Re: [LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?

2012-10-10 Thread Louigi Verona
Hey Dan!

"Saving projects is only tricky if you use the modular approach versus
instrument plugins hence this isn't really a problem for A3 and qtractor."

True, but since there are very few plugins, most power of Linux Audio today
is not in its plugin collection ;)

On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 2:09 PM, Dan MacDonald  wrote:

> Hi LV!
>
> Nice and interesting write up of your experiences and opinions there. I
> agree with most all of it except:
>
> "Saving projects is still a huge problem. In addition to LADISH we do now
> have NSM, the Non-Session Manager, which seems like a workable solution, so
> we'll see how this works out in the long run.
> LMMS seems to be the only game in town for those who want to save full
> projects by just clicking "Save" and not having to install and configure a
> "session manager". I must admit, by the way, that I have not followed LMMS
> recently."
>
> Saving projects is only tricky if you use the modular approach versus
> instrument plugins hence this isn't really a problem for A3 and qtractor.
> Aside from LMMS, MusE and sunvox have a few integrated instruments so they
> don't have this problem either (if you stick to the built-in synths for
> Muse only - sunvox doesn't handle plugins) and pretty soon MusE should gain
> native VST support to further improve this situation.
>
> Your article has reminded me of my one and only JACK complaint/ feature
> (yep - just one!!!) request which I filed a couple of years ago now but is
> still to be addressed:
>
> http://trac.jackaudio.org/ticket/202
>
> I'm surprised others haven't been asking for more descriptive 'device
> busy' error messages from JACK as for many years this has been my only
> issue with JACK - it doesn't start and you don't know what process is
> preventing it doing so. Quite often I'll not bother doing the detective
> work and just reboot but that is hardly ideal so I think this small
> addition would make JACK (and qjackctl) and as a result Linux audio much
> more user friendly.
>
> Your thoughts Mr Davis?
>
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 9:24 AM, Louigi Verona wrote:
>
>> Hey fellas!
>>
>> Would like to present an article I've written. Mostly wrote it to start a
>> conversation and hear what others have to say on the subject.
>>
>>
>> http://www.louigiverona.ru/?page=projects&s=writings&t=linux&a=linux_progress
>>
>> You can comment here or on my textboard (which does not require
>> registration).
>>
>>
>> --
>> Louigi Verona
>> http://www.louigiverona.ru/
>>
>> ___
>> Linux-audio-user mailing list
>> linux-audio-u...@lists.linuxaudio.org
>> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
>>
>>
>


-- 
Louigi Verona
http://www.louigiverona.ru/
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev


Re: [LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?

2012-10-10 Thread Paul Davis
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 6:09 AM, Dan MacDonald  wrote:

> Hi LV!
>
> Nice and interesting write up of your experiences and opinions there. I
> agree with most all of it except:
>
> "Saving projects is still a huge problem. In addition to LADISH we do now
> have NSM, the Non-Session Manager, which seems like a workable solution, so
> we'll see how this works out in the long run.
> LMMS seems to be the only game in town for those who want to save full
> projects by just clicking "Save" and not having to install and configure a
> "session manager". I must admit, by the way, that I have not followed LMMS
> recently."
>
> Saving projects is only tricky if you use the modular approach versus
> instrument plugins hence this isn't really a problem for A3 and qtractor.
> Aside from LMMS, MusE and sunvox have a few integrated instruments so they
> don't have this problem either (if you stick to the built-in synths for
> Muse only - sunvox doesn't handle plugins) and pretty soon MusE should gain
> native VST support to further improve this situation.
>
> Your article has reminded me of my one and only JACK complaint/ feature
> (yep - just one!!!) request which I filed a couple of years ago now but is
> still to be addressed:
>
> http://trac.jackaudio.org/ticket/202
>
> I'm surprised others haven't been asking for more descriptive 'device
> busy' error messages from JACK as for many years this has been my only
> issue with JACK - it doesn't start and you don't know what process is
> preventing it doing so. Quite often I'll not bother doing the detective
> work and just reboot but that is hardly ideal so I think this small
> addition would make JACK (and qjackctl) and as a result Linux audio much
> more user friendly.
>
> Your thoughts Mr Davis?
>

current jack1 (released months or years ago):

 if (snd_pcm_open (&driver->playback_handle,
  playback_alsa_device,
  SND_PCM_STREAM_PLAYBACK,
  SND_PCM_NONBLOCK) < 0) {
switch (errno) {
case EBUSY:
current_apps = discover_alsa_using_apps ();
if (current_apps) {
jack_error ("\n\nATTENTION: The
playback device \"%s\" is "
"already in use. The
following applications "
" are using your
soundcard(s) so you should "
" check them and stop
them as necessary before "
" trying to start JACK
again:\n\n%s",
playback_alsa_device,
current_apps);
free (current_apps);
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev


Re: [LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?

2012-10-10 Thread Louigi Verona
Hello Ben!

I'd like to answer your question: Is OSX/Win Audio moving _backward_?

In the most general sense my answer would be a no.
It is like being in a process of building a house and looking at your
neighbour who has already built a house and saying - "hm, his building
process seems to be going backward." But I think it is more accurate to say
that his building process simply stopped, because the house is already
complete.

Since day one I have always underlined that I do not think Linux can
technically compete with Windows and Mac OS in that many things.
Freedom is what gives Linux its benefits. But technical superiority is
questionable. It strongly depends on what distro you use, what you do with
it, etc. And even if in theory it can be shown that Windows and Mac OS are
in many ways technically inferior, the number of users hammering at it
surely made it work - not in theory, but in practice.

Windows Audio, as opposed to Linux Audio, has all pieces in place - it has
sequencers, it has tens of thousands of plugins, hundreds of them high
quality, it has software for djs and live performers, just like Linux it
has all sorts of very cool experimental applications, which continue to be
developed and absolutely no problems with hardware.
Mac OSX is even better in the realm of audio. I have many friends who are
professional musicians and who use Mac, I've performed with them and I have
seen great things that Mac Audio can do - it is incredible.

And now, when these platforms have everything a modern musician requires
and, while there is always room for improvement and new ideas, there are
hardly any pressing needs, they can experiment with Metro, with small
screens and with anything they want. They are on a firm base and if needed,
all of it can be expanded to anything you want.

This is my opinion.
Why we stick with Linux? Each has his reasons. Linux is free. Linux surely
has some unique workflows, possibilities and apps.
But to me the problem is that I can do great ambient on Linux, but I have a
difficult time putting together anything else. Doing a house tune, which is
a pleasure on Windows, is a very difficult thing on Linux, I've written
about it many times.
So my dream is to see Linux fulfil the need of a non-experimental
electronic musician.


On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 4:33 PM, Ben Loftis wrote:

>
> I'd pose a different question:
>
> Is OSX/Win Audio moving _backward_?
>
> If OSX continues to move towards iOS, and Win continues to move towards
> Metro,  and Thunderbolt stalls, and screens get smaller, and expansion
> ports get scarcer, then Linux might become the de-facto "pro" multimedia
> platform simply because the other choices have become too dumbed down.
>
> Of course _most_ users will be happy with the ease and power of the tools
> that will be available on iOS/Metro.  And _most_ users is where the money
> is, so Apple/Microsoft are chasing the right users.  But there will be some
> serious users that need a powerful production system with big screens and
> big peripherals,  and for these users, Linux might become the standard.
>
> -Ben
>
>
>
>
> __**_
> Linux-audio-user mailing list
> Linux-audio-user@lists.**linuxaudio.org
> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/**listinfo/linux-audio-user
>



-- 
Louigi Verona
http://www.louigiverona.ru/
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev


Re: [LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?

