Re: [LAD] [ANN] LV2 beta3

[Thomas Vecchione]

This is intentional.  LV2 is not intended to include every single
feature that everyone might want.  It is intended for it to
be /possible/ to implement any feature someone might want (this is why
LV2 actually exists in a useful state and, say, GMPI does not...)


While this makes perfect since in flexibility from a programmer 
perspective, I wonder how it will affect things from an end-user 
perspective, especially if LV2 becomes popular(Which many hope it would)...


The end user will have some plugins that are 'LV2' that will work in 
some 'LV2' hosts but not others.  How are they to know?  Will they have 
to have 'LV2 and supports these features' that they will have to check 
off every time to see if it should be working or not?


Or 'Profiles' that fit a certain set of features?

Don't get me wrong, I love how flexible LV2 is intended to be.  However 
without some baseline for it, there are some definite concerns when 
writing plugins in as far as compatibility for an end-user that may not 
know to check every last little additional function.


Perhaps LV2 should by default include extensions that encompass the 
points brought up here instead of dismissing them as capable of being 
done, as if they can be done in one host, not nesseccarily in all, then 
you have one giant mass of confusion in as far as what plugins can be 
sued here, there or whatever, and instead of a standard plugin format, 
we have a giant clusterf**k.


I apologize to anyone offended by the last statement in advance, but I 
could not come up with a better way to describe it.


Seablade
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/linux-audio-dev

Re: [LAD] [ANN] LV2 beta3

[Thomas Vecchione]

Gonna answer several posts with this I think in the interest of 
simplicity as I tihnk I was misunderstood somewhat


Lars:


You could have meta-extensions that were simply a collection of other
extensions. "To support this extension, a host must support extensions
A, B, and C". Or something like that.


Definitely a possibility, that is exactly what I was referring to with 
'Profiles'.  For example an Audio-Instrument profile might support XYZ 
while a Video Profile might support others, as if I recall correctly 
part of the point of LV2 was to support not just audio but possibly 
other things as well?  A GUI profile might be another one(Not saying it 
is a good idea, just providing possible examples)?


Whatever the case of how that is handled, simplicity for the user as 
well as the programmer needs to be considered.  Even the profiles 
mentioned above would add complexity in for the end user though.



I don't think there is any huge danger of that happening. People will
probably mostly use a few popular hosts, plugin writers will make sure
that their plugins work in those hosts (if feasible) and host writers
will try to support as many plugins as possible. I guess it depends on
how creative (or how disciplined) LV2 programmers are.



I think that is being either very optimistic or pessimistic, or both at 
the same time(If that is possible).  Writing plugins for a few specific 
hosts is a good idea, of course then you are limiting the capabilities 
of others also developed with LV2 as they might not be able to support 
all extensions out of the box quickly enough to become popular.  As much 
as I love Ardour, I would hate for it to be the only option out there, 
then we are back to Pro-Tools all over again.


Also depending on LV2 programmers to always be completely disciplined is 
being kinda optomistic IMO.  Nothing against any current programmers, 
but if we want to encourage people to develop plugins, some of those 
people may just be getting started in programming.  Some guidelines are 
not a bad thing in that regard, and may even encourage folks to stay 
logical and disciplined.



There is a good argument against having a large core specification; the
larger it is, the harder it is to write hosts, and the fewer hosts will
be written.


I am not arguing that at all actually.  I think Firefox's greatest 
strength early on that it is starting to lose was the fact they aimed 
for very lightweight and allowed extensions.  However now they are 
building more into the browser and less via extensions, instead of 
shipping it with those functionalities as extensions that can be 
disabled if desired.


Thorsten:


Hosts will be able to not ever list plugins they can't use, afaik.



Unfortunatly that has nothing to do with my concern though.  The problem 
isn't that hosts won't list the plugin, it is that a plguin that works 
here in program X, and I like the plugin but maybe not the program, 
doesn't work here because a host y has not done that particular extension.


It could be looked at as the job of the programmer to support the 
extension, but then you are adding complexity into the programmer's 
lives as well by making them follow every custom extension to support 
all these great plugins.


In the worst case we will need a table of what works where  :) 



Yes but that should be ABSOLUTE worst case.  I have enough problems 
explaining audio on linux half the time to others, that if I was to be 
asked every five minutes, well I have a plugin that works in RoseGarden 
but wont work in Muse, but they both support LV2, trying to explain the 
concept of extensions individually I think would be a problem.


Again I come back to profiles only because I couldn't think of a better 
solution at the time(So people start suggesting;), but if I have to 
point newcomers to a chart every time they want to knokw if their plugin 
works, and maybe it hasn't been tested... Might as well be back to 
VST/fst on linux debates there.


Steve:



I expect the majority of plugins will only use the core spec. The hosts can tell which plugins they don't have support for, and why so they could do something intelligent in the UI (greying out and tooltips or whatever). 



I completely agree, but things like this I think need to be addressed in 
a way that is simple for non-programmers to understand from the get-go.




There's also a lot of support to allow plugins to gracefully degrade, or 
provide alternative implementations when a feature that they'd like is not 
present.


And I think that is also a good idea.



Sure, why not? It's just a social contract. 


The catch is keeping it as simple as possible so we don't have an audio1 
audio2 and audio 3.4 profile all at once IMO.




They wont have to. The point that they might not understand why for eg. Ardour can't load one of Nedko's plugins is reasonable though. 


And the latter portion was of course my primary point/concern.





That's a possibility for the futu

Re: [LAD] [ANN] LV2 beta3

[Thomas Vecchione]

I don't really see the point of these "profiles" at all, to be honest.
Seems like just defining things for the sake of defining things.


All it does is maintain an easier way of telling if a plugin will work 
for the end user.


Keep in mind I am NOT talking about the programmer here, I am referring 
strictly for the end user.  And these 'profiles' actually are nothing 
that isn't already in the spec, just put together in a different way 
that is simpler for an end user to understand.




Either a plugin author supports these features, or not.
Either a host author supports these features, or not.


And that is great, for the programmers.


Either way, everything just works (or not) as it should.



Not to someone not familiar with the internals of how LV2 works.  As an 
example(I hate to bring up) how many people do you think could tell you 
how the ineternals of a VST program work.  Heck how many do you think 
have an even basic idea of computer programming, much less tell you the 
above.



I understand the idea of "plugin A doesn't work in host B" is maybe
unnerving at first glance, but you're looking at it from a strange
perspective and trying to come up with solutions to a problem that
simply doesn't exist.


Actually this is just it, I understand it perfectly well.  I am the one 
stuck helping many people looking to use linux for audio that it would 
make no sense whatsoever to.


"Why can't my plugin that is LV2, that is the same thing as a AU or VST 
plugin, work in this program that is LV2 compliant?"


Again for a programmer and specifically someone familiar with how LV2 
works, that is fine.  For someone that has no concept of programming, 
and just want something that works when(To them) it is supposed to, this 
is a huge screwup that can be fixed relatively easily to be honest.



Host H is a command line app, and doesn't support GUIs.
Plugin P is a plugin with an optional GUI.
Plugin G is a plugin with a mandatory GUI (silly example, yes).

P works in H, P's GUI doesn't.
G doesn't work in H.

Of course GUIs don't work in H - it doesn't support GUIs!  There is no
problem here...



Until you get someone that has no clue in programming say...

Hey this had a GUI in this application, why doesn't it here?

And you try to explain that it is because this implementation doesn't 
support GUIs, and they take that to mean the programming is broken 
because it doesn't work for them.


Once again, this is not about me I am mentioning this.  This is for the 
half dozen people(As of right now, obviously not counting those that I 
have gotten used to linux and how things work that might start again) 
that still come to me wondering why something doesn't 'just work'.


  Seablade
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/linux-audio-dev

Re: [LAD] [ANN] LV2 beta3

[Thomas Vecchione]

the problem will be rather: why has this plugin a GUI in ardour and
ingen and not in qtractor.

while this other plugin has a gui in qtractor and non in ardour and
ingen. 



That is an exact example of one case that is certainly possible.


What has understanding internals to do with this?
All that will need to be understood is that is-an-LV2 is not 
enough to describe a plugin or host.


And how is it doing to be described is my point.  At the moment it is 
being described as a function of what internal extensions are there in 
the case of something that does beyond the spec.  If this was one or two 
extensions it wouldn't be bad at all, but since we are aiming for 
expandability BEYOND what we can thing of right now I think it is a 
large mistake to not plan for what would happen if there are 50 
different extensions.


Do you propose to not have a plugin standard that can be extended for 
various current and possible future needs to avoid some possible user 
confusion?


Absolutely not, and nowhere did I say that.

What I am attempting to propose is a good, end-user-friendly, be found 
other than just describing individual extensions that gives end-users a 
strong idea of what will and will not work.  That is it.


Shall all hosts be forced to support all extensions available so 
that a sample editor would have to "support" MIDI plugins?


