[LAD] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?
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-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Re: [LAD] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?
On , Louigi Verona wrote: 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 Nice read, I'll mostly agree with you that although progress has been made, there are still many "normal" workflows for electronic musicians that are currently very difficult to set up to a satisfactory degree. On the plugin front, there are some advancements that you missed out on: Faust can now compile to LV2, so creating custom synths is a *lot* easier. Also Minaton is a subtractive mono synth from Nick Bailey, which works quite well here. I feel linux audio's progress is somewhat like being on a boat: when you look at the coast it doesn't seem to go fast, but when looking at the water beside you: one realizes the pace is quick :) -Harry ___ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Re: [LAD] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 1:24 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). > > Seems like a pretty negative outlook overall. Progress has definitely been slower than many of us would like, but that's understandable considering that most Linux Audio programs are maintained by single developers (with lots of other projects) or small groups. I'm surprised you didn't mention Luppp, libmapper, or the resurgence of ZynAddSubFX developement. I think the KXStudio project represents a *huge* amount of progress as far as integration and user experience goes. 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 (such improvements are unnecessary for monolithic applications such as Ardour since they duplicate all this functionality internally) . If an API is going to be fixed and rigid, it must also be extensible (like LV2). Still, I remain committed to improving Linux Audio and generally optimistic about the future. ___ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Re: [LAD] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?
"I'm surprised you didn't mention Luppp, libmapper, or the resurgence of ZynAddSubFX developement. Don't be - it is impossible to mention everything :) But this is why I want to hear what other people say - crowd source approach ;) On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 10:04 PM, J. Liles wrote: > > > On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 1:24 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). >> >> > Seems like a pretty negative outlook overall. Progress has definitely been > slower than many of us would like, but that's understandable considering > that most Linux Audio programs are maintained by single developers (with > lots of other projects) or small groups. I'm surprised you didn't mention > Luppp, libmapper, or the resurgence of ZynAddSubFX developement. I think > the KXStudio project represents a *huge* amount of progress as far as > integration and user experience goes. > > 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 (such improvements are unnecessary for monolithic > applications such as Ardour since they duplicate all this functionality > internally) . If an API is going to be fixed and rigid, it must also be > extensible (like LV2). > > Still, I remain committed to improving Linux Audio and generally > optimistic about the future. > > -- 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] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 1:24 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-dev mailing list > Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org > http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev > Great article! My perspective: 1. I'm strictly a studio musician - my product is digital audio files and as much of the process as is "humanly" possible is done algorithmically. Composition and synthesis in particular are done via code. I don't try to build software for other users, and I don't do live performances. 2. Given that, I can work on almost any platform, though I'm a long-time Linux user, have never used a Mac and boot my laptop into Windows 7 maybe once or twice a week. Where is Linux audio in general going? I think the same place all media creation software is going. End-user software will *always* be encumbered by patents, marketing and usability constraints and the need for granfalloons like Apple, Yamaha, Microsoft, etc. to provide returns to their stockholders. Two of the major community distros, Ubuntu and Fedora, have digital audio workstation respins available, but openSUSE doesn't. I think the days of independent audio distros like Studio 64 are numbered. The openSUSE-based Jack Audio Distro (JAD) died years ago. AVLinux announced a new release, which will be its last. And Studio 64 is "pivoting". Pixar built a massive empire by embedding Linux and open source tools into its workflow. So, for that matter, have Google and Amazon. But Linux audio as a *business*? I don't think so. Hell, I don't even think Canonical can make a profit with the Ubuntu *desktop*. It really is about building products that millions of people love to use on a daily basis and which the supplier can earn a profit. -- Twitter: http://twitter.com/znmeb; Computational Journalism Publishers Workbench: http://znmeb.github.com/Computational-Journalism-Publishers-Workbench/ How the Hell can the lion sleep with all those people singing "A weem oh way!" at the top of their lungs? ___ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Re: [LAD] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?
Le Wed, 10 Oct 2012 12:24:22 +0400, Louigi Verona a écrit : > 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). > > Interesting reading. From an user perspective, I have been used GNU/linux from quite some time now (back from my 386 box), and I have seen very things to appear like ALSA and JACK. In recent years, the biggest improvement was jack2 on multiprocessor machines. It is just much more easier to get the job done because the processor use is lower. This give us also a better stability at high system load. .But in the same time, I have seen a couple of choices coming, which are not directly related to the linux audio community, but can influence us badly if such idiotic choices are becoming the norm into GNU/linux in the future. More specifically, if I do understand the need for some big corporations for stuffs like policykit and consolekit, I just have no use for them in an audio pro box. So, I don't want them, and the recent decision to include a java script interpreter into polkit (in order to try to make it to become manageable...) will certainly not made me to change my mind: I have other things to do with my time than to learn JS in order to be able to make system administration, and I will not pay for that either. The worst thing with polkit, what is completely idiotic, is than it is a mandatory dependency of gnome. In consequence, when installing any gnome related program, this will install polkit and consolekit, and something as simple and efficient than startx will become broken, because as soon than polkit is installed, it is forcing you to run consolkit in order to be able to launch xorg with your favourite and *kit free wm/desktop. In consequence, my box today is not only completely windows free, but also completely gnome free. The kernel is a terrific tool. It just do its job, and it do it very well. And we have plenty of terrific audio tools. To speak generally, I think than another consequence of such idiotic choices is than we need to keep a close eye on what is going on in userland. 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] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 1:10 PM, Dominique Michel < dominique.mic...@vtxnet.ch> wrote: > > In recent years, the biggest improvement was jack2 on multiprocessor > machines. It is just much more easier to get the job done because the > processor use is lower. This give us also a better stability at high > system load. > I often get things wrong, especially on #jack on IRC. But it irks me to see people continue to make this claim about jack2. Let me reiterate: the normal version of jack2 does not and cannot use multiple processors if the data flow is serialized. Mutiple processors are only used where there is parallel flow between clients. Although this is not unheard of (e.g. two synths flowing into a DAW), its unlikely to be the common case for most users. Many people find jack2 to be "more stable" because it does not zombify clients in its default mode operation. It allows clients to be "late" by a substantial amount, which can result in clicks and pops in their "apparent" audio stream, but doesn't cause the server to kick them out in the way that jack1 does. One way to look at this is that jack2 is more tolerant of programming errors and system latency than jack1. --p ___ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