2012-10-10 Thread Paul Davis
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 9:39 AM, Louigi Verona wrote:

> Hello Ben!
>
> I'd like to answer your question: Is OSX/Win Audio moving _backward_?
>
> In the most general sense my answer would be a no.
>

in the general sense, sure. but Ben wasn't referring to the general sense.
if you're on the "inside" of Apple audio development its clear that their
focus is really shifting away from "creative/professional audio" toward
"consumer audio". i'm talking about the OS infrastructure here, not the
existing apps. now, traditionally, Apple has done an amazing job of
creating technology that manages to serve the needs of both audiences, and
they *may* manage to carry on doing that. but there are few signs from
things going on in both iOS and the latest versions of OS X that this might
not carry on.  personally, i'd probably put my money on apple, but there is
a real question what their (infrastructure) focus is going to be in a year
or two.
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev


Re: [LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?

2012-10-10 Thread Louigi Verona
Now that I am a little less zealous about free software (which is a
different discussion anyway), I might just try Renoise out.
I am rather tired of tracker interface. Does Renoise have a piano roll?

On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 9:11 PM, James Mckernon  wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 9:24 AM, Louigi Verona 
> wrote:
> > Hey fellas!
> >
> > Would like to present an article I've written. Mostly wrote it to start a
> > conversation and hear what others have to say on the subject.
> >
> >
> http://www.louigiverona.ru/?page=projects&s=writings&t=linux&a=linux_progress
> >
> > You can comment here or on my textboard (which does not require
> > registration).
> >
> >
> > --
> > Louigi Verona
> > http://www.louigiverona.ru/
> >
> > ___
> > Linux-audio-user mailing list
> > linux-audio-u...@lists.linuxaudio.org
> > http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
> >
>
> A smart article - as another 'electronic musician' (by your
> definition) using Linux, I'm always interested in your thoughts and
> essays on the topic. I agree that things can sometimes look a little
> bleak for those hoping to create highly sequenced,
> synth-and-effects-based music on Linux, but there are ways and means.
>
> Incidentally, I wonder if you've ever used Renoise? Not F/OSS, but
> runs perfectly well on Linux, and is in some respects sympathetic to
> the F/OSS ideology (saves to a simple, open file format, for example).
> Anyway, it's the strongest candidate I've found for making sequenced
> electronic music per se in LInux. Right now I'm working towards a
> workflow of using Renoise as a sequencer to drive simple synthdefs in
> Supercollider.
>
> Cheers,
> J
>



-- 
Louigi Verona
http://www.louigiverona.ru/
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev


Re: [LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?

2012-10-10 Thread Patrick Shirkey

On Wed, October 10, 2012 11:33 pm, Ben Loftis wrote:
>
> I'd pose a different question:
>
> Is OSX/Win Audio moving _backward_?
>
> If OSX continues to move towards iOS, and Win continues to move towards
> Metro,  and Thunderbolt stalls, and screens get smaller, and expansion
> ports get scarcer, then Linux might become the de-facto "pro" multimedia
> platform simply because the other choices have become too dumbed down.
>
> Of course _most_ users will be happy with the ease and power of the
> tools that will be available on iOS/Metro.  And _most_ users is where
> the money is, so Apple/Microsoft are chasing the right users.  But there
> will be some serious users that need a powerful production system with
> big screens and big peripherals,  and for these users, Linux might
> become the standard.
>

Looking at the recent trade shows it seems that Linux/Unix is the already
the hardware standard. I didn't spot hardware running on Apple or M$ OS's
but plenty of Linux and Unix platforms.

Unfortunately it costs $4000 for a booth here so I probably won't be able
to do any promotions at the next event.



--
Patrick Shirkey
Boost Hardware Ltd
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev


Re: [LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?

2012-10-10 Thread Gene Heskett
On Wednesday 10 October 2012 14:21:11 Patrick Shirkey did opine:

> On Wed, October 10, 2012 11:33 pm, Ben Loftis wrote:
> > I'd pose a different question:
> > 
> > Is OSX/Win Audio moving _backward_?
> > 
> > If OSX continues to move towards iOS, and Win continues to move
> > towards Metro,  and Thunderbolt stalls, and screens get smaller, and
> > expansion ports get scarcer, then Linux might become the de-facto
> > "pro" multimedia platform simply because the other choices have
> > become too dumbed down.
> > 
> > Of course _most_ users will be happy with the ease and power of the
> > tools that will be available on iOS/Metro.  And _most_ users is where
> > the money is, so Apple/Microsoft are chasing the right users.  But
> > there will be some serious users that need a powerful production
> > system with big screens and big peripherals,  and for these users,
> > Linux might become the standard.
> 
> Looking at the recent trade shows it seems that Linux/Unix is the
> already the hardware standard. I didn't spot hardware running on Apple
> or M$ OS's but plenty of Linux and Unix platforms.
> 
> Unfortunately it costs $4000 for a booth here so I probably won't be
> able to do any promotions at the next event.
> 
Ouch.  Suggestion Patrick, for the next show, hit up on one of the 
'crowdfunding' sites. See if you can get the show money & maybe enough for 
some big banners & handouts.

Hardware isn't going to happen unless it can be seen that there IS a market 
for it.
 
> --
> Patrick Shirkey
> Boost Hardware Ltd
> ___
> Linux-audio-dev mailing list
> Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev


Cheers, Gene
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
My web page:  is up!
 can I write a unix-like kernel in perl?
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev


Re: [LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?

2012-10-10 Thread Paul Davis
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 2:04 PM, J. Liles  wrote:



>  [ ... ] but that's understandable considering that most Linux Audio
> programs are maintained by single developers (with lots of other projects)
> or small groups.
>

 [ ... ]


> My personal frustration with Linux Audio is mainly focused on the
> seemlingly iron-clad (but flawed) JACK API. We've needed the ability to
> rename clients and have ports with arbitrary event payloads (to allow MIDI,
> OSC, or whatever other streams to be managed via the JACK connection graph
> and frame clock) for years. And, even though many proposals have been made
> and patches submitted, it doesn't look like the JACK API is ever going to
> be improved--which doesn't speak well at all for the future of modular
> audio on Linux
>

see your quote above. here's the process:

   * people identify an issue with the JACK API
   * there is discussion of various approaches to the issue
   * one or more people propose actual coded solutions
   * there is more discussion
   * potentially, one or more of the coded solutions is modified, followed
by more discussion
   * if no solution rises to the top, the issue remains unaltered
   * if a solution rises to the top, AND if there is a clear consensus that
its the right solution,
 then it goes in. this final step is the only one where my role as
"benign dictator" kicks in
 since its typically me who decides whether the solution has
emerged and whether there
 is broad consensus.

lets look at the situation with MIDI sysex messages for example. the lack
of support for arbitrary length messages is a genuine and real issue,
though doesn't affect the overwhelmingly common uses of JACK MIDI. it has
been discussed extensively. there have been 2 coded solutions proposed.
despite this, i don't feel that there is really a consensus that either of
them is really "right". as a result, the issue remains outstanding. people
are free to challenge this decision based on disagreeing with my assessment
of any of the steps outlined above. you could insist, for example, that
there is a consensus. you could even insist that its silly to go for
consensus when so few people would use or even care about the nature of the
solution. i'm open to all of that, except that i want to see a
meta-consensus in that latter case (i.e. a consensus that no consensus is
OK for this particular issue).

there are many areas where the JACK API could use some work. the only one
that i am aware of where there is reasonable consensus is the port metadata
API, which has not been implemented purely because of the reasons outlined
in your initial line above.

