> > JACK *isn't* intended for general use, and i get tired of > > suggestions that it should be.
<snip> and then later... > the reason for not doing this is that there isn't manpower to do it. i > am focused on JACK as the engine for a set of apps that i want to be > able use (and i want others to be able to use them) in pro audio, real > time, low latency environments. i don't have the hours (or the cash) > to support the development of a "joe user" sound server. if you do, > then please join the development team and help us out. Then explain it this way, and do not contradict yourself by initially saying Jack will never replace other sound daemons, and then mention that it is simply an issue that there is not enough manpower... Besides Jack can be high-latency (up to 8192 buffer size), so it is already fit to be used for purposes other than "pro" or SOPMF-whatever... > RTcmix, as fabulous of a program as it is, doesn't meet my definition > of "pro audio". actually, "pro audio" is a bad term. i should stick > with stuff like "studios operated as profit-making entities and/or > real time performance with a mixture of electronic and acoustic sound > sources". i'll call SOPME/RTP from now on, OK? First off, I USE RTcmix for "real-time performance with a mixture of electronic and acoustic sound sources," so obviously you have no idea what RTcmix is. Sure, it did not have a fancy gui (although that just changed a couple months ago with a new GUI from Dave Topper that makes RTcmix look like another Pd-like product). Other thing is, it is VERY LOW LATENCY, you can specify a single buffer size of 64 if you feel like it, the only question is whether your computer will keep up with it and how cpu intensive the process is. RTcmix has one of the best reverb, flange, place, and move filters I've heard, it has its own sub-busses (for mixing multiple filters), needless to mention dozens and dozens of other incredible instruments. It could as well be much better than any LADSPA plugin out there... Yet you say it's no good for commercial market... Hmmm... If you knew anything about the market, then you'd realize that as many SOPME/RTP studios there are in the world, they don't stack up to the amount of money educational institutions spend on building their electronic music studios, and this is where apps like RTcmix are an equal concern as Protools (even the university this list is hosted on uses RTcmix). If you had realized that, you'd know you'd be making a lot more money by selling your computers with Ardour and other stuff preinstalled to institutions like these (yet the institutions want their cpu's to do more than just Ardour). Just to give you a perspective, some of the INDIVIDUAL University studios in the US spend over $100,000/year for the new equipment/software. How much do the SOPME/RTP spend once they equip it for the first time? > >This will create an unnecessary polarization in an already heavily > >fragmented audio community (oss vs. alsa, esd vs. asd vs. artsd vs. > >gstreamer vs. jackd etc.). Linux is supposed to be all-inclusive and > > 1) who said "linux is supposed to be all inclusive"? who? Show me any past hardware that is not any more compatible with Linux and you'll know what I am talking about. Even if the device is not supported by the current kernel, you can always find a module and recompile it. That is by anyone's definition all-inclusive. Sure, some things do not work yet, but will be there soon (and this is not the issue in this case, since that falls into the forward-looking aspect). > i never said that not supporting JACK makes something a toy. i noted > that most of the audio applications for linux are (1) written to use > OSS and (2) are toys. there are thousands of links to such programs on > dave's pages. the toys are fun, and often very useful. however, they > are not viable candidates to act as the basis of SOPME/RTP for most > people. But are commonly used in educational institutions for professional music making purposes. Besides, please define "most people". I clearly see split on this list in terms of interests, so at best it's 50/50. > why should i be doing *anything* for "users" who aren't interested in > paying me, aren't interested in what i'm interested in, and keep > telling me they want things that i can give them but don't like the > package it comes in? Who said anything about you being the one who develops all this? What I did say is that you should not propagate the idea that Jack is never going to be an all-purpose sound daemon, when it is clear it could fulfill that purpose. In the end, it should be user's choice what they will do with it. Besides, I'd gladly poll my resources to add this feature to Jack, but the elusive alsa-server is in existence only in these discussions, alsa docs are still skimpy, and on top of that I do need to familiarize with the Jack's framework before I can contribute anything. Now why would I contribute to a project that you are so strongly trying to separate from having anything to do with what I am trying to contribute? > why don't you just spend $US60 on a decent audio interface that > supports hardware multiopen, and stop looking for software solutions? > the trident cards are nice, simple, reliable and cheap. 32 hardware > stereo streams. Because most people who perform their music on concert venues DO NOT WANT TO LUG ARROUND A TOWER, but rather have a laptop!!! Give me one laptop that does multiple opens in Alsa RELIABLY (Maestro 3i does two streams and hiccups on third and is not being used in newer laptops any more anyhow, even the all-cherished RME Hammerfall DSP on which I spent way much more than $60 does not do multiple opens (heck it does not work at all for me, and from what I've seen for many others, in Linux) even though it clearly stores audio into the memory buffer which could be easily hacked to do downmixing of outgoing streams, yet it is not me who has rights to the RME driver changing/updating, is it?) > i'm not here to do what you feel is obvious. i'm here to do what i > think is the right thing to do and what satisfies my needs and plans > the best. Well, and that is the source of the problem. "What suits me" instead of "what suits me and others around me." Besides, I never said it should be you personally who should do it. On one hand you complain how your life is tough, but when people propose additions they are interested in and are willing to chip in their time and energy, then you push them away with your "JACK *isn't* intended for general use" statements... > if you want to influence me then paypal is a few clicks > away, but otherwise, exhortations about what users need will not > accomplish very much. > > --p I got a better idea, perhaps you should let other people chip in their thoughts and efforts by not pushing them away in the first place... Alternately, if you find that unacceptable, maybe Jack should be branched off into another project that would allow this kind of development to take place... Cheers! Ico
