Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: Linux VERSUS OSS ???
On Wednesday 15 October 2003 11:51, Paul Davis wrote: How about docs for the mixer interfaces? or a simple HOWTO. the mixer interface is a problem. OSS glosses over this by hiding 90% of the capabilities of most hardware mixers and stuffing it into an incredibly simplified model that then prevents users from doing things that they can do under Windows. ALSA messes it up by exporting 90% of the capabilities of most hardware mixers into user space and leaving the complexity for someone else to deal with :) well, it might be nice if at least some kind of mixer docs, or mixer HOWTO existed, even if things will change in the API... takashi and jaroslav are working on the issues. i think their approach is correct (export the hardware capabilities, wrap them in alsa-lib to provide a simple interface for most apps and users) but it requires significant amounts of coding and won't emerge in a few days. Alsa/Jack is wonderful, and greatly more flexible than OSS, and is what linux needs to move to more professional recording software, but it does take more lines of code than OSS to do simple things. With OSS, I can have the device opened and playing audio in about 5 lines of code. assuming that your requirements are met by OSS's incredibly simplistic model of an audio device driver. need to control xrun detection? want to avoid starting the device until you've got enough data ready? want to use non-interleaved access? want to use a sample rate or sample format not supported by OSS? well, it won't take 5 lines, or 50 lines or 500 lines of code: you simply can't do any of this in OSS. For very small, simple players, yes, OSS does satisfy the requirements. (think embedded devices, with simple user requirements - 44100, 16bit, 2 ch.). Oss's simplicity is both a boon and it's downfall.
Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: Linux VERSUS OSS ???
On Wednesday 15 October 2003 03:19, Paul Davis wrote: OSS is dead. You should not be writing apps with OSS. Well, at least OSS has a programmer's guide (PDF file): http://www.opensound.com/pguide/oss.pdf For ALSA Initial HOWTO's: http://www.suse.de/~mana/alsa090_howto.html http://equalarea.com/paul/alsa-audio.html Reference manual for the PCM API: http://www.alsa-project.org/alsa-doc/alsa-lib/pcm.html#pcm How about docs for the mixer interfaces? or a simple HOWTO. Alsa/Jack is wonderful, and greatly more flexible than OSS, and is what linux needs to move to more professional recording software, but it does take more lines of code than OSS to do simple things. With OSS, I can have the device opened and playing audio in about 5 lines of code. Equivalents exist there for the MIDI API and others. [snip]
Re: [linux-audio-dev] windows musicians doing lisp?
On Friday 26 September 2003 10:42, Paul Davis wrote: amazing that these guys have the guts to show the screenshot .. http://news.harmony-central.com/Newp/2003/Symbolic-Comp-5-Mod-Win.htlm looks like OpenMusic to me. i guess we're still waiting for the official release for linux from ircam, right? this means I can run this from within an emacs window, right? :)
Re: [linux-audio-dev] Should the list be members-only?
On Thursday 14 August 2003 17:12, Paul Winkler wrote: Hi folks, your friendly temporary list-admin here. (Joern's on vacation and I'm filling in.) We seem to be getting quite a lot of spam lately. Currently the list is open - non-members can post. I'd like to take an informal poll: Should the LAD list remain totally open, or should non-member postings require moderator approval I should point out that the LAU list requires approval for non-member postings, and it seems to be no problem in my very-limited experience managing the lists: I check the pending-approval queue at least once a day, find nothing but spam, and throw it away. Approving a legit non-member posting would be trivially easy.
[linux-audio-dev] [announce]
Hello, This is to announce a web forum dedicated to Linux and recording. http://www.recording.org/cgi-local/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi Come and join the fun!
Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: why is no-one responding are you all justa bunch of *^%^%^ wits???