(such improvements are unnecessary for monolithic applications such as
> Ardour since they duplicate all this functionality internally) .
>

actually, no. Ardour has only recently started "duplicating" any of this
functionality internally, and even then, its for very limited purposes. it
uses JACK for more or less everything, and does not duplicate much of
JACK's functionality at all. Ardour2 continues to use JACK for all audio
routing, for example.


> If an API is going to be fixed and rigid, it must also be extensible (like
> LV2).
>

that doesn't seem to have held back a bazillion other APIs, including at
least 2 other "notable" (non-free) audio plugin APIs. neither VST nor
CoreAudio are extensible, but this does not appear to have held back
hundreds of plugin developers from creating plugins for those APIs. if
we're looking for reasons why plugin developers do not develop (as a rule)
for Linux, i think that the extensibility or non-extensibility of an API is
probably not the place we'll find the answer(s).
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev


Re: [LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?

2012-10-10 Thread Patrick Shirkey

On Thu, October 11, 2012 5:41 am, Dan MacDonald wrote:
> Patrick wrote:
>
>>
>> Looking at the recent trade shows it seems that Linux/Unix is the
>> already
>> the hardware standard. I didn't spot hardware running on Apple or M$
>> OS's
>> but plenty of Linux and Unix platforms.
>>
>>
> Which trade show was this?

"Integrate" is the biggest A/V trade show in Australia. It's just a baby
compared to US or EU offerings though.

> I'm unaware of any hardware vendors advertising
> or even officially supporting Linux other than RME kinda but their support
> seems little more than half-hearted as they apparently don't provide any
> support for their drivers which they say on their website are 3rd party so
> did they even have any involvement in them at all? Focusrite provide specs
> but no Linux drivers or support so I wouldn't count them either.
>

Just walking around you can see who is using Unix/Linux and who is not.
Granted most of it is embedded or SoC but they are definitely not Apple or
Mac OS's on the clear majority of the hardware solutions. Unfortunately
for us in the proprietary world it's not "cool" to talk about where you
get your firmware/software from so no one is promoting that information.

When it comes to desktop solutions no one is representing Linux at the
trade shows here. Afaik noone is doing anything explicit for Linux
Multimedia solutions at any of the US or EU trade shows either.

Given that there are several companies on these lists who do go to the
trade shows it seems that we are all missing a big opportunity for
promotion of the general platform by not capitalising on the "We heart
Linux" bandwagon.


> I know its not audio related but even HP who's support for Linux is
> arguably better or at least on a par with their support for the other two
> OS still don't advertise or claim to officially support Linux - even
> though
> they do. Sad state of affairs - even now in 2012 when we can all safely
> say
> Linux isn't going away the big corps still like to pretend it doesn't
> exist.
>

Valve just announced that the Linux port for Steam will go live with 15
titles. Intel, AMD and ARM all promote Linux heavily. The entire top level
of the movie industry runs on Linux. Harrison is building Linux Hardware
Solutions. RME provides Linux support or standards compliant devices.

What is missing is a concerted effort to advertise and promote the
advances that have been made. We can't rely on the magazine and mainstream
news media publishers to do it for us as they are clearly not interested.

So we have to do it ourselves which either means paying the publishers for
space or blanketing the web with information. Given that we are unlikely
to crowd fund advertising the latter is more viable. Considering that we
have several thousand LAU people who also just happen to be handy with a
computer and the internet that actually works in our favour.

Marketing companies spend millions of client dollars on SEO and manage to
get a lot done with just a few dedicated people. We have thousands of
users and each one of us can build a website or post links in forums and
social media to the landing pages that we want to promote. Our sites all
link up to each other anyway so it just needs some effort from people
around here to spread the links and evangelise the platform.

Having some killer content won't go amiss either.

Perhaps the professional companies round here have some AV content that
they would like to share more widely for promotional purposes?

We are actually looking for some content we can turn into a show reel. So
if you know of anything that would be suitable please let us know.


--
Patrick Shirkey
Boost Hardware Ltd
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev


Re: [LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?

2012-10-10 Thread Patrick Shirkey

On Thu, October 11, 2012 6:52 am, Louigi Verona wrote:
> @Folderol:
>
> "While it is nice to have lots of different apps, plugins, whatever, I
> think you
> find most musicians quickly settle on a very small range which they get to
> know
> extremely well."
>
> This is true. However, before you settle, you do need to have a choice.
> And
> there is
> very little right now.
>
> @Dan:
>
> "He made a number of valid points but I have to agree it was a bit overly
> negative. Linux audio has come a long way in the last few years- if still
> trailing some way behind commercial offerings in some areas but its
> unrealistic to expect otherwise when the big boys have large teams working
> full time on development plus some of the apps (Cubase etc.) effectively
> pre-date Linux back to the 80's."
>
> You point out the reason why things are as they are. I did not speak about
> the reasons, I tried to capture how I see the state of things, independent
> of the reasons. Noting that Linux has come a long way and that we cannot
> expect hobbyists to do as well as professionals has nothing to do with a
> completely independent statement that Linux has few plugins compared not
> even to Windows but to some musicians' needs. ;)
>
>
> I think sometimes it is useful to take such perhaps a slightly negative
> look. As long as it is not desperate, this kind of reflection can be
> useful
> to always be realistic about one's achievements or about state of things.
>
> Also, I have a hidden hope that someone disproves my view and shows that
> in
> reality everything is not so bad ;)


The problem with that approach is that it tends to feed the negative
attitude towards Linux and that is exactly what the "competition" want. So
by "trashing" the platform to gather informed responses it can do more
harm than good from a marketing and promotional angle. However that method
works very well for Fox and The Register so it's definitely a valid
approach.

After years of trash talk or being ignored what we really need is a
dedicated effort to "bigging up" all the things that can be done.

Which reminds me, if anyone has any tutorials they want to share on the
quicktoots website please send them my way. We get about 500 views a month
on that site at the moment and as it has been online for almost 10 years
that means almost 50,000 people have viewed tutorials on that site. The
toots don't have to be recent or cutting edge. Just useful and informative
:-)

BTW, for the professional companies out there that is 50,000 very
attractive sales prospects that you could have been marketing to for the
past 10 years. So if you are a company and want to increase your sales
potential it makes sense to be providing professional tutorials for
inclusion on the quicktoots site on a regular basis.



--
Patrick Shirkey
Boost Hardware Ltd
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev


Re: [LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?

2012-10-10 Thread Louigi Verona
@Patrick:

"The problem with that approach is that it tends to feed the negative
attitude towards Linux and that is exactly what the "competition" want."

There is no competition, Patrick. Windows Audio does not compete with
Linux Audio. Only if in our minds. And thus they do not want anything.

There is no Windows Audio community, there is a Linux Audio community.
We try to compete with them. They do not compete with us.

Also, talking positive will not solve things. I see little value in
promoting Linux Audio,
for instance, for my electronic musician friends - I have to honestly tell
them that
making the kind of music they do is not easy on Linux. I like it and I am
doing it,
but I would not advertise Linux Audio as comparable to Windows Audio since
it is
simply not true.
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev


Re: [LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?