Again no.  A host could still choose whatever they support.  However, 
for example, an audio host might support the audio extensions, a video 
host might support the video extensions, and a host that is midi capable 
the midi extensions.  If you are dealing with 20 or 30 extensions there 
for whatever reason, are you honestly going to have an end-user go 
through and say, ok this extension is present, this one is present, this 
one is not, crap my plugin won't work or will be missing a gui.


Do not get me wrong, as I have said repeatedly thus far, LV2 is nice and 
highly expandable, and I certainly don't want to change that, but that 
by itself will not make it usable for the end user.  Power and 
flexibility do not necessarily equate ease of use, and personally I do 
not see a reason why this could not have all three, it is close as it is 
and the only thing holding it back are clear definitions of what will 
and won't work where for an end user that doesn't require 20 minutes 
worth of work for each plugin to see if it SHOULD work.  This has much 
less to do with the technical requirements of the spec, and much more to 
do with looking down the road and realizing that if this spec IS fully 
taken advantage of, things might very well get messy.


   Seablade
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/linux-audio-dev

Re: [LAD] [ANN] LV2 beta3

[Thomas Vecchione]

For the common user, hosts and plugin collections should be part 
of the distribution he uses.



Oh I sincerely hope we are not going to tie people in like this, that 
would be a VERY bad thing IMO.




It might be far easier to list the supporting hosts for each plugin, 
once the number of extensions outgrows the number of hosts. It's not 
difficult to read a plain list.



But it is more work, and if that list grows at all then it is a lot of 
extra work.  Not only that, but we are dealing with open source, is 
someone going to go around to each individual project that exists, 
whether or not they know about it, and test each individual plugin that 
exists, whether or not we know about it?  Again this is VST support in 
linux as it currently stands all over again.  Someone asks me if a 
certain VST plugin is supported all I can answer is maybe.  And a list 
does exist for it, just usually doesn't have half the plugins people 
look for as it depends on others trying it and reporting it, and their 
exact configurations.


Please recognise that a new standard needs a phase of experimentation. 
You simply can't decide on every possible what-if and nail everything  
down, as then nothing is ever pushed out the door.


I am fully aware of that, but the entire point of LV2 being so flexible 
is specifically so that the 'what-if' I am proposing CAN happen.  I 
(Personally) think it is foolish to build the spec specifically so that 
it can happen, and then ignore what will happen when it does.


What happens when arbitrary extensions are made by a handful of people, 
for a handful of plugins on a year by year basis.  In a couple of years 
you have significantly more than a handful of extensions.


Will it happen?  Who knows.  But, my understanding is that LV2 was 
written specifically so that the above COULD happen if it needed, and it 
is extremely easy to define new extensions.


If we want it to remain a 'standard' plugin format, we should plan for 
it being used to its capabilities and make sure some level of 
interoperability remains, and that that level is clear for the end-user 
to understand.


As I mentioned before I am tossing out my two cents in full 
understanding that it can be chosen to be extensively ignored, with 
every right, on the part of any or all of the developers.  I don't mean 
to offend any of them here, and I certainly don't take offense at folks 
disagreeing with me, just so that it is clear.


It is just my two cents based off my experience with helping people 
understand linux audio thus far and a major pitfall I see with building 
something extremely flexible and powerful but without any organization 
so those less technical saavy folks can understand it.


   Seablade
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/linux-audio-dev

Re: [LAD] [ANN] LV2 beta3

[Thomas Vecchione]

Tie in?


Tie someone into a specific distribution because that is the first one 
they tried and had something they liked.


This is FLOSS, right? Nobody gets to tell people what to do or not 
in the end. So if anyone wants to create 'arbitrary' extensions, 
he will. No profiles, no nothing change that.




EXACTLY my point.  When do they cease being arbitrary extensions and 
instead be something a bit more structural for those programming the 
host to have a basic idea of what they should do to support the majority 
of plugins.


It's a wild software jungle out there anyway and I really do think we 
have to rely on distributors to make it more handable for the average 
user, where average user refers to everyone who is for whatever reason 
not able or inclined to go out there to explore, test and learn.


I would completely disagree, that seems like a very lazy way of doing 
things(No offense intended to you personally Thorsten).  Oh this seems 
to difficult, let someone else do it.



   Seablade
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/linux-audio-dev

Re: [LAD] [ANN] LV2 beta3

[Thomas Vecchione]

Translation:  no "tie in" here.




My "Tie In" comment was directly related to this specific sentence by 
Thorsten...



For the common user, hosts and plugin collections should be part 
of the distribution he uses.


I despise the thought of being "tied in" to a distribution as a user, 
especially since very rarely does a distribution match my needs exactly. 
 That is my own personal preference there, I should have made it more 
specific.



I still fail to see what this "profile" idea actually entails, in
concrete terms... I suspect it doesn't mean anything at all  ;)  As Lars
points out, trying to tell everyone what to do isn't worth the effort,
and is contrary to the whole point here anyway.  I'm not sure why anyone
would want to bother trying to come up with arbitrary definitions of
feature set combinations and slapping a "profile" name on it.  What's
the point?  Support the features you can/want to support..



The point is to allow people not familiar with the technicalities of it 
to know when their plug-in will or won't work.  As I have said in the 
past, I only use the 'profile' because I couldn't come up with a simpler 
way of doing it(And asked for other suggestions).  All the profile would 
be is a defined set of extensions that are included in its support to 
allow some form of consistency across the board.



That said, this is purely a documentation issue.  A nice central
location for finding what's out there in LV2 land would be useful.  A
wiki is probably the only thing that's feasible, unless someone wants to
maintain something more custom.


I mentioned it was not a technical issue some time ago.  It is all in 
how it is presented, and that some forethought needs to be given to this 
in the event that the flexibility IS taken advantage of in LV2.


  Seablade
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/linux-audio-dev

Re: [LAD] 2.4 vs 2.6

[Thomas Vecchione]

On 7/21/07, . <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


> > > wrote:
> > > > I've been working with the 2.6 series kernel now for some
> time with satisfactory

> when
> you all say RT Patched you mean realtime module built, loaded configured
and
> used by jack correct?

please learn how to quote. heres a screenshot:
http://whats-your.name/i/bloglines_blows.png




Some email software does not put who posted every time, relax, it really
isn't that big of a deal.


realtime isnt a module, its a big kernel patch. my experience (not on ia32)

is that it usually either 1) doesnt compile 2) doesnt boot 3) freezes up
some time during the boot sequence 4) freezes up some time afterwards. i
havent tried mingo since about 2.6.18 though so maybe theres been a night
and day change..




I have been compiling kernels since the 2.4 series myself.  All of the
2.6series, as the rt patch became availiable I compiled with it, and
have had
extremely good results.  The only times any of the above happened was
because of my own stupidity, I have never had it not compile.  Any time it
didn't boot was because of my own fault. Never had it freeze the boot
sequence, and any freezes I experienced afterwards(extremely few) I have
other suspects well in line before the patch.

Seablade
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/linux-audio-dev

[LAD] Re: [LAU] ReplyTo munging (Was: What hardware is actually used by freebob/ffado users?)

[Thomas Vecchione]

While my post is used as an example, I would prefer to have it left on.  I
can't count how many times I have to resend things I accidentally did not
send to the entire list on lists without it, and those are just the things I
caught.  My only real problem is because I have multiple lists on the same
account, just remembering which is which.

   Seablade
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/linux-audio-dev

Re: [LAD] jack-osx sources?

[Thomas Vecchione]

Seeing as the file downloads are hosted on Sourceforge, my bet is that its
code is in SF's CVS repository

http://sourceforge.net/cvs/?group_id=100023

 Seablade

On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 7:55 AM, jaromil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
> re all,
>
> looking for jack  and osx compatibility, I've found  this link hitting
> first  on google  http://jackosx.com which  looks pretty  much  what i
> needed, except that i cannot find the source code anywhere.
>
> does anyone knows more about it?
>
> thanks, ciao
>
> - --
>  Jaromil, dyne.org developer, http://jaromil.dyne.org
>
> GPG: 779F E8B5 47C7 3A89 4112  64D0 7B64 3184 [ B534 0B5E ]
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iD8DBQFH46Ije2QxhLU0C14RAoYUAJ9QVW1Fjtvx4t1DNokDRMQ3ON7wPgCgmE7G
> hFUZf+D4r2UYXOQuNyT2DSU=
> =hT3+
> -END PGP SIGNATURE-
> ___
> Linux-audio-dev mailing list
> Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
>
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev

Re: [LAD] [OT] vector drawing software

[Thomas Vecchione]

I'll be honest in that I personally find QCad to be invaluable for 2D
drafting.  I am not sure exactly how you are planning on using the vector
drawing program is part of the problem.  In the past I have also used
Inkscape for web design, and OpenOffice Draw for some things as well.  I,
like others, am curious how QCad and Inkscape fail these basic requirements
for you?