On Wed, 2003-02-12 at 07:44, Paul Davis wrote: So I've wasted 2+ years of my life and countless dollars continuing down this path. Do you know how much of my life and money I've spent continuing down this path? In return for getting up every day for 3+ years (bar some months in the summer) and working my ass off to produce something people claimed would take hundreds of man years to create, finding 2-300 emails per day in my mail box about audio software, hardware, and the rest ... I get this. Its pathetic. Not only that ... I have no idea how much longer I can keep working on Ardour right now because working on it has come close to exhausting my financial resources. What right do you have to complain about countless dollars? If I may pipe in here.. Being a developer and a musician/engineer, I am aware of the resource drain invloved. With all due respect, Paul, If you are interested, I am sure people would pay for binaries of ardour.I would. I know other musicans that would.I could get more musicans to. Personally, I have been waiting for it since I first heard about it. Why not release something? People are waiting! Most open source projects release binaries throughout their development phase. Instead of adding cool new features for years on end, why not release something that musicans can use. That is what it's all about, right? Musicians want your software. Linux (community) needs your software. You have been given access to the inside of the entire development process of a major piece of software: something you would never, ever have any access to with a commercial company. If you don't like the fact that nobody has time to answer your questions because we too **DAMN BUSY** trying to get software to the point where non-coders can use it with satisfaction and ease, well ... go get products support from companies that will happily take your money for both of them. There are plenty of good ones. -- My cat's a debugger Potter, Lorn, ljp core developer / Web Administrator Project OPIE- the Open Palmtop Integrated Environment http://opie.handhelds.org | http://www.opie.info (german) | http://www.opie.us IRC: irc.freenode.net #opie #opie.de [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Alsa-devel] Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: why is no-one respondingare you all just a bunch of *^%^%^ wits???
On Wed, 2003-02-12 at 09:49, Paul Davis wrote: If you are interested, I am sure people would pay for binaries of ardour.I would. I know other musicans that would.I could get more musicans to. Personally, I have been waiting for it since I first heard about it. Why not release something? because i am tired of downloading open source projects that are still so clearly under development. i am tired of the impression that this creates. when i get hold of something like freqtweak, which i can compile or get binaries for, and the thing just works ... that is the right impression. the wrong impression comes from stupid bugs, inability to cleanly exit the program (still a core problem with ardour), and functionality that is obviously necessary and either missing or incomplete. ahhh, you are a perfectionist! I see your point. Open source software is always under dev, unless it's not maintained. You _could_ release 'alpha' versions clearly stating that it is alpha condition. People are waiting! Most open source projects release binaries throughout their development phase. Instead of adding cool new features for years on end, why not release something that musicans can use. that's precisely what i am trying to do. however, my definition of something that musicians can use might be different from yours. Well, obviously, ardour isn't at the 'release' stage, but perhaps beta or even alpha. Perhaps someone else with more time, could release a binary version for you. Pick one or two target dists, and release alpha binaries or such. You'd certainly get more bug reports. :) jazz++ has been around for a long time, and is available as a binary. why isn't it widely loved and used? because it really isn't very good. i know that i tried to use it many times, and found it, well, frankly i found it completely awful. ardour still has lots of significant bugs and a few design issues that need addressing before i want the general population judging it. to release ready-to-run copies now, or even tarballs that would help people who can't/won't use CVS to try to compile it ... well, all i think it would do is to increase the number of people who have been there, don't want to go back with respect to the program. Personally, I keep checking back to projects that are in some kind of beta stage, or too buggy to use and look interesting, to see what things have changed. Heck, I'll even use software day to day that crashes constantly, if I think it's useful enough. (mozilla - early stages comes to mind) when ardour is in a state where i believe (rightly or wrongly) that a reasonably typical target user can sit down and just use it without encountering bugs when recording a typical 12-32 track piece, there will be binaries. People are willing now to support you financially now, Paul.Paypal might be a good idea, if you dont mind begging till ardour is at a point where you can release to the general public. --p --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com ___ Alsa-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/alsa-devel -- My cat's a debugger Potter, Lorn, ljp core developer / Web Administrator Project OPIE- the Open Palmtop Integrated Environment http://opie.handhelds.org | http://www.opie.info (german) | http://www.opie.us IRC: irc.freenode.net #opie #opie.de [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [linux-audio-dev] OpenSynth Eko supports Linux ?