2012-10-10 Thread Patrick Shirkey

On Thu, October 11, 2012 7:25 am, Louigi Verona wrote:
> @Patrick:
>
> "The problem with that approach is that it tends to feed the negative
> attitude towards Linux and that is exactly what the "competition" want."
>
> There is no competition, Patrick. Windows Audio does not compete with
> Linux Audio. Only if in our minds. And thus they do not want anything.
>

There are plenty of competitors to Linux Audio as a platform. AVID is the
most obvious competitor.


> There is no Windows Audio community, there is a Linux Audio community.
> We try to compete with them. They do not compete with us.
>

Look at things from a professional business point of view and try again
please. I'm not talking about Linux Multimedia for amateur users or even
necessarily for artists/producers. I'm talking about businesses that use
Linux as their revenue generating platform.


> Also, talking positive will not solve things. I see little value in
> promoting Linux Audio,
> for instance, for my electronic musician friends - I have to honestly tell
> them that
> making the kind of music they do is not easy on Linux.

What kind of music do they make that is so difficult to do on Linux?

Don't you mean that because "insert favorite application/plugin" is not
ported they will have to learn how to do something differently and that is
too much to ask?

If that is the case then they are probably not a good fit for a Linux
desktop experience but I wonder how they managed to get anything done in
the first place if they are averse to learning.

>I like it and I am
> doing it,
> but I would not advertise Linux Audio as comparable to Windows Audio since
> it is
> simply not true.
>

And it's a good thing too.


--
Patrick Shirkey
Boost Hardware Ltd
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev


Re: [LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?

2012-10-10 Thread Louigi Verona
"I'm not talking about Linux Multimedia for amateur users or even
necessarily for artists/producers. I'm talking about businesses that use
Linux as their revenue generating platform."

Fair enough. I have no idea about businesses.

"Don't you mean that because "insert favorite application/plugin" is not
ported they will have to learn how to do something differently and that is
too much to ask?"

No, not really.
This is a topic which I have raised many times. I can point you to a couple
of my articles I wrote on the topic, namely these two:

http://www.louigiverona.ru/?page=projects&s=writings&t=linux&a=linux_types
http://www.louigiverona.ru/?page=projects&s=writings&t=linux&a=linux_modular
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev


Re: [LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?

2012-10-10 Thread Harry van Haaren
Replying to nobody in particular but perhaps bringing some new things to
the table:

I feel there's a lot going on "just-under-the-surface" of what most of us
know about. I presume not everybody here is aware of the advances FAUST has
recently made in DomainSpecificLanguage technology. Similary I'm sure
there's other projects having successes that I'm not aware of (despite
being subscribed to all linux-audio feeds I know exist :) So are these
"under-the-surface" technologies and workflows going to arise into public
knowledge? If so, how?

The other things I feel is necessary is to bundle the community together:
We need to agree on one place to post information: a central hub for
linux-audio.

This location needs to have a certain appeal for newcomers, where
inspiration strikes: "YES! With those tools I can achieve exactly what I've
wanted for years!!" says the now enthusiastic and ISO downloading newcomer.

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


Re: [LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?

2012-10-10 Thread Alexandre Prokoudine
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 2:48 AM, Harry van Haaren wrote:

> The other things I feel is necessary is to bundle the community together: We
> need to agree on one place to post information: a central hub for
> linux-audio.

Amen to that :)

P.S. Oh, and I do owe you a private reply on a relevant topic.

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


Re: [LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?

2012-10-10 Thread Jörn Nettingsmeier

On 10/10/2012 11:00 PM, Patrick Shirkey wrote:


On Thu, October 11, 2012 7:25 am, Louigi Verona wrote:

@Patrick:

"The problem with that approach is that it tends to feed the negative
attitude towards Linux and that is exactly what the "competition" want."

There is no competition, Patrick. Windows Audio does not compete with
Linux Audio. Only if in our minds. And thus they do not want anything.



There are plenty of competitors to Linux Audio as a platform. AVID is the
most obvious competitor.


that's a bit like saying NASA is competing with the RC model helicopter 
community. i'm pretty sure the whole professional *non-embedded* linux 
audio market is a fraction of the size of AVID's _marketing_ budget.


now under the hood, things look quite different, but that doesn't have 
much impact on the public opinion towards or perception of linux.



There is no Windows Audio community, there is a Linux Audio community.
We try to compete with them. They do not compete with us.



Look at things from a professional business point of view and try again
please. I'm not talking about Linux Multimedia for amateur users or even
necessarily for artists/producers. I'm talking about businesses that use
Linux as their revenue generating platform.


i'm one such business, and despite my healthy illusions of grandeur i 
don't consider myself part of a relevant market for any major equipment 
or software manufacturer.


besides the obvious technical benefits of using linux (for my particular 
kind of workflow), the main advantage to me is to be able to _ignore_ 
the rat race of the mainstream pro audio software market.



Don't you mean that because "insert favorite application/plugin" is not
ported they will have to learn how to do something differently and that is
too much to ask?


that's not how marketing works, and that's not how the market works. the 
goal is to get kids to buy dsp cards with emulations of old UREIs that 
are great for snares and female vocals, and another emulation of an old 
fairchild which is great for male voices and kick drums, and the way to 
do it is to get fat old mixing gurus to advertise that kind of gear on 
youtube.


the linux community doesn't have those dsp cards to sell, our plugins 
don't have the kind of bling, and people who give their stuff away are 
less inclined to bullshit kids out of their money. we have a few 
limiters with a bunch of parameters that give useful results on all 
kinds of program material, all they lack is the instant rocknroll 
credibility thing of a fat bearded guy with a metallica t-shirt at a 
96-channel ssl who compares them to his obsolete analog treasures and 
praises them to high heaven.


hence, in my view, the absence of a "market" like this is a good thing.

the only time it hurts is when i cannot get hardware support for gear 
that i need. but these days, i can get linux drivers for everything from 
2 to 128 channels of i/o (more if i'm prepared to gang cards), so what's 
the problem?


intel and amd thankfully make dsp cards that will also deal with my 
email and run my browser (word processing on a sharc, anyone?), and they 
are well-supported by linux :)



I like it and I am
doing it,
but I would not advertise Linux Audio as comparable to Windows Audio since
it is
simply not true.


And it's a good thing too.


here i whole-heartedly agree!



--
Jörn Nettingsmeier
Lortzingstr. 11, 45128 Essen, Tel. +49 177 7937487

Meister für Veranstaltungstechnik (Bühne/Studio)
Tonmeister VDT

http://stackingdwarves.net

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


Re: [LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?

2012-10-10 Thread Nils Gey
There are good things as well.

For music notation Linux is at least equal to any other system except the 
handwriting of a 19th century professional.

For the advanced stuff and music that is really meant to be published as print 
product there is of course Lilypond which still beats all other products in 
quality, the only category that matters here.

And for the consumer and amateur market there is Musescore.

Both those programs absolutely suck at playback functionality compared to a 
typical midi sequencer with a piano roll editor. Windows world has Notion, 
which seems to be made by educated and intelligent people, because that is how 
their program is desinged and presented.
With Laborejo I am working on a program for exactly that usecase, creating 
great playback through notation, without the need for a piano roll sequencer. 
Except I base it on Lilypond and they don't, so in terms of printout-quality 
the match is already won here for the open source side.