  Seablade

On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 12:03 PM, Dennis Schulmeister <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Hi Fons,
>
> On Tue, 2008-07-29 at 15:05 +0200, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
> > Anyone knows a good vector drawing program for Linux ?
>
> I'm surprised nobody has mentioned Gnome Dia yet. It's a fine program
> and I'm using it for all my vector diagrams since years. In my opinion
> there are only a few things really missing from it:
>
>  * Rotation like rotating text or rotating objects. There ain't
>even a 90° rotation.
>  * Gradient fills
>  * More developer care. Development activity seems to be quite low
>recently. But fortunately you can use python for scripting.
>
> Besides that it's very usable and works very well for me.
>
> Just noticed that postscript export is not as obvious as it might be,
> though. You can't export a postscript file but need print to it.
>
>
>
> Yours sincerely,
> Dennis Schulmeister
>
> --
> Dennis Schulmeister - Schifferstr. 1 - 76189 Karlsruhe - Germany
> Tel: +49 721/5978883 - Mob: +49 152/01994400 - eMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Now moved to the corridor: Hermes! (http://ncc-1701a.homelinux.net)
> Besides that: http://www.denchris.de - http://www.motagator.net/bands/65
>
> 
>
>
> ___
> Linux-audio-dev mailing list
> Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
>
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev

Re: [LAD] [OT] vector drawing software

[Thomas Vecchione]

Ok that explains things a bit at least, thank you Fons.

You are correct in that there are no connections(I think are what you are
looking for rather than paths which I think of from Gimp/Photoshop/Inkscape
as a bit different in QCad.  I actually used to think that was a problem,
but after doing several system one liners in QCad I have come to the
conclusion I depended on them way to much.

But at any rate, what I used for the type of drawings I believe you were
describing, believe it or not, is Open Office Draw.  The last time I did one
not in QCad, Inkscape at that point did not have connections, which I
believe it does now as of last summer, so that may very well work for what
you need now.  But what type of drawing specifically makes alarge difference
in the tool I chose, which is why I asked, as if I was doing a very
simplified one liner for someone that doesn't know their way around a sound
system, with images, etc. I would be looking not at QCad but one of the
other programs I mentioned.

At this point I would say look at Inkscape or Open Office Draw seriously,
and as you come across problems post a question and itll probably get
answered(Like it was previously).

  Seablade
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev

Re: [LAD] [OT] vector drawing software

[Thomas Vecchione]

3D Cad tools unfortuanatly I haven't found any I particularly like among the
open source projects.  Personally I am using QCad for 2D and Sketchup for
3D.  I use Blender for organic modleing and rendering though.

   Seablade

On Thu, Aug 7, 2008 at 6:17 PM, nescivi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Hiho,
>
> On Thursday 07 August 2008 14:18:39 Thorsten Wilms wrote:
> > On Thu, 2008-08-07 at 14:03 -0400, nescivi wrote:
> > > At first sight it seems more geared to 3D modelling for animation
> > > graphics, rather than for making realworld objects.
> > > I need to model some things in order to "print" them on a rapid
> > > prototyping machine...
> > > Is Blender a suitable candidate for that?
> >
> > AFAIK rapid prototyping machines work with triangle meshes, so using a
> > polygon modeler is no problem. It's even the way to go for organic
> > shapes like action figures. There's a RP startup that works with Blender
> > a lot.
>
> Hmm.. ok. that sounds interesting.
> I don't want to make action figures so much, but part of my interest is
> organic shapes...
>
> > However, for precise geometrical shapes, Blender is the wrong tool. It
> > can be done to some degree, but it is just painful compared to a decent
> > CAD tool.
>
> Do you know any decent open source CAD tools?
> I haven't yet found one I am completely content with
>
> sincerely,
> Marije
> ___
> Linux-audio-dev mailing list
> Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
>
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev

Re: [LAD] [OT] vector drawing software

[Thomas Vecchione]

Sadly no native Linux version yet, but many people do run it in Wine is my
understanding.

  Seablade

On Fri, Aug 8, 2008 at 1:50 AM, Bengt Gördén <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Den Friday 08 August 2008 03.52.47 skrev Thomas Vecchione:
> > 3D Cad tools unfortuanatly I haven't found any I particularly like among
> > the open source projects.  Personally I am using QCad for 2D and Sketchup
> > for 3D.  I use Blender for organic modleing and rendering though.
>
> I'm one of those Linux-only persons. Is there a Sketchup for Linux or is it
> just Mac and Windows as the Sketchup-page says?
>
> /bengan
>
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev

Re: [LAD] [OT] what are the good wireless headphones?

[Thomas Vecchione]

Sounds like what you are looking for are IEMs(In-Ear Monitors).  Unlike the
other poster I don't have much problem with Sennheisers for wireless, but
the Shure PSM600 series is the one I have used most on this and have been
pleased with them.

Seablade

On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 6:33 PM, Marcell Mars <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 11:36 PM, Wolfgang Woehl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Any or wireless?
>
> wireless.. i need them for live performance so to avoid cables...
>
> > At work I use Sennheiser RS 140, ~150 Euros, well worth the money. No
>
> hm.. did you check them for live recording? the problem is also that
> they are big and i would like to have some solution where i can just
> plug any earphones...
>
> probably asking for too much.. still hoping for the best ;)
>
> > joke, close to ridiculous. But then, you didn't ask that, did you?
>
> nope.. but thanx anyway for both infos...
> ___
> Linux-audio-dev mailing list
> Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
>
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev

Re: [LAD] update of FIL-plugins

[Thomas Vecchione]

Hmm jconv as a  LV2 plug would interest me as well I think.

 Seablade

Always looking for more toys;)

On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 4:01 PM, Dave Phillips  wrote:

> Fons Adriaensen wrote:
> > The 4-band paramatric filter plugin has been updated:
> > ...
> > Nedko Arnaudov is preparing an LV2 version that will
> > also show the actual frequency response.
> >
>
> Great news, Fons, and as always, thank you for your great work.
>
> Any chance of jconv showing up as an LV2 plug ? :)
>
> Best,
>
> dp
>
> ___
> Linux-audio-dev mailing list
> Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
>
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev

Re: [LAD] [LAU] Kim did the switch to Linux

[Thomas Vecchione]

Just realised this needed to go to both lists... bah.

Seablade

On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 7:49 PM, Thomas Vecchione wrote:

> On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 3:19 AM, James Stone  wrote:
>
>>  The Mac fanboi backlash is by turns amusing and irritating but
>> always unsurprising.
>>
>
> I wonder if I fall into this category nowadays?
>
> I guess its a bit funny if I do;)
>
> > Linux audio is a total mess... a normal human being can't work with pro
>> > audio on Linux, unless he/she spent hours and hours to learn the little
>> > tricks or he has an expert available who helps him...
>>
>> What is the purpose of telling this mailing list this?
>>
>
> Preaching to the choir in most cases I suspect;)
>
>
> then get off this list and leave us to our playthings. or better yet,
> spend time critiquing the current state of the "out of the box"
> experience with the people who **actually provide**  the out of the
> box experience.
>
> Well technically this list did, not to long ago, scare away someone that
> was impactful in those sorts of decisions;)
>
>
> Control what? The source code of an application? Or the kernel? I have very
>> limited skills in programming languages - I'm just an old school music
>> artist and multimedia designer. On OS X I have full control over my personal
>> creative workflow. But Linux was controlling me in a way that I have to take
>> care of lot admin tasks and bugs. Yes the bugs and workarounds on Linux
>> controlling me and I'm to stupid to fix them all plus write my dream apps.
>> I'm one of the guys, going into a music store and buy a guitar and not one
>> of the guy who'd like to build a own. My handcraft is music, not wood.
>>
>
> Control your workflow.  I am on OS X now for most of my work, however I
> can't set up the same workflow I could on Linux, and what I can do is not
> nearly as easy or quick on OS X.  I could control my desktop and
> applications much smoother and faster with some simple customizations on
> Linux than I ever could on OS X.  I could tweak the visual aspects much more
> easily to that I was happier looking at my screen(Yes I do have a soft spot
> for eyecandy, and OS X doesn't come close to filling it).
>
>Seablade
>
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev

Re: [LAD] Kim did the switch to Linux

[Thomas Vecchione]

Sorry you got this twice Hermann, I am still used to the reply munging that
was gotten rid of some time ago.

On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 11:52 PM, hermann  wrote:

>
> Hi
>
> Yes, I don't understand why people mean linux audio is a mess, last
> day's I have setup a new box with debian/sid and it took me a half day
> to get a full featured rt audio/midi environment on the run.


Its because, take for example OS X Hmm out of the box is capable of
pretty decent audio and midi for both professional and consumer
applications.  No custom kernel, no need to worry about Flash working while
you are running your pro-audio application.