1/17/2003 7:55:29 PM, Paul Winkler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, Jan 17, 2003 at 06:30:48PM -0800, Paul Winkler wrote: On Fri, Jan 17, 2003 at 11:07:40AM +0100, Vincent Touquet wrote: Check this out: - http://www.opnlabs.com/ I've written them with a couple of basic questions, and asked for permission to post their reply here. Will let you know if/when I get anything back. -- thats looks really sweet. I hope you asked them what processor and memory specs were. :) Paul Winkler http://www.slinkp.com Look! Up in the sky! It's MAILMAN BURRITO! (courtesy of isometric.spaceninja.com)
[linux-audio-dev] dev help requested
hello, I am writing a audio recording app for linux pdas, of the zaurus sort. I am running into a problem with switching sampling rates on the target device, and need some help to find a work around for a buggy driver, which I have no control over, as it's shipped with the device, and is not a kernel module. When testing on my x86 desktop, and various audio cards, everything works as planned. But when running on the device (arm based processor, tc35143 audio chip - heh for whatever its worth), when I request a new sampling rate, the driver/device seems to change, no errors are reported. I can ask the driver what the rate is and it reports what I requested, but the actual amount of data received is at the previous rate. I can close the app and get the actual intended rate. I have tried doing a fork, in hopes maybe the driver was holding process information. No joy. I don't want to have to resample the input, as it seems a waste of cpu, and as a musician... blasphamy. Any hints, or suggestions would be welcomed. thanks, ljp -- My cat's a debugger Potter, Lorn, ljp core member / Web Administrator Project OPIE- the Open Palmtop Integrated Environment http://opie.handhelds.org | http://www.opie.info (german) | http://www.opie.us IRC: irc.freenode.net #opie #opie.de [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [linux-audio-dev] Soundcard spotting
On Wednesday 23 October 2002 12:49 pm, Bob Ham wrote: On Wed, Oct 23, 2002 at 01:22:41AM +0300, Kai Vehmanen wrote: Ok, maybe the current SB cards are better, but I'll never forgive the company the disappointment their AWE64Gold caused me. Such waste of money! ;) Oi! I won't have a word against the AWE cards. This track: http://pkl.net/~node/music/obelisk_init()-ep_01_the-stone-circle.mp3 was done entirely on a P200 with an AWE 64 (not Value, or Gold, just plain old AWE 64) which, imvho, ain't bad :) I don't know about you studio people with all your low latency, 10 in, 10 out, 24/96 gubbins, but my AWE has served me well :) Bob It's not the equipment you have that really counts.. it's what you do with it! -- My cat's a debugger.. Potter ljp, Lorn core member Project OPIE- the Open Palmtop Integrated Environment http://opie.handhelds.org | http://www.opie.info (german) | http://www.opie.us IRC: irc.freenode.net #opie #opie.de [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [linux-audio-dev] a brief update and a request
At 02:06 PM 7/16/2002 -0400, you wrote: Greetings: I've been traveling quite a lot lately, so I have not updated the Linux soundapps site for a couple of months. I'll be posting an update later this week, I promise. (!) Meanwhile, I'm happy to announce that my publisher has requested an outline for a 2nd edition of my book (The Book Of Linux Music Sound). I've already made quite a list of additions and deletions, and I would like to know the opinions of the members of LAD/LAU. Specifically: What applications profiles would you like to see added ? What applications profiles would you like to see deleted ? What other material would you like to see added or deleted ? Any other suggestions ? I haven't read the original, but you might want to touch on opensource audio projects that are either stalled, or dead, and may be needing help or resurrection. such as http://sourceforge.net/projects/khdrec2 which is me.. but I have not worked on this for quite some time, due to lack of inspiration. And I have committed to cvs for longer than I have not worked on this, so there is some code here that I may add. Currently, I am working on developing some audio apps for embedded linux. You may want to touch on linux embedded apps and projects also ;) Open Palmtop Integrated Environment http://opie.handhelds.org [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[linux-audio-dev] irc
hello, Is there any irc channels associated with this list? Or perhaps a channel where audio dev programmers hang?