As you may know from other messages here and my blog www.nilsgey.de a "great 
Playback" also requires good sound creating programs such as Samples, 
Synthesizers or Physical Modelling, which are drastically underrepresented in 
the Linux Audio World and the best option is still to slave a win/osx machine 
or to rely on Wine/VST, unsupported and unstable as it is, unable to load the 
newest copy protection years after their release or never. 

I see this as a pattern: Nearly all of us work on host programms and connection 
tools. Obviously this it the right choice because who needs the best synth when 
you can't play it? Could it be that we are so far behind that our brightest and 
most creative minds still have to concentrate on the underlying general purpose 
tools instead on specialized short-term software? (such as synths and samplers. 
These follow a trend and are still driven by technological innovation, so each 
orchestral lib really sounds better than another one two years earlier)

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


Re: [LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?

2012-10-10 Thread Geoff Beasley

On 10/11/2012 07:25 AM, Louigi Verona wrote:

There is no competition, Patrick. Windows Audio does not compete with
Linux Audio. Only if in our minds. And thus they do not want anything.

There is no Windows Audio community, there is a Linux Audio community.
We try to compete with them. They do not compete with us.


nicely put Louigi and quite correct imho.

Linux audio is never about windows anything. it's always about making 
music. and in Linux we can make music with elegance and accuracy.


remember, the tools are just that - tools. i've heard plenty of shit 
albums produced in multi million dollar complexes.


there are always many alternate ways to do the same job. too much 
emphasis is placed by too many on software solutions of all 
sorts.knowledge and experience is really what it is all about. and that 
can't be programmed - it has to be learned.


BTW, have you tried mhwaveedit? very nice,compact and stlouable audio 
editor and converter. i use it all the time.



best

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


Re: [LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?

2012-10-10 Thread Patrick Shirkey

On Thu, October 11, 2012 10:00 am, Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
> On 10/10/2012 11:00 PM, Patrick Shirkey wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, October 11, 2012 7:25 am, Louigi Verona wrote:
>>> @Patrick:
>>>
>>> "The problem with that approach is that it tends to feed the negative
>>> attitude towards Linux and that is exactly what the "competition"
>>> want."
>>>
>>> There is no competition, Patrick. Windows Audio does not compete with
>>> Linux Audio. Only if in our minds. And thus they do not want anything.
>>>
>>
>> There are plenty of competitors to Linux Audio as a platform. AVID is
>> the
>> most obvious competitor.
>
> that's a bit like saying NASA is competing with the RC model helicopter
> community. i'm pretty sure the whole professional *non-embedded* linux
> audio market is a fraction of the size of AVID's _marketing_ budget.
>

That is simply because the majority of the businesses are not supporting
the Linux platform. It has nothing to do with the viability of Linux audio
as a platform for serious multimedia production.  It's more like comparing
NASA with CNSA. One is a bloated organisation that is on it;s last legs
that relies on marketing and propaganda to sell it's agenda and the other
is a dynamic and productive organisation that is quickly achieving
significant results surpassing the technological achievements of the other
with very little reliance on marketing or propaganda.


> now under the hood, things look quite different, but that doesn't have
> much impact on the public opinion towards or perception of linux.
>
>>> There is no Windows Audio community, there is a Linux Audio community.
>>> We try to compete with them. They do not compete with us.
>>>
>>
>> Look at things from a professional business point of view and try again
>> please. I'm not talking about Linux Multimedia for amateur users or even
>> necessarily for artists/producers. I'm talking about businesses that use
>> Linux as their revenue generating platform.
>
> i'm one such business, and despite my healthy illusions of grandeur i
> don't consider myself part of a relevant market for any major equipment
> or software manufacturer.
>
> besides the obvious technical benefits of using linux (for my particular
> kind of workflow), the main advantage to me is to be able to _ignore_
> the rat race of the mainstream pro audio software market.
>
>> Don't you mean that because "insert favorite application/plugin" is not
>> ported they will have to learn how to do something differently and that
>> is
>> too much to ask?
>
> that's not how marketing works, and that's not how the market works. the
> goal is to get kids to buy dsp cards with emulations of old UREIs that
> are great for snares and female vocals, and another emulation of an old
> fairchild which is great for male voices and kick drums, and the way to
> do it is to get fat old mixing gurus to advertise that kind of gear on
> youtube.
>
> the linux community doesn't have those dsp cards to sell, our plugins
> don't have the kind of bling, and people who give their stuff away are
> less inclined to bullshit kids out of their money. we have a few
> limiters with a bunch of parameters that give useful results on all
> kinds of program material, all they lack is the instant rocknroll
> credibility thing of a fat bearded guy with a metallica t-shirt at a
> 96-channel ssl who compares them to his obsolete analog treasures and
> praises them to high heaven.
>
> hence, in my view, the absence of a "market" like this is a good thing.
>

We can certainly find fat bearded guys with black T-Shirts and a lot of
equipment if anyone feels like making those kind of ads.

> the only time it hurts is when i cannot get hardware support for gear
> that i need. but these days, i can get linux drivers for everything from
> 2 to 128 channels of i/o (more if i'm prepared to gang cards), so what's
> the problem?
>

It's not a problem for you or me personally but  for business people who
are seeking to make a living out of the Linux Audio and multimedia
platform getting access to a larger customer base of people who don't have
the supported cards is a good thing.


> intel and amd thankfully make dsp cards that will also deal with my
> email and run my browser (word processing on a sharc, anyone?), and they
> are well-supported by linux :)
>
>>> I like it and I am
>>> doing it,
>>> but I would not advertise Linux Audio as comparable to Windows Audio
>>> since
>>> it is
>>> simply not true.
>>>
>> And it's a good thing too.
>
> here i whole-heartedly agree!
>
>
>
> --
> Jörn Nettingsmeier
> Lortzingstr. 11, 45128 Essen, Tel. +49 177 7937487
>
> Meister für Veranstaltungstechnik (Bühne/Studio)
> Tonmeister VDT
>
> http://stackingdwarves.net
>
> ___
> Linux-audio-dev mailing list
> Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
>


--
Patrick Shirkey
Boost Hardware Ltd
___
Linux-aud

Re: [LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?

2012-10-10 Thread drew Roberts
On Wednesday 10 October 2012 19:00:42 Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
> the only time it hurts is when i cannot get hardware support for gear
> that i need. but these days, i can get linux drivers for everything from
> 2 to 128 channels of i/o (more if i'm prepared to gang cards), so what's
> the problem?

It is a problem for me in finding workable options. (With a future)

I have been a delta 1010 guy for years. But just the one. I had one, bought 
another but the first died before the second arrived iirc.

But for years I have wanted to get something can can record a full 5 piece  
band to individual tracks in ardour. 4 vocalists, 2 guitars, 1 bass, 3 
keyboards, and a drum kit on stage at once. I want to properly mic the drums, 
not just do a 2 mic / stereo overhead setup.

Let's say I want at least 24 ins.

What do I get? Where can I find a HOWTO on my options?

For the ignorant, this info is hard to find even for non-linux setups.

I have heard focusrite mentioned. Firewire. Fine, but a bit iffy considering 
reports of firewire being "put out to pasture" - is this something to worry 
about?

So, what focusrite firewire setup will get me 24 ins at once and be linux 
compatible?

Go to ffado:

http://www.ffado.org/?q=devicesupport%2Flist&filter0=focusrite&filter1=&op2=OR

Focusrite   Saffire PRO 40  Experimental
Focusrite   Liquid Saffire 56   Reported to work

The models listed with full support don't seem to have the io needed and don't 
seem to be available anymore.

What do I do?

