Re: [LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?
--- Forwarded message --- From: Uwaysi Bin Kareem uwaysi.bin.kar...@paradoxuncreated.com To: Adrian Knoth a...@drcomp.erfurt.thur.de 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 a...@drcomp.erfurt.thur.de 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
Re: [LAD] [LAU] Linux Audio 2012: Is Linux Audio moving forward?
On Sat, 13 Oct 2012 13:16:01 +0200, Jonathan Woithe jwoi...@just42.net 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?
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?
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?
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?
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.deforum_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?
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?
On , Nils Gey l...@nilsgey.de 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?
On Friday 12 October 2012, at 10.27.39, Nils Gey l...@nilsgey.de 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?
On Fri, 12 Oct 2012 17:19:18 +0200 David Olofson da...@olofson.net wrote: On Friday 12 October 2012, at 10.27.39, Nils Gey l...@nilsgey.de 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?
On Friday 12 October 2012, at 17.41.38, Nils Gey l...@nilsgey.de 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?
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?
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?
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?
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?
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?
Speaking of hardware drivers, long time ago I wrote this article on E-MU 0404 USB: http://www.louigiverona.ru/?page=projectss=writingst=linuxa=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?
Le Wed, 10 Oct 2012 23:48:50 +0100, Harry van Haaren harryhaa...@gmail.com 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?
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=projectss=writingst=linuxa=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?
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 lad...@jrigg.co.uk 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=projectss=writingst=linuxa=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?
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 allc...@gmail.com 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 louigi.ver...@gmail.comwrote: 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=projectss=writingst=linuxa=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?
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 6:09 AM, Dan MacDonald allc...@gmail.com 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?
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 b...@harrisonconsoles.comwrote: 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.orglinux-audio-u...@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/**listinfo/linux-audio-userhttp://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?
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: http://coyoteden.dyndns-free.com:85/gene is up! Flood 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?
On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 2:04 PM, J. Liles malnour...@gmail.com 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?
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?
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?
@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?
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?
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=projectss=writingst=linuxa=linux_types http://www.louigiverona.ru/?page=projectss=writingst=linuxa=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?
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?
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?
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-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?
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%2Flistfilter0=focusritefilter1=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. /rant|weak rant all the best, drew ___ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