It took you half a day, I could probably do it in a few hours at most.  But
I also have more than my fair share of knowledge on Linux administration and
specifically how to set up a realtime audio system for professional use.
Most people going into Linux do not know that, and that is why it is a
mess.  There are distributions out there, sadly probably the best known
being Ubuntu Studio, that by default out of the box do not provide an
experience anywhere close to being ready for low latency performance.  You
have to disable this sound system, and that sound system, and install Jack,
and then get Flash working with Jack(Iffy at best).

It isn't that Linux isn't capable of being used for professional audio, far
from it.  I did for a long period of time and the only reason I still don't
is because I had a motherboard blow on me and haven't had the money to
replace that machine.  It is because in order to get a basic experience of
decent performance for professional audio applications and still not cripple
most of the consumer applications out there, you have to dig into system
administration that most users are not willing or capable of doing.


> It's like
> always in life, if you wont to use a tool, you must know how it work's.
> There is no diff in this case to windos or mac.


Yes there is.  Mac I install and get going right then and there, no worry
about xruns because I don't have realtime preemption capable kernel, or I
don't have /etc/security/limits.conf correctly set up.

Look I am all in favor of LInux, but people need to realise how these things
affect newcomers to Linux as well, and if you can't see the reasoning behind
why people say these things, then there is other issues to sort out.

And before anyone says I am a Mac fanboi, please look me up some first, even
reading my earlier post in this thread.  I truly believe Linux is more
capable once it is set up for realtime audio than Mac or Windows(Or probably
many others, I just don't have experience with all of them).  But it is
getting to the point of having your system set up for that which is so
confusing for many users.

 Seablade
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev

Re: [LAD] Impro-Visor created on sourceforge

[Thomas Vecchione]

Forgot to send to the list.

On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 6:10 PM, Thomas Vecchione wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 5:34 PM, Raymond Martin  wrote:
>
>>
>> Not at all. There is even evidence in the FSF documentation somewhere
>> exactly
>> about this point and they vehemently disagree with any attitude like that.
>> We
>> all know very well the situation of Emacs, Xemacs, and various other
>> forks.
>>
>
> The FSF is not the law.  I suggest you look up Trademark Law to realize why
> you are wrong, and why you are subject to a lawsuit for knowingly creating a
> product that is infringing on an already existing trademark(Regeristered or
> Unregeristered would make a small, but only small, difference in this case),
> and can easily be confused as such.  In fact the case against forcing you to
> change it is rather strong because not only is your product nearly identical
> in name, it is nearly identical in function and can be easily confused with
> the original.
>
> Standard disclaimer of I am not a lawyer of course applies.
>
>Seablade
>
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev

Re: [LAD] Impro-Visor created on sourceforge

[Thomas Vecchione]

Once again forgot to hit Reply-All.

On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 6:41 PM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:

> I'm not interested to take sides, I only want to learn about the GPL.
>
> Assumed that Miss B. forks a GPL'd project, as far as I understand the GPL,
> Miss R. is allowed to fork a project with a similar name, similar function,
> based on the open source code of Miss B. and if Miss B. had no time to open
> the source code, because she was in the manicure salon, but Miss B. accepted
> the GPL, e.g. a mailing list for manicure software can witness this, than
> Miss R. is allowed to decompile the software of Miss B.. Am I wrong?


You are confusing Copyright and Trademark Law.  Copyright law says that yes
they can fork the project.

Trademark Law however says that Miss B. is allowed to follow up legally to
prevent a trademark, which can be registered or unregistered, from being
confused by another similar trademark that might be confused with it.  The
fact that the trademark is similar, and the product is similar, is doubly
damning in that case.

So while a fork is certainly allowed by copyright, the original owner is
completely within their rights to make sure that the fork is not in any way
confusing with the original product.


>
> If Miss B. would use GPL'd code and won't agree to the GPL, than Miss B. is
> violating the GPL, but Miss R. isn't allowed to decompile the software of
> Miss B., because of copyright laws. Am I wrong?


This is correct, so long as Miss B is distributing the code.  The legal
process can mean that either Miss B either must cease distribution of the
product, or come into compliance with the GPL copyright.  However that also
means that it is the choice of Miss B. and not of Miss R. to force the
second option.


> But again, Miss B. accepted the GPL, but while the nail polish needs to
> dry, she wasn't able to distribute the source code, she only had time to
> distribute the binary. She wrote exactly this to the manicure developers
> mailing list, that's why Miss R. decided to decompile the code.


This is much greyer area to tell the truth, and one I won't touch.  But if
you look at the SFLC's cases in the past about the GPL, you will notice a
theme of them giving ample time to come into compliance with the terms of
the GPL before taking the product to court.  However those are all slightly
different due to none of those products to my knowledge, being GPLd software
that wasn't already availiable form another source.  So I suspect there will
be no final answer on this until a judge(Or more likely multiple) are forced
to answer it in a courtroom.

  Seablade
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev

Re: [LAD] Kim did the switch to Linux

[Thomas Vecchione]

Damn Reply-To-All, yet again.

On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 6:56 PM, Thomas Vecchione wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 6:40 PM, Chuckk Hubbard 
> wrote:
>
>> I guess my thought was that people who want to use audio
>> professionally are less likely to make decisions based on what
>> requires the least effort, which seems to be the main bragging point
>> for OSX as well as the main complaint about Linux.
>>
>
> They are more likely to choose what works for them.
>
> Which for many people OS X works for them out of the box.  Linux doesn't
> even come close at this point to doing so out of the box for most people.
>
> So lets say I am an audio professional about to upgrade, ignoring financial
> things for the moment for various reasons.  I have a choice.  I can either
> go with OS X and get an experience that works out of the box for what I need
> it to.  Or I can go with Linux and spend hours learning a new OS and
> tinkering with the commandline, before I can even start to work
> professionally.
>
> For many people there isn't much choice there.
>
>  Seablade
>
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev

Re: [LAD] Impro-Visor created on sourceforge

[Thomas Vecchione]

On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 7:15 PM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:

>
>  You are confusing Copyright and Trademark Law.  Copyright law says that
>> yes
>> they can fork the project.
>>
>> Trademark Law however says that Miss B. is allowed to follow up legally to
>> prevent a trademark, which can be registered or unregistered, from being
>>
>> confused by another similar trademark that might be confused with it.
>>
>>
>
> Okay, I guess you're right, because I have two web browsers, one is called
> Firefox and the other is called Iceweasel, for me, as a user they only
> differ by the name and logo and there seems to be a reason for this ;).
>

In fact that is exactly the reason IIRC.  The license on the Mozilla
trademarks(Logos and Name) were deemed incompatible with Debian's policies
so they couldn't be included.  Trademark law is even more fun because if you
don't protect your trademark, you can lose all rights to it at the same
time, so you pretty much HAVE to protect your trademark.

I should clarify I am speaking from the US legal point of view.


>
> Icevamp or Hotvamp instead of Improvisor might be an alternative.
>

Yes they absolutely could.  Pretty much anything that clearly differentiates
it as a product so that it cannot be confused with Impro-Visor would be an
alternative.


>> This is much greyer area to tell the truth, and one I won't touch.
>>
>
> I agree, that's why laws are construable, have some margin. It's impossible
> to factor in every devisable situation.
>
> Everybody seems to understand the GPL and the law after that long
> discussion for this basic issues. Here is a basic issue, with an unusual
> exception. I guess even two judges could pronounce two different sentences,
> in the same town, at the same court.
>

And this is why I said multiple judges;)  Because the ruling of the first
one would likely be appealed anyways;)

   Seablade
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev

Re: [LAD] [LAU] Kim did the switch to Linux

[Thomas Vecchione]

On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 7:21 PM, James Cameron  wrote:

>
> The installation discs for Mac OS X already contain software licensed
> under the GNU GPL (e.g. bash), so the additional obligations under the
> GPL would not have been the reason to exclude a compiler.
>
> It seems much more likely that it was the size.  Several hundred
> megabytes that aren't required by most users should always be omitted
> from the installation discs, so that more room is made for what most
> users require.
>
> The same is done with Ubuntu and Debian installation images.  Most of
> the tools needed to build Ubuntu are not included in the installation
> image, and require downloading "apt-get build-dep $packagename".
>

You misunderstood what he was saying.  The GCC compiler IS included on the
installation disks as part of the XCode program.  You can also download this
program off of the internet(The download is over a gig by the way last I
looked).  The complaint is that Apple only bundles gcc with the XCode
program and a lot of useless stuff that aren't necessarily used by people
like us.  But they are used by most Mac developers, and Apple I am sure
wants to encourage their use and 'their' way of doing things.

Seablade
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev

Re: [LAD] Impro-Visor created on sourceforge

[Thomas Vecchione]

On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 4:41 AM, Raymond Martin  wrote:

> Another fool. Trademarks apply to commercial interests, the program is
> non-commercial in nature. Thus it would be very difficult for anything
> to be done about this for creating a free program from a free program.
>

Sorry you are incorrect.  Then again you have shown a strong desire not to
admit when this is the case in past discussions, so I don't expect you to
change your mind.