I have seen talk of RME firewire stuff not being well supported. Is that still 
the case if it ever was?

Are there cards that are just in essence adat I/O cards (I am ignorant enough 
here not to know the correct term for what I am asking) that can handle 3(+) 
adat lightpipe connections?

I guess this info may be all simple and second nature to some but I can 
usually find HOWTOs to get me places but not in this area in years.

I taught myself to set up a dial up isp with 10s of modems in cages running to 
a single pci card, wrote the billing system, set up the mail server, dns 
server, ftp server, web server, firewalls, set up greylisting, virtual 
domains for the mail in a database etc. etc. etc. But I can't find what I 
need to know to feel comfortable buying some audio hardware to the point 
where I have put off the purchase for years.

Something is odd... (Or I am being extra dense.) I figure it does not help 
that I live on a rock in the middle of the ocean where our ability to walk 
into stores and check things out is severely limited.

I have the buying itch again but am putting it off because of not being able 
to get comfortable that what I buy will actually work.



all the best,

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


Re: [LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?

2012-10-11 Thread Adrian Knoth
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 10:01:23PM -0400, drew Roberts wrote:

[24 I/Os]
> Are there cards that are just in essence adat I/O cards (I am ignorant enough 
> here not to know the correct term for what I am asking) that can handle 3(+) 
> adat lightpipe connections?

Yep. RME RayDAT. Exactly what I have. 4xADAT-I/O, 2xS/PDIF, 2xAES,
36ins/36outs in total.


HTH

-- 
mail: a...@thur.de  http://adi.thur.de  PGP/GPG: key via keyserver

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


Re: [LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?

2012-10-11 Thread John Rigg
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 10:01:23PM -0400, drew Roberts wrote:
> Let's say I want at least 24 ins.
> 
> What do I get? Where can I find a HOWTO on my options?

Here's a HOWTO on using multiple Delta 1010s (which can also be adapted
for other cards):

http://www.jrigg.co.uk/linuxaudio/ice1712multi.html

Note that the 1010 is still in production and there are so many of
them out there that used replacements should be available for quite
a while if new production ceases.

Another cheap option is a used RME HDSP9652 (also still being made)
with 3xADAT I/O. The PCIe alternative is the HDSPe RayDAT mentioned
elsewhere in this thread.

Going up the price scale there are RME MADI cards, both PCI and PCIe
versions. I used an RME HDSPe MADI with an SSL Alpha-Link for a couple
of years with excellent results, and I don't expect either of those to
go out of production for a while yet.

Future availability of PCI motherboards might be a concern, but there
are still many new boards being made with PCI slots.

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


Re: [LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?

2012-10-11 Thread drew Roberts
On Thursday 11 October 2012 07:42:22 John Rigg wrote:

First, thanks Adrian for the RayDay mention, and thanks John for this info.

> On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 10:01:23PM -0400, drew Roberts wrote:
> > Let's say I want at least 24 ins.
> >
> > What do I get? Where can I find a HOWTO on my options?
>
> Here's a HOWTO on using multiple Delta 1010s (which can also be adapted
> for other cards):
>
> http://www.jrigg.co.uk/linuxaudio/ice1712multi.html

Not quite the HOWTO I am looking for / need. This is more a hotwo on one 
option rather than on the different options available.

I think such a howto might be useful and would be willing to write one if 
people would be willing to answer questions coming from an ignorant (in the 
field) person's perspective.
>
> Note that the 1010 is still in production and there are so many of
> them out there that used replacements should be available for quite
> a while if new production ceases.

This would need a motherboard with 3 free PCI slots right?
>
> Another cheap option is a used RME HDSP9652 (also still being made)
> with 3xADAT I/O. The PCIe alternative is the HDSPe RayDAT mentioned
> elsewhere in this thread.

These options would just need one free PCI or PCIe slot. Not bad, portability 
may be an issue. Do I build a rack with a silent rack mount PC, 3 adat 
interfaces (8 ins each)
>
> Going up the price scale there are RME MADI cards, both PCI and PCIe
> versions. I used an RME HDSPe MADI with an SSL Alpha-Link for a couple
> of years with excellent results, and I don't expect either of those to
> go out of production for a while yet.
>
> Future availability of PCI motherboards might be a concern, but there
> are still many new boards being made with PCI slots.
>
> John

all the best,

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


Re: [LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?

2012-10-11 Thread Florian Faber
On 10/11/12 13:42, John Rigg wrote:

> Another cheap option is a used RME HDSP9652 (also still being made)
> with 3xADAT I/O. The PCIe alternative is the HDSPe RayDAT mentioned
> elsewhere in this thread.
> 
> Going up the price scale there are RME MADI cards, both PCI and PCIe
> versions. I used an RME HDSPe MADI with an SSL Alpha-Link for a couple
> of years with excellent results, and I don't expect either of those to
> go out of production for a while yet.
> 
> Future availability of PCI motherboards might be a concern, but there
> are still many new boards being made with PCI slots.

The Seraph series of PCIe interfaces from german manufacturer Marian
will be officially supported soon. So far the M2 (dual MADI card) and
Seraph 8 (8 channels analogue I/O) are working, the A3 (3x ADAT) is
being added soon. If you do not need the matrix mixer from the RME
cards, they are a cheaper alternative - and still offer german
engineering (the best kind :).


Flo
-- 
Machines can do the work, so people have time to think.
public key B3B9226C
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev


Re: [LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?

2012-10-11 Thread Louigi Verona
Speaking of hardware drivers, long time ago I wrote this article on
E-MU 0404 USB:
http://www.louigiverona.ru/?page=projects&s=writings&t=linux&a=linux_emu0404usb

For a long time it was my mostly read article. Some people theorized
that it is possible to make the soundcard working, but my tests have
concluded
that it is surely impossible without voodoo spells.

Is there any system solution to these kind of things, when the specs are
available,
but nobody cares?

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


Re: [LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?

2012-10-11 Thread Dominique Michel
Le Wed, 10 Oct 2012 23:48:50 +0100,
Harry van Haaren  a écrit :

> Replying to nobody in particular but perhaps bringing some new things
> to the table:
> 
> I feel there's a lot going on "just-under-the-surface" of what most
> of us know about. I presume not everybody here is aware of the
> advances FAUST has recently made in DomainSpecificLanguage
> technology. Similary I'm sure there's other projects having successes
> that I'm not aware of (despite being subscribed to all linux-audio
> feeds I know exist :) So are these "under-the-surface" technologies
> and workflows going to arise into public knowledge? If so, how?
> 
> The other things I feel is necessary is to bundle the community
> together: We need to agree on one place to post information: a
> central hub for linux-audio.
> 
> This location needs to have a certain appeal for newcomers, where
> inspiration strikes: "YES! With those tools I can achieve exactly
> what I've wanted for years!!" says the now enthusiastic and ISO
> downloading newcomer.
> 
> -Harry

I fully agree with you. For the French linux audio community,
it is Linux MAO www.linuxmao.org that is a wiki with audio
related wiki, tutors and forum. We try to keep the it up-to-date.

Dominique




-- 
"We have the heroes we deserve."
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev


Re: [LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?

2012-10-11 Thread John Rigg
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 05:31:19PM +0400, Louigi Verona wrote:
> Speaking of hardware drivers, long time ago I wrote this article on
> E-MU 0404 USB:
> http://www.louigiverona.ru/?page=projects&s=writings&t=linux&a=linux_emu0404usb
> 
> For a long time it was my mostly read article. Some people theorized
> that it is possible to make the soundcard working, but my tests have
> concluded
> that it is surely impossible without voodoo spells.
> 
> Is there any system solution to these kind of things, when the specs are
> available,
> but nobody cares?

