welcome under software repository of Ubuntu Mate. It's even preinstalled in Ubuntu Studio. No citation is needed here, anyone can check it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yahya Talatin (talk • contribs) 00:05, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Adding ARM architecture
See here: http://www.raspberryconnect.com/raspbian-packages-list/item/91-raspbian-sound — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yahya Talatin (talk • contribs) 14:17, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

GPL'd DRM?
Shouldn't this softwares business model, which is very unusual for an “open source” project, be mentioned in this article? --94.219.150.113 (talk) 00:08, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

This is an excellent question and rightfully puts quotes around the poorly defined term "open source". Ardour is at odds with the license it is provided under. For these reasons there is some interest in forking the project away from proponents who spend time praising Apple Hardware or the convenience and flexibility that have nothing to do with the tool itself. To most users this is trivial but where are we going to try to hold higher standards? Wikipedia? Pornhub?