Trademarks apply to any product, be it software or physical, or company.  A
trademark is simply an identifying mark that differentiates something from
the competition.  This applies to Open Source software just the same as it
does any other.



> Maybe you should check the fact that there is already another program
> called
> improvisor that exists that is not Impro-Visor, it is a commercial company
> that could claim trademark infringement against Impro-Visor.
>

Possibly, I don't know the situation or history with those products.  It is
completely seperate from this situation however.


>
> So if anybody is in a problem it will be Impro-Visor first.
>

No, it will be whoever decides to defend their trademark first.


There is a reason. A scumbag company forced trademark issues to the front
> even though they were doing FOSS. Trademarks in FOSS are just as bad as
> software patents. Too bad most people do not get that.


That is your opinion.  I would disagree, very strongly in fact.



> Okay, maybe for names and logos used by FLOSS, the creative commons
> should be forced as an agreement or something similar to this.
>

Once again, see what i already wrote.  If a company does not defend its
trademark, then the rights to that trademark are lost.  Trademarks HAVE to
be defended to remain valid.  Thus forcing the CC isn't really an option as
much as I enjoy the concept of the CC licensing.

Trademarks can only be in violation when they are on similar things.

 Once again, WRONG.  Trademark violations are when the use of a similar
name, logo, image, etc. causes confusion with the original product.  The
products don't necessarily HAVE to be similar, just cause confusion with the
trademark.

Something funny about confusing names. For my needs jconv can be a very
> good audio application and a very useless Japanese code conversion.


Which is why this does not apply as a trademark issue, it does not cause
confusion with either products.

 So this would not be okay in Germany only, if there was a trademark
> applicable in Germany.


Wrong, see above.


Then Bob is guilty first and my project name is just due to his applications
> name. Who is more guilty, a single person trying to do FOSS or a professor
> and educational institution that should be in a better position and act
> more
> appropriately? If my name is similar to theirs by derivation and that is
> similar to the commercial one, then Bob and his ilk have unclean hands
> before
> I ever made a project.


Yes someone else did something wrong, I am just copying them so I must be in
the right.  That is EXACTLY it.  /sarcasm

Seriously, you need to understand what you are writing about much better
before you spout off drivel as fact.  I am not a lawyer, but I obviously
understand trademark law much better than you do.  Not only that as a moral
or ethical issue which you seem to think you are taking the high ground on,
this is just wrong.

Since there is so much confusion surrounding how copyrights work
> in FOSS, it should be no surprise that similar misunderstandings exist
> for trademarks in the same situation.


The irony is amazing.

 This is FOSS, not commercial enterprise,
things do not need to operate exactly the same as in proprietary
situations. That goes as much for trademarks as it does for copyrights.


Idealogoically you are correct.  However the same LAWS apply to both.

They made all kinds of crazy claims
> and did not understand how futile it is for one FOSS project to try
> to go after another one. I still have my similar name even though
> they have a trademark. Trademarks are for commercial interest.


I am going to stop repeating myself correcting you on trademarks.


Claimed infringements on trademarks have to show that the existence
> of a similarly named product causes or potentially causes damage
> to the trademark holders product, company, bottom line, and so on.
>


Or confusion in the marketplace with that product.

I suggest you read up...
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/metaschool/fisher/domain/tm.htm

Specifically this part...

"

7. What constitutes trademark
infringement?

If a party owns the rights to a particular trademark, that party can sue
subsequent parties for trademark infringement. 15 U.S.C. �� 1114,
1125.
The standard is "likelihood of confusion." To be more specific, the use of a
trademark in connection with the sale of a good constitutes infringement if
it is likely

Re: [LAD] [LAU] OpenOctaveMidi2 (OOM2) beta release

[Thomas Vecchione]

On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 2:38 PM, Christopher Cherrett
 wrote:
> I suspect there is much more to this puzzle than attribution. I suspect we
> rocked the boat just a bit too much and too fast.
>

No, there really isn't.(At least not in as far as the original post
that started this was concerned)

Not sure why you keep insisting there is, but there isn't.  It was a
simple request, easily answered, and was turned into something much
more than it really should have been.

You also seem to think that the Ardour project is disgruntled with
you.  Not really.  In fact many of us were discussing this project
yesterday and today both on IRC, and aside from the attribution issue,
it was well received in general and more than a fair amount of well
wishing.  There are things that confuse us, such as why fork an
existing project when you were asked to put something in Mantis,
instead of writing a patch for the single feature or expanding it, but
that is your choice, and is part of the freedom of open source
obviously and I think everyone gets that.  The primary detractor from
it was simply the attribution issue and clarifying that.

At any rate, I think that has been expressed, wish you well on your
project and I may play around with it myself before long as well.
Thanks for the contribution to the community.

  Seablade
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev

Re: [LAD] [LAU] OpenOctaveMidi2 (OOM2) beta release

[Thomas Vecchione]

On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 2:50 PM, Christopher Cherrett
 wrote:
> Seems a bit more than a question, seems there is a few insinuations.
>

Not really.  There is the statement that not attributing is not
morally correct, and as I said some people do disagree with the choice
to fork rather than commit to(And as I said it is pretty well
understood that is your right given the license), but I don't know
what insinuations beyond that you are referring to as they really
aren't there and I am fairly sure you are reading more into it than
was ever intended by the original author.  The second thing would
never really have been an issue, it was the attribution issue that
started all this and that is where it should have ended as well.

 Seablade
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev

Re: [LAD] [ANN] IR: LV2 Convolution Reverb

[Thomas Vecchione]

Fons

Being someone that tracks recordings live constantly, I am curious, if the
singer only wanted to overdub one section of their vocals with another, and
you are not touching the remainder of the recorded tracks, exactly what
stops you from doing a standard punch in/out in your example?

Even if you are referring to replacing a mixdown take, I am not certain 4
point editing is to much of a benefit there persay to be honest, as I have
done this without it quite well in the past as I often have to edit down
recordings for dance choreographers for modified music in a way you can't
tell it is edited obviously.

I have never used 4 point editing, and have done mixing of all varieties,
musical and non, from many different genres including some classical.  There
are points where I can easily see 4 point editing being useful as has been
explained to me in the past by people that do use it, but this is not one of
them if I am understanding your question correctly. (Of course I can't think
of a good example at the moment where I was thinking it would be useful, but
I remember being told some in the past and thinking it would be).

   Seablade


On Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 10:40 AM, Fons Adriaensen wrote:

> On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 12:39:04PM -0500, Paul Davis wrote:
>
> > the position that i take with N-point editing is not that there is
> > some other way to do "the following". There isn't. its that the way of
> > approaching the task that leads to needing to do "the following" is
> > rooted in an older way of thinking about the overall workflow.
>
> Tell that to your customer when he (or she in this case) wants you
> to replace part of an edited track with the same fragment from
> another take.
>
> A simple case:
>
> <
> http://kokkinizita.linuxaudio.org/linuxaudio/downloads/d_amor_sull_ali_rosee2.mp3
> >
>
> After this was edited (9 fragments from 4 takes), the singer wanted
> to replace the part "del prigioniere misero conforta l'egra mente"
> [2:03 to 2:27] by another take.
>
> Now I could have told her that what she wanted was 'rooted in an
> older way of thinking', or that she was stupid and should have had
> that bright idea before we had done the five edits following this
> fragment, but I didn't and actually performed the edit to her
> satisfaction.
>
> Now this was a simple demo with just the piano instead of a full
> orchestra. The latter could easily be more than 20 tracks if the
> recording is done live and no mics must be visible. And mixing it
> before editing is usually *not* and option.
>
>
> Quiz2: there are 10 edits in this recording, free beer at LAC2011
> if you can find 5 of them.
>
> Ciao,
>
> --
> FA
>
> ___
> Linux-audio-dev mailing list
> Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
>
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev

Re: [LAD] [ANN] IR: LV2 Convolution Reverb

[Thomas Vecchione]

Yes film and TV post is where I have heard of it being more useful, but
since I just got up I will leave that for the moment until my brain is more
awake;)

Fons replied off list and we discussed his example some, The situations was
similar to what i had thought, where a 4 point edit was one possible way to
do it, but far from the only.solution, and probably wouldn't be what I
personally used.  The real issue was A2's lack of an ability to move
automation with regions, which Carl has addressed in A3 IIRC.  I didn't
spell this out as much as I should have in my reply to Fons on list however
due to typing on my cell phone at the time:)

Seablade

PS For the record yes I understand an overdub wouldn't be likely in
classical recording, an even less so in tracking live performances which is
more of what I am used to doing obviously, but in that particular situation
is something I could see doing since the singer had requested it I assume
they were present.  However this wasn't the situation presented above, thus
my post above.