If it's a popular device shouldn't it be possible to organise the programming
equivalent of a "group buy" and get interested users to pay someone who knows
the necessary voodoo to get it working?

It might not be a case of "nobody cares", but that nobody can afford to drop
their paid work for long enough to look at the problem.

John

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


Re: [LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?

2012-10-11 Thread Louigi Verona
Sure, John.
I did not try to organize this. It might be possible, of course, in theory.

And maybe it is one of the solutions - to have a place (possibly like
kickstarter)
where we can organize driver jobs. I don't know how realistic this is
though, but
could be worth a try.

On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 11:11 PM, John Rigg  wrote:

> On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 05:31:19PM +0400, Louigi Verona wrote:
> > Speaking of hardware drivers, long time ago I wrote this article on
> > E-MU 0404 USB:
> >
> http://www.louigiverona.ru/?page=projects&s=writings&t=linux&a=linux_emu0404usb
> >
> > For a long time it was my mostly read article. Some people theorized
> > that it is possible to make the soundcard working, but my tests have
> > concluded
> > that it is surely impossible without voodoo spells.
> >
> > Is there any system solution to these kind of things, when the specs are
> > available,
> > but nobody cares?
>
> If it's a popular device shouldn't it be possible to organise the
> programming
> equivalent of a "group buy" and get interested users to pay someone who
> knows
> the necessary voodoo to get it working?
>
> It might not be a case of "nobody cares", but that nobody can afford to
> drop
> their paid work for long enough to look at the problem.
>
> John
>
> ___
> Linux-audio-dev mailing list
> Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
>



-- 
Louigi Verona
http://www.louigiverona.ru/
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev


Re: [LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?

2012-10-12 Thread Nils Gey
So, now that this thread shifted into a hardware/driver discussion and the 
flood of answers has stopped:

Have we learned anything from it?

For my part the conclusion is
make more music
make it public
make other people want to use the same tools as you

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


Re: [LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?

2012-10-12 Thread harryhaaren

On , Nils Gey  wrote:

For my part the conclusion is



make more music



make it public



make other people want to use the same tools as you


Sounds fair enough, I bumped into this guys soundcloud yesterday:
http://soundcloud.com/macrowave

Talking about music that will make you bop your head :) A bit of research  
shows he's using LMMS.

IMO more guys like him will show people what can be done with Linux Audio.
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev


Re: [LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?

2012-10-12 Thread David Olofson
On Friday 12 October 2012, at 10.27.39, Nils Gey  wrote:
[...]
> make more music
> make it public
> make other people want to use the same tools as you
[...]

On that note, some stuff I've done for one of my current projects, Kobo II; 
chip themed music and sound effects:
http://soundcloud.com/david-olofson

My focus shifted away from music many years ago, and I've more or less been 
out of the loop ever since The Great API Discussions. (JACK, LADSPA, GMPI, XAP 
etc.)

These days, I'm running my own business, and since part of that is developing 
games, I'm kind of getting back into music agan. However, I'm pretty much 
exclusively using weird custom tools (as always!), so I'm not sure I can 
contribute much to The Cause anyway, I'm afraid...


The tracks above are all realtime synthesis on a custom engine, ChipSound, 
using geometric waveforms and noise only. It's a very simplistic synth from 
the DSP point of view, but it's driven by a per-voice microthreaded realtime 
scripting engine, which is how it can still produce somewhat interesting 
sounds. No pre-rendered waveforms, filters or anything so far, but there's 
off-line rendering, modular voices and stuff in my development tree.

All sounds and music coded in a standard code editor (KDE Kate) so far, but 
I'm planning on throwing the MIDI master keyboard in the mix later on.

No proper home yet, but the latest release as of now is found here:
http://olofsonarcade.com/2012/03/13/chipsound-0-1-0-released-zlib-
license/


Of course, I'm still developing and running everything on Linux! The ChipSound 
development tree has JACK support (too many issues with the SDL->PulseAudio-
>JACK->ALSA stack), and I'm using mhWaveEdit and JAMin for recording and 
mastering the demo tracks.


-- 
//David Olofson - Consultant, Developer, Artist, Open Source Advocate

.--- Games, examples, libraries, scripting, sound, music, graphics ---.
|   http://consulting.olofson.net  http://olofsonarcade.com   |
'-'
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev


Re: [LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?

2012-10-12 Thread Nils Gey
On Fri, 12 Oct 2012 17:19:18 +0200
David Olofson  wrote:

> On Friday 12 October 2012, at 10.27.39, Nils Gey  wrote:
> [...]
> > make more music
> > make it public
> > make other people want to use the same tools as you
> [...]
> 
> On that note, some stuff I've done for one of my current projects, Kobo II; 
> chip themed music and sound effects:
>   http://soundcloud.com/david-olofson
> 
> No proper home yet, but the latest release as of now is found here:
>   http://olofsonarcade.com/2012/03/13/chipsound-0-1-0-released-zlib-
> license/

It worked! I want to use the same tools as you.
I have searched for somthing like this for a long time.
Downloading the source right now...

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


Re: [LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?

2012-10-12 Thread David Olofson
On Friday 12 October 2012, at 17.41.38, Nils Gey  wrote:
[...]
> > > make more music
> > > make it public
> > > make other people want to use the same tools as you
[...]
> > On that note, some stuff I've done for one of my current projects, Kobo
> > II; chip themed music and sound effects:
> > http://soundcloud.com/david-olofson
> > 
> > No proper home yet, but the latest release as of now is found here:
> > http://olofsonarcade.com/2012/03/13/chipsound-0-1-0-released-zlib-
> > 
> > license/
> 
> It worked! I want to use the same tools as you.
> I have searched for somthing like this for a long time.
> Downloading the source right now...

Awesome! :-D

Well, it's still an inhouse tool in development, so the documentation is 
incomplete and might not be up to date. Also, the JACK support isn't in that 
release, in case you're looking for that.

I'm going to set up a proper web site for it shortly, with some documentation 
and examples. At this rate I'm going to need it myself, as I'm forgetting 
details between the times I do some proper work with it! ;-)


-- 
//David Olofson - Consultant, Developer, Artist, Open Source Advocate

.--- Games, examples, libraries, scripting, sound, music, graphics ---.
|   http://consulting.olofson.net  http://olofsonarcade.com   |
'-'
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev


Re: [LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?

2012-10-12 Thread Jonathan Woithe
Hi Drew

[ Note: due to the way the LAD mailing list mail server and my mail account
interacts, this reply is unlikely to make it to the list.  Feel free to
forward it to the list if that's the case. ]

> Let's say I want at least 24 ins.  What do I get?

I assume you're referring to 24 analog ins.  Within a single unit that may
be challenging.

> I have heard focusrite mentioned. Firewire. Fine, but a bit iffy considering 
> reports of firewire being "put out to pasture" - is this something to worry 
> about?

It depends on who you speak to.  Certainly in the consumer realm it seems to
be going out of favour.  For semi-pro and professional audio however it
appears to be carrying on for the moment (most likely because the bus
architecture is so much better than USB for things like AV transport).  This
is evidenced by the manufacturers continuing to release new firewire-based
devices.

