Make it as good as other competitors

[Ishida0216]

Note

This discussion was converted from issue #7733 on March 02, 2025 13:14 to a Discussion thread.

Enhancement Summary

i found out about this project and actually would like to learn using this DAW but some people don't recommend using it cuz its not gonna be beneficial in long run.

Implementation Details / Mockup

it lacks some advanced features which are there in fl studio. for example it doesn't support integration of omnisphere

i know there is need for devs, but if possible, i would just request the devs to just make it as good as the competitors and make it a reliable option for serious music producers cuz i really would love to use LMMS and support it.

and yes i think the UI should be updated

Please search the issue tracker for existing feature requests before submitting your own.

• I have searched all existing issues and confirmed that this is not a duplicate.

[Rossmaxx]

We are all trying, but this is a volunteer led project, so not everyone has free time. For starters, I would suggest you take a look at the January milestone posted on this discussions page. Also, can you be more specific about what you want?

[qnebra]

Hmm, omnisphere integration and ui update. Omnisphere, from what I remember, works with lmms. UI update, it is worked on more in terms of user experience and usability, not some spectacular redesign.

I enjoy this laid back approach of lmms, being aware of, didn't like this word, competition, but making it just a really good and easy casual DAW with some advanced surprises.

[Ishida0216]

We are all trying, but this is a volunteer led project, so not everyone has free time. For starters, I would suggest you take a look at the January milestone posted on this discussions page. Also, can you be more specific about what you want?

right now, i would like ya'll to make fonts and the UI in general, larger upon increasing the global UI scaling. im on linux and even though global UI scaling is set to 125%, the fonts appear small

[Ishida0216]

and yes there are couple other suggestions i'd like to give. and yeah they are kinda necessary for me cuz absence of these is a deal breaker

--> you should give us the ability to put the whole melody sample directly, like you do in other popular DAWs. right now, to play a sample, i gotta use the piano roll. i'd like to directly put the sample and use it instead of jumping to the piano roll. and even when u use the piano roll, the size of the keys sometimes dont extend and i end up not being able to fully play the sample.

--> im not sure but maybe you don't give us the ability to add our sample folders to the path where LMMS can search for samples. i think you get the whole file system explorer.

--> changing pitch shouldn't change the speed. if someone's exclusively changing pitch, why change the speed?

--> search option in sample explorer is broken.

[khoidauminh]

--> you should give us the ability to put the whole melody sample directly, like you do in other popular DAWs. right now, to play a sample, i gotta use the piano roll. i'd like to directly put the sample and use it instead of jumping to the piano roll. and even when u use the piano roll, the size of the keys sometimes dont extend and i end up not being able to fully play the sample.

Alpha/Nightly LMMS allows you to place a sample directly onto the song editor, although it will only play the sample as is. It's not possible to pitch shift the sample yet.

--> im not sure but maybe you don't give us the ability to add our sample folders to the path where LMMS can search for samples. i think you get the whole file system explorer.

I'm assuming that you want LMMS to search in multiple folders for samples instead of one? A possible workaround is to create shortcuts/symbolic links to those folders in the lmms sample path.

--> changing pitch shouldn't change the speed. if someone's exclusively changing pitch, why change the speed?

AFAIK, this is currently not possible in the sample players like AFP/SlicerT. Someone will have to implement it.

--> search option in sample explorer is broken.

You should open a bug report and provide the steps for reproducing it so that the devs can look into it

[bratpeki]

I think we need to revamp the issue creator form to somehow specify that issues like these are not preferred, nor welcome IMO.

1. They don't present an issue. There is no clear cut problem and no idea on how to solve it.
2. They demean the developers, presenting the idea of "You guys should make a free DAW that works just as well as a paid DAW overnight, but without any additional manpower or profit incentive."
3. As a continuation of point 1, they clutter the issue page, making it difficult for devs to find issues they wanna work on and fix.

I applaud the developers. Sometimes I see a comment like the one presented in this issue and realize how ungrateful people are for the work you pour into this wonderful piece of software. Thank you for all your work!

---

If the idea to add some informative text to the creator form is up for debate, I'd gladly write the preliminary version, and we can work on it from there!

[Monospace-V]

i know there is need for devs, but if possible, i would just request the devs to just make it as good as the competitors and make it a reliable option for serious music producers cuz

It is already a reliable option for serious music producers. Check out the Best of LMMS tracks. When you say "as good as the competitors," do you refer to specific features? I find FL Studio pretty unintuitive to use, for instance, and REAPER extremely unpleasant. It is as "good" as LMMS is. Specific features can be requested.
If you wanted the workflow of FL Studio, of course, then you would use FL Studio. If you wanted the workflow of Ableton, you would use Ableton. These are different DAWs.
LMMS is unique in that it is different from other DAWs, so has a different workflow and learning curve. Learning to use a specific software does require some effort, but if you are used to a specific interface then it is easy to use that interface.
If you are familiar with any other competitors and have used them, then continuing to use your other DAW is easier.
If you want specific features, we can discuss them specifically, or you can create single issues for integration of specific enhancements. You have mentioned some useful points.

i really would love to use LMMS and support it.

This can be solved easily, check out this page.
It is free to get and use and takes less than 100 MB of disk space.
Please do what you love.
I encourage you to use LMMS if you feel this way. If you are having trouble, we can help you download and pick a version for your needs, or download multiple versions if necessary.

it lacks some advanced features which are there in fl studio. for example it doesn't support integration of omnisphere

I don't know much about Omnisphere, or how its integration is advanced. It appears to be a paid plugin. So for someone to integrate it, they need to both be willing to pay ₹43k for a single plugin, and also be able to work with LMMS' VST Host. The costliest version of FL Studio is ₹29k. The most popular version is ₹10k.
Omnisphere is 43k. It says it's the only synth to integrate several hardware synths- I draw the conclusion that this is the only thing it can do that most other synths are capable of. Ie, this is its primary defining ability, large libraries aside. There are several free and some FOSS alternatives that can do much of what Omnisphere can, though maybe not all together. A hardware synth is extremely costly too.
LMMS has an integrated soundfont player. Most users get soundfonts.
But most people who drop 43k on what is basically a massive soundbank library and its player or another 30-40k on a hardware synth are the kind to drop 10-30k on FL Studio. That is to say, they don't tend to develop for LMMS.

I have, however, seen LMMS users talk about having bought and used Omnisphere. It seems to work alright in LMMS, but if you're facing a specific issue, we can check it out. I understand there was once a preset issue. We need more users who use obscure and costly VSTs if we want to test issues.
You can ask for Omnisphere integration, but we cannot integrate Omnisphere without an Omnisphere user testing it. So it would be easier to be a part of the change. Do you not wish to use LMMS until Omnisphere works perfectly? Then it will never happen. If you have purchased Omnisphere and see an issue with it, then we need you to help us fix it.

and yes i think the UI should be updated

I am aware of a work in progress UI update, and it's been frozen lately, but if you want to work on a UI update you can contribute to that, or you can create a PR to update specific parts of the UI. The UI isn't easy to update, so we would appreciate any help we can get. We are also hoping to separate the UI from the core of LMMS, and this would make it easier to make UI changes. This could be a good place to look if you want to help.

--> im not sure but maybe you don't give us the ability to add our sample folders to the path where LMMS can search for samples.
i think you get the whole file system explorer.

It's alright. Symbolic linking can be done in cmd in admin mode, as mklink /d "<Pointing Directory>" "<target>". It's what I use. You use Linux, so it may be different for you. We can discuss this and help you, but you can look up symlink in linux on your choice of search engine and see how that works for your needs.

--> changing pitch shouldn't change the speed. if someone's exclusively changing pitch, why change the speed?

This is because it's the simplest way to change pitch.
There is already an enhancement request for this and related to this. If you wish to allow this behaviour to be possible, and have the skillset necessary to implement it well, you can do this. This would be helpful.
If you are actually asking why it occurs, then this is because of how basic audio works. But that is obvious.

--> search option in sample explorer is broken.

There have been several issues about the sidebar search that have been corrected. If you have found a new one, please report it as it is. We can help you present a clear issue.
What do you mean by "sample explorer"? If you mean the file dialogue obtained upon clicking the choose-file option in an instrument, then we don't have a search option- and we probably should consider it. If you mean the sidebar, we can discuss this in detail. This is a useful point.
In the meantime, you can- in master- drag a sample in from the sidebar.

i found out about this project and actually would like to learn using this DAW but some people don't recommend using it cuz its not gonna be beneficial in long run.

I can recommend using this DAW because it will be beneficial in the long run.
People who don't use the DAW will obviously recommend not using it. I don't recommend a lot of other DAWs. LMMS is unique. There are things LMMS cannot do yet, but I am continually amazed by the things it can do, and some of the native plugins that are developing recently are easily as good as or better than some paid alternatives.
And users of paid DAWs are likely to talk about LMMS saying it's "good for the free price," so this may bias your judgement. You may always find better paid alternatives, but we're always working on things.

FL Studio is a paid and proprietary DAW- we don't get ten thousand rupees out of every user we acquire. Image-Line is worth millions of dollars. If we took payment, LMMS would probably be more feature rich. Other DAWs cost between 5k to 60k.
LMMS is ₹0. It's open-source. The developers aren't paid to work on LMMS or contracted to do so. They are doing it because they want to. People have learnt so that they could contribute.
The free alternatives are proprietary. You may not pay for them, but the developers are paid anyway.
Our competitors are more feature rich by virtue of the developers being paid to work consistently on them. If you want to make LMMS more like one of these competitors, and cannot contribute to its working yourself, you can contribute to LMMS like you would contribute to a competitor. This is assuming you have the means, considering you have mentioned using Omnisphere in FL Studio. It is possible that after having purchased these two you no longer have the means to contribute to LMMS 😜

"Enhancements" like this do not add meaning to the tracker. The issue tracker's template is simplistic so simplistic enhancements can be requested. "Make LMMS better" is a very vague post. Enhancement requests with specific features would be more useful. You can create a single enhancement focusing on a single feature, or a single bug report about a single bug (after testing with master).
Your request for sample folder search is a good idea. You can look into how it works now on master and accordingly create a feature request.

[Ishida0216]

It is already a reliable option for serious music producers. Check out the Best of LMMS tracks. When you say "as good as the competitors," do you refer to specific features? I find FL Studio pretty unintuitive to use, for instance, and REAPER extremely unpleasant. It is as "good" as LMMS is. Specific features can be requested. If you wanted the workflow of FL Studio, of course, then you would use FL Studio. If you wanted the workflow of Ableton, you would use Ableton. These are different DAWs. LMMS is unique in that it is different from other DAWs, so has a different workflow and learning curve. Learning to use a specific software does require some effort, but if you are used to a specific interface then it is easy to use that interface. If you are familiar with any other competitors and have used them, then continuing to use your other DAW is easier. If you want specific features, we can discuss them specifically, or you can create single issues for integration of specific enhancements. You have mentioned some useful points.

i apologise it's a fault from my side. since i read online that its not good for long term, and i like this project, so i thought of suggesting to improve it so that i wont end up needing to switch to the paid ones again cuz switching to some other DAW kinda disrupts the workflow u used to have.

i think i should have tried the software myself instead of acting on what i read online

This can be solved easily, check out this page.
It is free to get and use and takes less than 100 MB of disk space.
Please do what you love.
I encourage you to use LMMS if you feel this way. If you are having trouble, we can help you download and pick a version for your needs, or download multiple versions if necessary.

i already was using lmms when i posted the comment you replied to. incase you forgot to see the screenshot

But most people who drop 43k on what is basically a massive soundbank library and its player or another 30-40k on a hardware synth are the kind to drop 10-30k on FL Studio. That is to say, they don't tend to develop for LMMS.

uhh well ig i forgot to mention but before i switched to linux, i was using FL Studio on windows. since i had issues using fl studio on linux using wine. i thought of finding some good alternative and i came across LMMS and i ended up liking this project so i wanted to show my support by using it and also by donating too!

but since i ended up finding a solution for fl studio, i switched again. although i still want to support this project thru whatever means possible cuz as i said i ended up liking it

What do you mean by "sample explorer"?

This is assuming you have the means, considering you have mentioned using Omnisphere in FL Studio. It is possible that after having purchased these two you no longer have the means to contribute to LMMS 😜

i understand my words unintentionally sound rude and ungrateful, but i think you should stay respectful. (assuming you're a grown up adult.)

"Enhancements" like this do not add meaning to the tracker. The issue tracker's template is simplistic so simplistic enhancements can be requested. "Make LMMS better" is a very vague post. Enhancement requests with specific features would be more useful. You can create a single enhancement focusing on a single feature, or a single bug report about a single bug (after testing with master).

i apologise.

[Monospace-V]

I apologize for my tone. I should have been kinder. I am about your age, but I still have a tendency to be unkind when reacting like this. I am very sorry about this. We get issues about LMMS that are vague, and my reaction was disproportionate, especially considering you had concerns. I hope to improve.

What you have shown a screenshot of is the sidebar, and the ability to search has recently been undergoing some changes between 1.2 and now.
I myself have found confusing behaviour with searching the sidebar, but I did not take care to properly understand what was going on, since I was impatient with it.
Can I request you to explain the issue? Also, it may be helpful to use the most recent version of LMMS before you do so, since there are some additions to sidebar search that may make it more useful. It is possible your issue may not appear here.
You can find it here: https://lmms.io/download > scroll down to "Nightly Versions" and download the version for your system.

[bratpeki]

changing pitch shouldn't change the speed. if someone's exclusively changing pitch, why change the speed?

Because the two are linked for any sample-related work. If you wanna exclusively change the pitch, there's AM Pitchshifter and Granular Pitch Shifter. That's simply how LMMS was designed.

Changing it now would break user projects, so it's off the table.

AFAICT this issue is explored and should be closed. @tresf, how do you feel about adding some informative text to the issue form telling the user how to properly define an issue?

[Ishida0216]

I think we need to revamp the issue creator form to somehow specify that issues like these are not preferred, nor welcome IMO.

1. They don't present an issue. There is no clear cut problem and no idea on how to solve it.
2. They demean the developers, presenting the idea of "You guys should make a free DAW that works just as well as a paid DAW overnight, but without any additional manpower or profit incentive."
3. As a continuation of point 1, they clutter the issue page, making it difficult for devs to find issues they wanna work on and fix.

I applaud the developers. Sometimes I see a comment like the one presented in this issue and realize how ungrateful people are for the work you pour into this wonderful piece of software. Thank you for all your work!

If the idea to add some informative text to the creator form is up for debate, I'd gladly write the preliminary version, and we can work on it from there!

i sure had a feeling that my words might indicate im being ungrateful. but thats not the case. since english isnt my mother tongue maybe thats why i couldnt find a better way to express myself

i infact wanna support this project and see potential. thats the reason i even cared to post some suggestions/issues in the first place.

[tresf]

AFAICT this issue is explored and should be closed. @tresf, how do you feel about adding some informative text to the issue form telling the user how to properly define an issue?

The issue process is already overly complex with the amount of questions we have to answer. In my experience no amount of explaining prevents "bad" bug reports.

I want to encourage the OP to remain excited about the software while also firmly enforcing that a bug report must be specific enough to take action on.

right now, i would like ya'll to make fonts and the UI in general, larger upon increasing the global UI scaling. im on linux and even though global UI scaling is set to 125%, the fonts appear small

If you searched you'd find that this has been covered in many other bug reports. In short, use nightly for HiDPI.

[tresf]

The OP emailed me requesting he could continue discussing, so I've reopen and converted to a Discussion.