2011/2/27 Andres Cabrera 

> Hi,
>
> This feature is actually also very useful in post production for film
> or TV, where often you get a video edit after you've started doing
> your mixing, and you have to move big blocks of tracks in time. I'd
> also like to know if there's a simple way to do this in ardour, or to
> add my vote for it =)
>
> Cheers,
> Andres
>
> 2011/2/27 Jörn Nettingsmeier :
> > On 02/27/2011 01:05 AM, Thomas Vecchione wrote:
> >>
> >> Fons
> >>
> >> Being someone that tracks recordings live constantly, I am curious, if
> >> the singer only wanted to overdub one section of their vocals with
> >> another, and you are not touching the remainder of the recorded tracks,
> >> exactly what stops you from doing a standard punch in/out in your
> example?
> >
> > in classical recording sessions, overdubs happen rarely if ever.
> > i guess the situation here is that multiple full or partial takes were
> > recorded with the full ensemble, and the editing happens afterwards, when
> > all musicians are gone.
> > iiuc, the soloist requested one section to be replaced with another take.
> > since there is no "click", this usually means that the part after the new
> > spliced-in section will move in time, slightly.
> > which is a bit of a problem in ardour while you haven't consolidated
> region
> > fragments (which often you don't want to do until the very end), because
> you
> > have to be very careful to move all subsequent regions.
> > easy in the vertical thanks to edit groups, but quite hard in the
> > horizontal. or maybe i'm overlooking yet another feature?
> >
> > best,
> >
> > jörn
> >
> >
> >
> > ___
> > Linux-audio-dev mailing list
> > Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
> > http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
> >
> ___
> Linux-audio-dev mailing list
> Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
>
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev

Re: [LAD] FW: Frequency Space Editors in Linux

[Thomas Vecchione]

It depends on what you need to do precisely.

To be clear, the frequency dependant functionality of the noise removal in
the windows programs mentioned, only appeared in Adobe Audition (1.5 I
believe) after Adobe had purchased Cool Edit from Syntrillium(sp?).  Before
that Cool Edit had used only a sampling based process.  And really their
frequency based process is only a noise reduction process IIRC, meaning you
essentially remove that frequency range for that period of time, I think it
is a bit smarter than that, but the basic concept is there.

Al this being said, if there is a crackle, there are some specific
algorithms that exist that are _not_ the broadband noise reduction that you
seem to be looking for(In other words are specifically for declicking
audio), that may be of more benefit.  However in all these areas of
restoration, Linux is sorely lacking.  You can try GWC, but I was never
impressed by it or Audacity for restoration work.  Sadly if you are
depending on restorative work, your best bet is either to use another
platform at this time, either another OS or via realtime hardware based
solutions like CEDAR if you can afford it.  Alternatively you can attempt to
run other plugins/software via WINE on Linux, whcih I have done in the past
with mixed results.

But really to my knowledge there are no good native audio restoration tools
on Linux.  I am currently using the WaveARTS MR Suite on OS X for this work
myself, though since it is machine based authorization(not iLok), and
several of their plugins do run on the receptor hardware, it might be
worthwhile to try to run it via ArdourVST/Wine and see if it can be run on
Linux.  This is on my TODO list as I slowly progress to Linux again full
time for production work, but is not something i have had time to do yet.

   Seablade

On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 10:42 AM, Ivica Ico Bukvic  wrote:

> Hi Mike,
>
> Forwarding this to the list where users and developers might be able to
> assist.
>
> Hope this helps!
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Ico
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Michael Van [mailto:m_vanwag...@yahoo.com]
> Sent: Saturday, April 09, 2011 12:44 PM
> To: i...@linuxaudio.org
> Subject: Frequency Space Editors in Linux
>
> Hello Linux Audio,
>
> I just wanted to find out if anyone know of any Linux programs that do
> sophisticated noise removal from recordings, like the frequency space
> editing process of Windows programs, Adobe Audition or Cool Edit.  I
> wondered if there is a plugin for Audacity that might do it.
>
> I need to use something other than standard noise sample removal plugins
> because the crackle is only present when the music is playing, not present
> during quiet stretches.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mike
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Linux-audio-dev mailing list
> Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
>
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev

Re: [LAD] [LAU] FW: Frequency Space Editors in Linux

[Thomas Vecchione]

On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 5:39 PM, Fons Adriaensen wrote:

>
> It would help to know the origin of the the 'noise' or to have a
> sample of it.
>
>
Agreed in as far as helping to address it, however it still leaves the fact
that there just aren't many, if any, good restoration solutions on Linux so
even so there is only so much I can suggest, unless you know of some
solutions I don't?

  Seablade

Who honestly would like some good restoration solutions on Linux.
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev

Re: [LAD] [LAU] FW: Frequency Space Editors in Linux

[Thomas Vecchione]

On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 9:11 PM, Geoff Beasley  wrote:

> GWC is the only program I've ever used successfully under linux; and it was
> as 'good' as anything else i've used on other platforms


Sadly I would strongly disagree.  The results I can get from what are fast
becoming basic tools on other platforms outperform anything I have been able
to achieve on Linux by a fairly wide margin including GWC.  Not to mention
the benefit of running such restoration in realtime in Ardour as opposed to
GWC:)

   Seablade
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev

Re: [LAD] [LAU] FW: Frequency Space Editors in Linux

[Thomas Vecchione]

On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 3:04 AM, Gordon JC Pearce wrote:

>
> You either need to break out some code, or some cash.
>
>
Heh if I could code DSP processing I would, however I never even took Calc,
so for the most part I am way out of my league there.  I should get my wife
to teach me sometime.  Cash on the other hand is doable(Well maybe not at
this very moment, dang US taxes), but not at the level where I can sponsor
the development of that code solo, otherwise I would have(And have even
mentioned it before though not on mailing lists;)

  Seablade
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev

Re: [LAD] [LAU] FW: Frequency Space Editors in Linux

[Thomas Vecchione]

On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 7:03 AM, Johannes Kroll  wrote:
> Are you saying Ardour has good restoration functionality built-in? If
> so, would you care to give a hint/link on how to use it?
>
> But you're probably talking about some Windows-only VST plugin or
> such... :-/

As Paul mentioned, Ardour has no such functionality, and honestly IMO
is far beyond the scope of Ardour.  What Ardour DOES do however is
host plugins, and there are realtime noise removal plugins.
Technically what I use is on OS X in AU format, but on Linux yes I
would be dealing with VST versions through WINE.  However since this
is from a manufacturer that some of its plugins are on Receptor, I
would have decently high hopes of it working and intend to test just
that sometime in the hopefully not so distant future.

   Seablade
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev

Re: [LAD] MeeGo for better handheld/tablet multimedia? (was Re: Android audio plugins)

[Thomas Vecchione]

On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Niels Mayer  wrote:

> Specifically, MeeGo on the  Nokia N9 (
> https://flors.wordpress.com/2011/06/20/nokia-n9-state-of-the-art-of-mobile-linux-and-qt/
> ). I'm sure that it will be easier to create handheld multimedia
> applications on an in-production and widely-distributed, supported
> product that supports the full stack of libs and development tools
> already in use by the LAD community

Just to clarify, the N9, and N950(The 'developer' device that most of
the existing community really wants over the n9) isn't running Meego,
but instead is running Maemo Harmattan, which is primarily Maemo, with
the Meego development API implemented on top of it.  Could make a
difference in performance and support.

Not to mention of course that the current CEO of Nokia, Stephen Elop,
is a former MS guy that has insisted that even if the N9 is a success
Nokia won't be producing any more handsets based around Meego (Or
Maemo/Harmattan is the common understanding) and instead will be
running Windows Phone 7, to the effect of he has even 'leaked' videos
of nearly identical hardware running WP7 with the only conceivable
reason to most people is to help ensure that the Maemo/Harmattan N9 or
even Meego is not a success.  Whether the latter part of that is the
real reason or not is not certain but I haven't come up with a better
reason either at this point.

   Seablade
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev

Re: [LAD] MeeGo for better handheld/tablet multimedia? (was Re: Android audio plugins)

[Thomas Vecchione]

On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 8:04 PM, Gabriel M. Beddingfield
 wrote:
> On Sunday, July 03, 2011 04:40:22 am Thomas Vecchione wrote:
>> Just to clarify, the N9, and N950(The 'developer' device
>> that most of the existing community really wants over
>> the n9) isn't running Meego, but instead is running
>> Maemo Harmattan, which is primarily Maemo, with the
>> Meego development API implemented on top of it.  Could
>> make a difference in performance and support.
>
> Do we really need to carry this MeeGo/Harmattan FUD outside
> of the MeeGo community?  Yes, Harmattan is not a purist form
> of MeeGo... but the developer differences aren't all that
> great.

Actually it isn't FUD because it is true, and isn't meant to spread
fear uncertainty or doubt, just to explain that there is an actual
difference.  You are correct in that if you develop for the Meego API,
it shouldn't present to much difference, but it is something that must
be kept in mind in my opinion in case you do find a difference.

> Yes, this is an excellent reason to not get an N9.  It is
> the reason why I will not be getting an N9.
>
> It is not a reason to *NOT* develop for MeeGo.  Nokia
> doesn't own MeeGo and never has.  MeeGo is not dead, nor
> dying.

You seem to think I was suggesting it was.  I was responding directly
to the mailings suggesting the N9 itself, nothing more and nothing
less.

Personally I think there are far better reasons not to get an N9, but
to each there own.  I don't have much opinions on Meego itself in
general right now aside from there isn't really a good strong consumer
phone coming out that I know of that is scheduled to use it to my
knowledge, which makes me hesitant to spend to much time developing
for it personally, a shame as I suspect based off my experience with
Maemo that I would like it more. Yes LG supposedly  has some in the
workings, but I haven't heard much to make me believe they will be out
anytime soon at the least.

Once again I am not saying don't develop for it, that is a decision up
to each individual developer, just that it should be approached with
caution at this point IMO before to much time is spent on it.

Seablade
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev

Re: [LAD] Denormals / subnormals (again)

[Thomas Vecchione]

On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 12:40 PM, Carl Hetherington  wrote:

> I'm not entirely sure ...
>
>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SSE2#Notable_IA-32_CPUs_not_supporting_SSE2

Assuming the hitchiker's guid... eer wikipedia is accurate of course.

   Seablade
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev

Re: [LAD] First release of zita-lrx

[Thomas Vecchione]

On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 5:31 PM, Fons Adriaensen  wrote:

>
> That doesn't exclude any interactive version in the future
> of course. OSC control would certainly be a possibility, it
> will depend on demand from users. So I've set that counter
> to +1 now...
>
>
Add another +1 for that, there is more possible uses for this than simply
speaker management(For instance multiband processing via a jack 'network'),
and even in speaker management, while the parameters can be calculated,
sometimes it can be difficult, especially if using speakers that weren't
originally intended to be used together (Sub from one manufacturer tops
from another) which makes it more likely some playing may be desired.

That being said, thanks very much for the release, will be testing it out
myself here before long.

   Seablade
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev

Re: [LAD] NSM - handling large files

[Thomas Vecchione]

Personally I prefer Ardour's behavior myself.  I do keep my samples on an
external drive, but in the end the ability to maintain a self-contained
session for portability purposes is important to me.  But to each their own.

 Seablade

On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Fons Adriaensen wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 09:07:07PM +0200, Lieven Moors wrote:
>
> > Would there be anything against using hard links?
>
> A hard link makes the file pointed to part of the session
> directory, just as moving or copying the file would. There
> is no difference between a hard link and the original - both
> are hard links. So such a file is no longer recognisable as
> 'external' and the choice of including it or not in an archive
> or a copy no longer exists. That defeats the original purpose
> which is to have this choice.
>
> Apart from that, hard links are possible only within the
> same file system. There are good reasons to keep big audio
> files etc. on a separate one. That in itself is a motivation
> for 'external' data in first place. I don't want hundreds of
> Gigabytes of audio files on my /home partition, let alone in
> my home directory.
>
> Ardour makes this mistake of creating hard links if by chance
> it happens to be possible, and even if the user explicitly
> expressed his/her choice to keep a file out of the session
> directory. It's inconsistent and unreliable behaviour and
> only creates problems.
>
> Ciao,
>
> --
> FA
>
> A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia.
> It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris
> and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow)
>
> ___
> Linux-audio-dev mailing list
> Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
>
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev

Re: [LAD] NSM - handling large files

[Thomas Vecchione]

Not awake enough to debate here, but my memory and your's of Ardour's
behavior doesn't seem to be matching up I don't believe.  But I ened more
sleep before I really dig into that.

   Seablade

On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 5:27 PM, Fons Adriaensen wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 05:14:50PM -0400, Thomas Vecchione wrote:
>
> > Personally I prefer Ardour's behavior myself.  I do keep my samples on an
> > external drive, but in the end the ability to maintain a self-contained
> > session for portability purposes is important to me.
>
> You always have that ability, even if you allow others not
> to use it. And if you don't allow that, as Ardour does when
> by chance it can, it's no longer an 'ability' but something
> forced onto you.
>
> Ciao,
>
> --
> FA
>
> A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia.
> It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris
> and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow)
>
>
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev

Re: [LAD] NSM - handling large files

[Thomas Vecchione]

On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 3:11 PM, J. Liles  wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Paul Giblock  wrote:
> > I didn't necessarily mean for transport or archival. I imagine "just
> > dereference it" is one of the motivations for links in the first place.
> I
> > was more concerned about windows users, or people with large external
> > (fat32) drives who wish to use this filesystem for their live session
> > storage.  I just checked and NTFS at least supports symlinks.
>
> Anyone attempting to store their production audio sessions on a fat32
> filesystem is certifiably insane anyway...
>

Can't agree with that.  USB Thumb Drives for instance are still one of the
most common ways to transport sessions and other data and are often
formatted FAT32 for interoperability purposes.

  Seablade
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev

Re: [LAD] Kontakt sampler format (Chicken Systems Translator)

[Thomas Vecchione]

Kontakt works relatively well in Wine actually, but that is beside the
primary point of the conversation.

Seablade

On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 4:10 PM, Tom's Lists  wrote:

> I know this is somewhat already covered in this discussion, but this is
> straight from the head of Chicken Systems (a friend of mine).  I asked him
> if there was any way beyond converting the samples (which Translator can do
> just fine) to get the Kontakt samples into Linux, and this was his reply:
>
> "All the scripting is lost, there's nothing really to convert it to since
> no other platform is as intelligent. Of course, EastWest uses Python and I
> forgot what MachFive 3 uses, but I'm not sure how demanded such a
> conversion is."
>
> So, until NI ports Kontakt to Linux, or someone else makes an equivalent
> or better sampler for Linux, we'll have to stick with some form of Windows.
>  Unless I've missed it, has anyone gotten it to work with Wine, or through
> Windows in VirtualBox?  I'm building a machine that will have most versions
> of Windows as VirtualBoxes, just to experiment with it, & to get away from
> Windows, albeit slowly, but this isn't my DAW, just a strong Linux (Fedora
> 17) box.
>
> -Tom
>
> Dyrnwyn Studios & Workshops
> Blomkest, MN
>
>
> __**_
> Linux-audio-dev mailing list
> Linux-audio-dev@lists.**linuxaudio.org
> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/**listinfo/linux-audio-dev
>
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev

Re: [LAD] [LAU] [ANN] Radium Compressor V0.0.1

[Thomas Vecchione]

On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 7:06 AM, Kjetil Matheussen <
k.s.matheus...@notam02.no> wrote:

> I don't know the origin of the drum loop,
> but that UMG all of a sudden heard about this video (there's only been 9
> views),
> somehow recognized the short loop that's used in it from material that
> they have copyrighted, and then closed it down (only in germany),
> and all within a time frame of two hours, sounds very unlikely to me.
>

Youtube has an automated content matching system, which is known for giving
occasional false positives, like someone trying to claim bird song field
recordings as music off an album, or in my case one of the more notable is
one of the videos where I had a wireless mic short out, and the brief
period of pops, crackles, etc. apparently matched a recording of 'Burning
Down the House'.

So probably what happened is that it came up with a match in the automated
system, whether it is correct or not I don't know.  You can say you
disagree with it should you choose through Youtube's interface, and give a
reason.  It may or may not make much difference, so think about it
carefully.

   Seablade
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev

Re: [LAD] [LAU] [ANN] Radium Compressor V0.0.1

[Thomas Vecchione]

On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 7:17 AM, Kjetil Matheussen <
k.s.matheus...@notam02.no> wrote:

> Thanks. This is just insane though. It's a 2.6 second clip of a drum loop
> that's so standard that could probably be taken from around 2000 songs.
>
> So much copyrighted music put up on youtube, and they block this!
>
>
In many cases, they don't block, but instead request to put ads on your
content and they make money from the views.   But it really depends on the
content and the supposed copyright holder.

Seablade
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev

Re: [LAD] [LAU] So what do you think sucks about Linux audio ?

[Thomas Vecchione]

On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 9:58 AM, Dave Phillips  wrote:

>
> So, in your honest and bold opinion as user and/or developer, what do we
> lack most and what can we do without that we already have ? Please feel
> free to expand your remarks as you like. I'm planning an article on the
> topic and will likely use selected comments, subject to approval of course.
>
>
Linux sucks often comes down to, I am not used to it so therefore it sucks
because I don't know it.  There are many reasons for this, which I just
won't cover here, but there are also legitimate reasons to dislike using
Linux, or to think it isn't as good as some of the alternatives.  To name a
few of my personal ones...

Documentation: I will come back to this.