Over the next few years I expect thunderbolt interfaces to come to the fore
(assuming the interface is adopted widely and quickly).  However, there
remains a huge number of very good firewire-based interfaces out there, and
people will continue to want to use them for a number of years yet.  As a
result, I suspect that there won't be major issues attempting to obtain
firewire host cards for the foreseeable future.

> So, what focusrite firewire setup will get me 24 ins at once and be linux 
> compatible?  Go to ffado:
> :
> Focusrite Saffire PRO 40  Experimental
> Focusrite Liquid Saffire 56   Reported to work

This status is true, unfortunately.  I should clarify that the
"experimental" tag for the Pro 40 come about because FFADO has not received
any information from the manufacturer about this device AFAIK.  However, it
is proving to be similar to earlier devices (excepting the DSP, which isn't
relevant if all you're looking for is raw I/O) and it appears that progress
is being made.  Ultimately the slow progress is mostly due to a lack of
manpower to work on the drivers.  Admittedly this doesn't help your current
quest.  Note that I am not overly familiar with the Focusrite interfaces or
the FFADO driver for them; to obtain more detailed information about them it
would be best to head to the ffado-user and/or ffado-devel mailing list and
post your queries there.

> I have seen talk of RME firewire stuff not being well supported. Is that 
> still 
> the case if it ever was?

Back a few years ago it was true; those working on FFADO were unable to get
in contact with the right people at RME to facilitate the work on a driver. 
This changed a couple of years ago and as of FFADO 2.1.0 the Fireface-400
and Fireface-800 are almost fully supported (MIDI I/O and the FF800 TCO are
the most significant omissions).  In terms of getting 24 analog channels
into the computer, you could use a FF800 with two 8-channel ADAT pre's of
your choice.  Again, it's not a single box with 24 inputs and it's a costly
solution, but it should be workable.

The RME UCX and UFX devices are currently not supported by FFADO.  Adding
the support for these is mostly dependent on getting physical access to
sample devices.  This is still being worked on (financial issues are proving
to be a problem).

Disclaimer: I work on the FFADO RME driver.

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


Re: [LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?

2012-10-13 Thread Adrian Knoth
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 04:12:37PM +1030, Jonathan Woithe wrote:

Hi!

> Over the next few years I expect thunderbolt interfaces to come to the fore

And even if not, one could still use an ordinary PCIe interface in a
thunderbolt-to-PCIe enclosure.


> The RME UCX and UFX devices are currently not supported by FFADO.  Adding

Though the UCX is not supported by FFADO, it is supported by ALSA if the
device is set to USB 2.0 class compliant mode.



Cheers

-- 
mail: a...@thur.de  http://adi.thur.de  PGP/GPG: key via keyserver

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


Re: [LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?

2012-10-13 Thread Jonathan Woithe
Hi Adrian

> > The RME UCX and UFX devices are currently not supported by FFADO.  Adding
> 
> Though the UCX is not supported by FFADO, it is supported by ALSA if the
> device is set to USB 2.0 class compliant mode.

That's neat.  Has someone tested and verified this (on the RME site it
simply says that Linux should "theoretically work")?

Even so, "class compliant" mode is fairly limited: as I understand it
there's limited access to the onboard mixer/DSP settings, and one is
restricted to at most 8 ins / 2 outs.  The "ins" are the analog inputs and
the two outs are copied to analog out 1/2, phones and SPDIF/ADAT.  This may
also mean that there is no easy way to control device settings such as
phantom power.  However, I have not had a chance to experiment with the
device myself, nor have I read about it in detail; therefore some or all of
this may be inaccurate.

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


Re: [LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?

2012-10-13 Thread Clemens Ladisch
Jonathan Woithe wrote:
>> Though the UCX is not supported by FFADO, it is supported by ALSA if the
>> device is set to USB 2.0 class compliant mode.
>
> That's neat.  Has someone tested and verified this (on the RME site it
> simply says that Linux should "theoretically work")?

Well, the difference between theory and practice is that in theory, the
Linux driver is bug-free:
http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_name=20121007151231.0x20reciv488sc8g%40webmail.uni-potsdam.de&forum_name=alsa-user


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


Re: [LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?

2012-10-17 Thread Uwaysi Bin Kareem
On Sat, 13 Oct 2012 13:16:01 +0200, Jonathan Woithe   
wrote:



Hi Adrian

> The RME UCX and UFX devices are currently not supported by FFADO.   
Adding


Though the UCX is not supported by FFADO, it is supported by ALSA if the
device is set to USB 2.0 class compliant mode.


That's neat.  Has someone tested and verified this (on the RME site it
simply says that Linux should "theoretically work")?


I have it working on class compliant mode yes. The latency isn`t that  
impressive though, but you can live with 5ms.


I have earlier run a firewire card at 0.33ms latency.

The fix is in this kernel aswell,  
http://paradoxuncreated.com/Blog/wordpress/?p=2268

if you don`t want to compile your own, with the fix mentioned on this list.

Peace Be With You.
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev


Re: [LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?

2012-10-17 Thread Adrian Knoth
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 05:07:20PM +0200, Uwaysi Bin Kareem wrote:

> http://paradoxuncreated.com/Blog/wordpress/?p=2268

The site mentions:

--- quote ---
>   sudo schedtool -p 98 -n -20 -F `pgrep X`
--- end quote ---

Setting the X-server to FIFO/98 is just plain wrong, at least on an
audio mailing list.

And then:

--- quotes ---
> To go with this I also recommend, using the Ubuntu 2d desktop, as it has
> low-jitter. Also the chromium-browser has low-jitter (better youtube).
--- end quotes ---

I have no idea what you're trying to prove here, but I'm pretty sure you
have a general misunderstanding of jitter, thread wake-up latencies and
proper scheduling priorities.



-- 
mail: a...@thur.de  http://adi.thur.de  PGP/GPG: key via keyserver

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


Re: [LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?

2012-10-18 Thread Uwaysi Bin Kareem



--- Forwarded message ---
From: "Uwaysi Bin Kareem" 
To: "Adrian Knoth" 
Cc:
Subject: Re: [LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 10:06:45 +0200

On Wed, 17 Oct 2012 17:58:33 +0200, Adrian Knoth
 wrote:


On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 05:07:20PM +0200, Uwaysi Bin Kareem wrote:


http://paradoxuncreated.com/Blog/wordpress/?p=2268


The site mentions:

--- quote ---

  sudo schedtool -p 98 -n -20 -F `pgrep X`

--- end quote ---

Setting the X-server to FIFO/98 is just plain wrong, at least on an
audio mailing list.

And then:

--- quotes ---

To go with this I also recommend, using the Ubuntu 2d desktop, as it has
low-jitter. Also the chromium-browser has low-jitter (better youtube).

--- end quotes ---

I have no idea what you're trying to prove here, but I'm pretty sure you
have a general misunderstanding of jitter, thread wake-up latencies and
proper scheduling priorities.


There seems to be a lot of misunderstandings about scheduling policies and
jitter out there. Howver if you want your desktop to slow down, simply by
moving another window, then leave it at normal. Jitter for audio seem
unaffected by this. The standard kernel seems to almost do 0.33 ms stable
on my HDA soundchip. A few clicks, and that is how it is with realtime X
aswell. So why not do it, even if audio is your main focus. X is
singlethreaded, so it needs to have data ready, for it`s windows or games.
Or else it becomes a bottleneck. Do whatever you want with this, but don`t
say it is wrong, or some kind of misunderstanding. I would not run a
desktop any other way.

Peace Be With You.
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev