LMMS or not, that is the question

Have you ever thought about that all sounds, effects and transitions in a song made in LMMS, could come from anywhere? Even if the author clearly states that it is made in LMMS, it could be that no sound actually was produced by LMMS! What does it mean when the artist say that the song was made in, by or with LMMS? This article is discussing where we could set some limits.

Made in LMMS is a common description on Soundcloud and YouTube... if you follow a lot of people who use LMMS. What exactly does the term: "made in LMMS" mean? That greatly vary from artist to artist because there is not a clear definition of that term, and thus we can't always know the exact meaning.

As I see it, we can divide into three main groups.

1. Songs which are produced only by using native LMMS. The sounds in these songs are only produced with the plugins, instruments and samples inside LMMS and can be shared on the lsp without a problem. This does not include the use of the plugins Sf2 Player, PatMan or VeSTige because you will have to download other files to produce sound with them. Downloading presets (xiz, xpf) and use them in your song also qualifies as native LMMS because you could have created them yourself.
1. Songs which sometimes are called native LMMS. What could be debatable is if you are allowed to master with downloaded VST(fx) or another program. All of the sounds you hear is still produced by LMMS, but the mastering plugins can be downloaded or it could be done by another program. If it cannot be shared on the sharing platform, I would not call it native LMMS. So if you use downloaded VST's the song fits into the next category.
2. Songs which are produced in LMMS. The sounds and effects in these songs can also be produced by downloaded VSTi's, soundfonts, pat files and samples. You can also master with downloaded VST(fx)'s.
1. If we look at the adposition (preposition) used in this term; "in", it would actually mean that it still is wrong to master in another program if you want your song to use this term as description. However a lot of people use this term anyway. Good arguments can be: It is the music which is important and that is already produced by LMMS, the program only makes the music better/louder. Or: What should I call it then? And that is a good argument/question, for my next group does not necessarily fit these songs.
3. Songs which are produced with LMMS only as sequencer. This means all the sounds come from other sources. It is quite rare to use LMMS without using BitInvader, Kicker, LB302, Mallets, Organic, FreeBoy, SID, TripleOscillator, Vibed or ZynAddSubFX, especially when you think of LMMS as a music making software for computers, but of course it happens! A band could easily use LMMS only as editing software and sequencer if it chose to use LMMS. It would be a bad idea, cause Ardour is so much more fitted for purposes like that, but LMMS together with Audacity could do it. Horror scenario: A guy on FL-studio could make a song, then export the drums, lead, bass and effects and organize it all back together in LMMS just to use the words "made in LMMS". Of course that would be wrong use of the terms, but I don't think he would care. And in the end, all DAW's are music sequencers.

To be safe stick with: "made with LMMS", "I use LMMS", "LMMS".