Re: [linux-audio-dev] W64 file format
On Wednesday 24 October 2001 02:08 am, you wrote: [snip] IEEE float was only available in the format provided 48_32bit_stereo http://llornkcor.com/w64/w64.html My ftp site is having problems, so http is it. If you need any more, or need bigger files, or have questions, email me. My favorite (added for grins) is the PCM_192,000_24bit_stereo file. It was HUGE, so it's really short time-wise! Like anybody is really going to use that sample rate! (yet) :) No other 32 bit files were available. I even kept them under 100k bytes. ljp
Re: [linux-audio-dev] W64 file format
On Tuesday 23 October 2001 04:00 pm, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote: Hi People, I currently have one example of this file format and I need more. The single file I have is a 16 bit stereo file. I need some more files and what I'm looking for (if they are available) is as follows: - a mono file of any bitwidth - files containing more than 2 channels - files containing 8, 24 or 32 bit PCM data - files containing float or double data - files containing looping and other information - files containing encoded data (ie not PCM nor float/double) If anybody wishes to help this Free Software project by supplying examples files I would be very pleased to hear from them. Please don't email files to me without asking first as I would like to prevent my mail box from overflowing with multiple copies of the same file. I can send you some, it appears that theres no support for multi channel 64 bit wave files. Looks like these are supported : ACELP.net A-law U-law True Speech GSM6.10 IAC2 IEEE float (uncompressed) IMA ADPCM LH CELP 4.8kbit/s LH SBC 12 LH SBC 16LH SBC 8 MS ADPCM MS G.723.1 mp3 PCM which ones do you want? What length? Can't do multi channel ljp
[linux-audio-dev] Linux and the Future of Audio?
Hear ye! Hear ye!! Come one! Come all! Announcing a linux audio web forum at: http://www.recording.org/cgi-local/ubb/dawworld/ultimatebb.cgi ljp
Re: [linux-audio-dev] ALSA vs OSS drivers
On Sunday 30 September 2001 12:55 pm, you wrote: I've been happily using the commercial OSS driver ( http://www.4front-tech.com ). Ditto here. I'd rather spend my time recording/playing music than compiling/configuring a sound card. OSS commercial is rather painless. ljp
Re: [linux-audio-dev] Broadcast 2000 removed from public access
At 16:58 9/10/2001 -0700, you wrote: I second that, maybe it could be forked off as a part of the oggvorbis project, as they have created a foundation to protect themselves from liabilities. Apparently heroine virtual was actually getting hit with some real suit or suits, so it wasn't just a theoretical threat, I perhaps this is just a taste of hell to come, as I remeber Microslop mentioning that legislators need to be educated about the risk that Linux represents. Perhaps Bush is dumb enough to push for the complete outlawing of open source. --- Ruben Merz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This goes with the current state of the USA and the suit happy atmosphere here, and people not taking responsibility for themselves and their actions anymore. Personally I think it might have to do with this http://linuxmediaarts.com can't get $19,999.99 for free software and some hardware. Maybe the potential for litigation made him want to pull it. Anyhow, the source is still out there on distribution disks and currently on their ftp servers. Maybe studios and other media types won't use software that they can't point their fingers at when they themselves screw things up and not back up. But, I'd hate to spend 36 hours rendering anything that turns out crappy because of defects in the software. If they outlaw open source, then only outlaws will have open source, and they can pry my gnu compiler from my cold, dead harddrive. ljp
Re: [linux-audio-dev] VST plug-ins for Linux?
At 14:33 9/7/2001 +0300, you wrote: Peter Surda [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What's VST? I've contributed some stuff to the avifile project and we are planning to integrate more binary codecs (QT, RealMedia), but it isn't top priority now, so if VST is something interesting I could take a look and tell if it is doable. Hey, it would be great if you could have a look! Some explanation: VST, or virtual studio technology is a plug-in API developed by Steinberg, www.steinberg.net, famous of their Cubase sequencer app. In short, it is a very *very* very popular interface in the music production world, for plugging 3rd-party effects algorithms and synthesizers into a diversity of audio editors/sequencers. What Linux lacks is not the plug-in API but the loads of commercial plug-ins that use VST. There's a VST SDK available to help you out. Registration required. http://service.steinberg.net/webdoc.nsf/show/development_e
Re: [linux-audio-dev] [OT] Cool Edit Snd comparison survey (brief)
At 11:36 8/21/2001 -0400, you wrote: 1) How do you most typically use Cool Edit, i.e., what routines do you most commonly access ? Noise reduction, DirectX plugins, FET Filter, Amplitude- dynamics, amplify, and normalize. 2) What do you consider CE's greatest strength as a soundfile editor ? noise reduction, and DirectX plugins. 3) What do you like most/least about CE ? Most- Plugins Least- Doesn't work on linux. 4) What would you most like to see in Snd ? Change in gui 5) Do you prefer Snd with GTK, Motif, or no GUI at all ? GTK 6) What do you like most/least about Snd ? Motif
Re: [linux-audio-dev] User Interface
7/26/2001 19:59:58, Paul Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ljp writes, in response to two criticisms of GNOME dependency: To me, music is more important than any library ideologies. I wouldn't give a rats ass if software was made with QBASIC, as long as it compiles fairly easily and then continues: (not alot of excessive library inclusion that I have to install every libtom-libdick-and-libharry libs just to compile it- because there no binaries available), which IMHO is precisely the problem with depending on GNOME ... True, but I suppose ardour is any better? I want to try ardour, but gave up trying to compile it? WHY? Because the libraries you use are 1) obscure and hard to locate 2) there's at least one library that you have (had?) ONLY cvs access to, making it for developers only. 3) I'd rather use something that allows me to record music rather than compiling/installing several, several unstable libraries to get it to even compile, much less link correctly. I simply gave up on it. Besides, I can go download Cubase and be recording in about 5 minutes. No compiling needed. No searching for obscure unstable libraries to compile, which in turn often require installing OTHER libraries. Granted gnome is like that also. but ardour is worse in that aspect. It's like a pot calling the kettle black. I'm not disparging all the work you do. As a developer myself, I know that you put alot of time into the code, and I respect you for that. In fact, I'd love to try ardour out. I bought an rme card because of linux drivers. But it's the library thang. One thing that would help, is on the ardour web page (I haven't checked out the web page lately- sorry) , have links to all the libraries needed. Much better than finding out during ./configure and having to do a google search for them, one by one when it fails to configure. I hate that. Gnome is like that also. or even better, links to any binaries that the dist's. might have available. ljp
Re: [linux-audio-dev] User Interface
7/26/2001 23:30:38, Paul Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why don't I make my libraries available as RPMs or debian packages? Because I have better things to do with my development time than rebuilding, reuploading, re-doing a web page every time I fix a bug in a library. Thats why Ardour is currently a developer only system, and its why I use CVS, because I assume that developers will be happy using CVS because of the ease and low cost of updating it provides. Ya, I hear you there. I totally understand. I still want to try ardour, but I have better things to do than hunt down/install all the libs required. Like keep my OWN applications up to date. the requirements page already did this, and i just updated it to include a couple of new links and to revise the old ones. http://ardour.sourceforge.net/requirements.html or even better, links to any binaries that the dist's. might have available. its proven *extremely* problematic to use binaries of C++ libraries. C++ is much more susceptible than C to compile-time conditions. in addition, the dists have become increasingly incompatible due to compiler/library issues, and furthermore, they include code changes that are not in the original source ball, making it more difficult for me to track bug reports accurately. Tell me about it. It seems if a developer DOES want to provide binaries, you have to have several of the different dist's on your own system. Even different versions of the dists, and compile a binary for each of the distributions.That's one thing I don't like about many of them- they install libraries in different places other than the maintainers tar balls. I have gotten to the point where if/when I install a dist, I forget about installing anything X, or dev from them, and just install from tarballs. I guess thats a unix tradition, having several different incompatible distributions available. I was hoping linux could overcome this, but it isn't happening. ljp
Re: [linux-audio-dev] User Interface
At 22:04 7/25/2001 -0400, Paul Davis wrote: Paul Winkler writes: I was just wondering why people on this list seem to ignore glame, when the discussion comes upon waveeditors. [ ... ] Can't compile it without GNOME. I don't like that. I guess that makes me a luddite. Oh well. i *am* a luddite, and i don't like GNOME-dependent audio software either. To me, music is more important than any library ideologies. I wouldn't give a rats ass if software was made with QBASIC, as long as it compiles fairly easily (not alot of excessive library inclusion that I have to install every libtom-libdick-and-libharry libs just to compile it- because there no binaries available), functions well, and serves the purpose that I use it for. I'm willing to check out glame. I'll let ya know what I think about it. ljp