Plugins:
  While we have plugins, it is very difficult to tell exactly what is
decent or isn't without spending a lot of time with it.  Some plugins sound
great, but seem to crash my session fairly often with little warning.  You
can say this is a problem on other platforms as well, and you would be
correct to an extent when talking about plugins developed in the spare time
of someone, or other 'free' solutions that aren't supported.  But I gotta
say, I can't think of the last time one of my commercial plugins crashed a
PT session.  Hell even running them through Wine with Festige they are
pretty dang stable(I have had two instances I think where i had to restart
everything, Jack, Festige, etc. as they weren't processing audio correctly,
which may be as much Wine, Festige or any number of things as the
plugins).  Many plugins sound horrible, but it is hard to identify these
without going through each of the hundreds of plugins available.  And then
you get those few gems that sound great and are stable.

Audio Hardware:
  Not just IO hardware, but that is huge as well.  And I don't mean to say
this is the fault of the Linux Community, in many cases it is the
manufacturers, straight up.  RME is good stuff, don't get me wrong, and I
love my RME interface.  I also know that courtesy of FFADO etc. we have
many more selections than we used to and have some solid mid range things,
Focusrite and Echo Audio come to mind especially.  I also found that with
little work I could get my Mackie Onyx-i series working if I cared to.  All
well and good, but then we have things like Dante, which is picking up
steam in the live sound world, especially for multitrack recording, and
interfaces with a lot of live processing/mixers/etc.  Or we have things
like a Metric Halo interface, or any number of interfaces coming out
nowadays that have onboard DSP effects or dynamics processing.  The MH
units are a great example because of their flexible nature, but even more
basic like the onboard DSP on many Focusrite or Lexicon interfaces are not
supported.  Or even more basic things like my Apogee Duet, which I see
there are reports of it working that doesn't seem to be to certain, I have
never bothered trying, or many interfaces without hardware controls that
depend on software control we just don't have software for.  .  And then of
course you get to the topic of things like Universal Audio's DSP cards, or
the SSL Duende, etc.  All of these would be great for running commercial
plugins on, except we can't use them of course.

Audio 'Drivers':
  This is still an issue, and it is an issue because the average user can't
download Ubuntu and install Ardour, and have it run without having to set
it up and tweak it.  This is in part due to the blessing and curse both of
'choice' in that for most of us here, we know standard Ubuntu probably
isn't the best choice, or we know that we have to add realtime permissions
to our user, or half a dozen other things.  But the average person from a
different OS that doesn't know Linux is going to download Ubuntu, or
Fedora, or whatever distribution they have heard of, or happen across first
in a Google search.  Contrast this to OS X, user installs the OS, Download
the app, and runs it, and all permissions, setup etc. are taken care of for
them.  Or on Windows where without tweaking at least the damn stuff
opens(Can't say that about the 'typical' Linux install with pro audio that
depends on Jack as it is looking for realtime permissions) even if it
doesn't run well.

Back to Documentation:
  We lack a good single reference we can point people to for information.
linuxaudio.org is a start I suppose but I gotta say, if I go there thinking
as a new user looking for information on what hardware works with Linux for
audio, I could go to the site and have no freaking clue where to go from
there.  It is set up much more for the people that already know Linux, as
opposed to the people that want to know more about Linux Audio because they
are interested in learning about it.  And to clarify, yes I personally know
that under 'Resources' there are some good resources there, but as a new
user, the typical kind I generally have to help in IRC, or elsewhere this
would mean nothing.  And even after clickin

Re: [LAD] Community Interaction and Working Together

[Thomas Vecchione]

On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 7:50 AM, Harry van Haaren wrote:

>
> I'd also like to get feedback from users, about what tools are needed
> most: plugins, synths, effects? Yet-Another-DAW?
> If any of the above, please provide details / intended use-case.
>
>
Since you asked and it was recommended to me some time back to chat with
you about this... ;)

The state of audio restoration tools on Linux is abysmal.  The short
version is, nothing on Linux comes close to options in other OSes.  There
are some options to run via Wine (ie. I run WaveARTs plugins via Wine) but
many more options that do not (ie. iZotope).

The tools I can think of...

Hum/Buzz Removal -- Essentially Notch filters, that are harmonically linked.
Broadband Noise Removal -- Even a good multiband gate can help, as that is
close to what WaveARTs MRNoise is, and it is noticeably better than options
on Linux.  I am not sure what iZotope does for it's destructive process,
but I believe is also a form of multiband gating.
Click/Pop removal -- Not something I use a lot, so can't comment here
Expander -- A decent expander is surprisingly difficult to come by.  Most
options on Linux are gates instead of true expanders, and the expanders I
can find like Calf, I haven't been to happy with the results I have been
able to get out of it.  I would suggest looking at MRNoise from WaveARTs
for a great example of this, it honestly is one of the best expanders I
have used.

There is one last component to this, which is a destructive environment to
work in, actually non-realtime is a better term for what I am looking for.
 Believe it or not this is one of the few areas I personally believe a
non-realtime workflow is better than realtime/non-destructive.  I prefer
being able to find areas with a spectrograph to sample to set my multiband
gating process off of, and then apply to areas in the same way.  I prefer
to do this non-realtime because in the same audio clip delivered to me by a
video editor, I may need to do this multiple times, with different settings
each time, for each edit point they have at times.

The workflow I would ideally see is the ability to open the file in the
editor, apply Hi/Lo-pass filtering as appropriate, hum and buzz removal if
needed, sample a section of audio for setting any appropriate settings for
hum/buzz and for broadband noise removal, then finally remove the noise via
multiband gating or whatever.  The last step for me personally is downwards
expansion to hopefully provide just a slight amount more cleanup at the end.

The use case is pretty much a given for anyone that gets video from editors
in any form(But especially dialog), and has to edit the audio together.  It
also works wonders if used appropriately on field recordings for SFX,
Dialog, etc.   It is the one thing I wasn't able to stay in Linux for when
working on the recent Tube trailer.

So that should be a few years worth of work for you, should you choose to
accept it:)

 Seablade
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev

Re: [LAD] AVB not so dead after all

[Thomas Vecchione]

Related to this topic, I would recommend reading through this...

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/theatre-sound-list/WbysqMHs6iw

AVB isn't dead no, but it certainly isn't close to dominant at this point,
at least on my side of the pond.  It may be a different situation on the
other side, no idea.  That being said, it has a very uphill battle to
displace Dante at this point on my side of the pond and get decent usage
professionally.

Then again if AES67 interoperability comes into play, then is may be a moot
point as ideally you would be able to communicate between the two protocols.

Seablade

On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 7:05 PM, Len Ovens  wrote:

>
>
> Looking at the MOTU AVB endpoints, I see MIDI ports on them. None of the
> AVB docs I have read (yet) show MIDI transport. Is this then just RTP-MIDI
> on the same network? It almost seems that the midi is visible to the USB
> part only.
>
> Motu recommends connecting one of the AVB boxes to the computer via USB or
> Thunderbolt and streaming all avb channels through that connection. So this
> would mean that the BOX closest to the computer is the audio interface.
> With Thunderbolt the maximum channel count is 128 with any mix of i/o from
> that (example 64/64 i/o).
>
> Connection to the computer via AVB:
>
> http://www.motu.com/avb/using-your-motu-avb-device-as-a-mac-audio-interface-over-avb-ethernet/
>
> shows some limitations:
>  - SR can be 48k and multiples but not 44.1k and multiples
>  - The Mac will insist on being the master clock
>  - The Mac locks each enabled AVB device for exclusive access.
> (The mac can talk to more than one AVB device but they can't
> talk to each over or be connected to each other while the Mac
> has control)
>  - Maximum channels is still 128 at least on a late 2013 Mac Pro. earlier
> models should not expect more than 32 total channels (mix of i/o)
>  - Motu AVB devices set all streams to 8 channels, no 2 ch streams allowed.
>  - Because the AVB network driver on Mac looks like a sound card, Audio SW
> needs to be stopped before changing channel counts. (adding or
> removing IF boxes)
>
> I think that a Linux driver has the potential to do better in at least
> some cases. I personally would be quite happy with 48k SR only, but I am
> sure someone will make it better. Linux does not have to be the Master
> Clock unless it must sync to an internal card that only has some kind of
> sync out but can't lock to anything (like some of the on board AIs that
> have a s/pdif out). In the Linux case, the AVB AI may well be the only used
> AI and the internal AI can't be synced to anyway. With Jack, channels can
> come and go with no ill effect except a connection vanishes. Channels can
> be added and removed even within a jack client. This _should_ (logically)
> be possible in a Jack backend, but maybe not wise. A sync only backend may
> be better that takes it's media clock from the AVB clock as this would add
> stability in case of an avb box being disconnected. I do not know if jack
> backends can deal with 0 or more channels with their number changing, but a
> client dying because it's remote AI vanished would not crash jack. The
> problem with using clients for the AI is that auto-connecting APPs look for
> system/playback_1 and _2. Even more jack aware apps like Ardour would have
> you looking in "other" for more inputs.
>
> Anyway, getting AVB working with Linux is first (even two channels).
>
> --
> Len Ovens
> www.ovenwerks.net
>
> ___
> Linux-audio-dev mailing list
> Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
>
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev