Re: [ubuntu-studio-devel] "elementary OS" ... ONE Ubuntustudio user's thoughts ...

[ttoine]

I don't think we need to blacklist.

Maybe we should just recommend some hardware and software that we know are
using. Less is more.


Antoine THOMAS
Tél: 0663137906

2015-09-07 20:03 GMT+02:00 Ralf Mardorf :

> What about a 2 pages on the Ubuntu Studio website. One to black and
> whitelist plugins and another to balck and whitelist hardware.
>
> Plugin name:
> Host name
> Ubuntu release:
> Package version host:
> Package version plugin:
> Description:
>
> Hardware:
> Ubuntu Release:
> Kernel version:
> Firmware version:
> Description:
>
> Without the need to have an account to post such a report.
>
> --
> ubuntu-studio-devel mailing list
> ubuntu-studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel
>
-- 
ubuntu-studio-devel mailing list
ubuntu-studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel

Re: [ubuntu-studio-devel] "elementary OS" ... ONE Ubuntustudio user's thoughts ...

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Tue, 8 Sep 2015 10:51:46 +0200, ttoine wrote:
>I don't think we need to blacklist.
>
>Maybe we should just recommend some hardware and software that we know
>are using. Less is more.

The problem could be exotic revisions of hardware. Revision 1, 2, 3 and
4a might work, but revision 4b doesn't work for all purposes. This might
happen not that often. Right off the bat I remember a Microlink 56k
modem, a donation from a Windows user. I could use the modem for
Internet access, but for some usage it didn't work. Perhaps I couldn't
use it for fax, I don't remember, but I remember that revision 1, 2, 3
and 4 (or similar) were mentioned to work with Linux. It exposed that
revision 4 was split into an a and b version and neither Vendor nor the
Linux community cared about the chipset of this revision.

Regarding hardware recommendations it's important that we not only
mention hardware that might work for our individual usage.

My HDSPe's analog IOs can be used with long latency, but still getting
xruns, but anyway the sound quality is better than provided by most, if
not all prosumer cards. On the same machine it can be used with short
latency on a Windows install. On the Windows and a FreeBSD install
everything works, on Linux ADAT doesn't work with jackd.
Users often don't test all abilities. I for example never tested if
AES/EBU works. Another issue is what does work in wich version.

In general RME devices on other platforms support a lot of features
that aren't available for Linux.

What I absolutely can recommend is an Envy24 PCI device I own, but who
is interested in PCI devices?

Could I recommend the KORGnano KONTROL? Yesno! I own the old version.
For the old version a Linux application exists, but this app can't save
settings. AFAIK for new KORGnano KONTROLs no Linux app is available.

Blacklists are more important than Whitelists.

Often people ask for help to improve their mastering. They use all
kinds of EQ available by plugins. Excepted of Fons' parametric EQ, I
would blacklist all other Linux EQs I know, at least for audio
production. Most EQs simply don't do what they should do.

If you follow Linux audio mailing lists, you might have noticed that
each week at least one user reports a crash caused by plugins.
Since plugins are provided bundled by packages, it would be good to get
a list to

sudo rm list_of_plugins

It always takes hours, when I search a clean old school ping pong delay.
IIRC only one delay can provide it and it takes tricky settings to get
it. So even a whitelist should provide a description.

-- 
ubuntu-studio-devel mailing list
ubuntu-studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel

Re: [ubuntu-studio-devel] "elementary OS" ... ONE Ubuntustudio user's thoughts ...

[ttoine]

> It always takes hours, when I search a clean old school ping pong delay.
> IIRC only one delay can provide it and it takes tricky settings to get
> it. So even a whitelist should provide a description.
>
> That is why having sponsors or money would be great, so we can pay an
audio dev to create some plugins.
-- 
ubuntu-studio-devel mailing list
ubuntu-studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel

Re: [ubuntu-studio-devel] "elementary OS" ... ONE Ubuntustudio user's thoughts ...

[Len Ovens]

On Fri, 4 Sep 2015, C. F. Howlett wrote:

Perhaps I missed it, but I saw precious little consideration or discussion in 
this thread about what Ubuntustudio USERS want/need from a multimedia OS.


Want and need are two different things... But (and this maybe shows my 
lack in PR) to me the whole thread has been about the end user. All of my 
changes have been towards the end user... true, from my POV :)


However, I am very willing to make Studio's setup work for what those who 
understand the end user better than I do come up with. I do maybe have a 
bit of an understanding what can be done or not and how much work a 
feature whould take. Also if a feature request really belongs with Studio 
or upstream. Perhaps I might be able to help word an upstream request so 
that it makes sense to a coder then again.


--
Len Ovens
www.ovenwerks.net


--
ubuntu-studio-devel mailing list
ubuntu-studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel

Re: [ubuntu-studio-devel] "elementary OS" ... ONE Ubuntustudio user's thoughts ...

[Ralf Mardorf]

What about a 2 pages on the Ubuntu Studio website. One to black and
whitelist plugins and another to balck and whitelist hardware.

Plugin name:
Host name
Ubuntu release:
Package version host:
Package version plugin:
Description:

Hardware:
Ubuntu Release:
Kernel version:
Firmware version:
Description:

Without the need to have an account to post such a report.

-- 
ubuntu-studio-devel mailing list
ubuntu-studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel

Re: [ubuntu-studio-devel] "elementary OS" ... ONE Ubuntustudio user's thoughts ...

[ttoine]

Thanks a lot for your email.

Like often with open source projects, users are not enough in the center of
developer mind. We need to make it more easy for users to adopt Ubuntu
Studio !!!


Antoine THOMAS
Tél: 0663137906

2015-09-04 9:40 GMT+02:00 C. F. Howlett :

> Perhaps I missed it, but I saw precious little consideration or discussion
> in this thread about what Ubuntustudio USERS want/need from a multimedia OS.
>
> Ubuntu introduced me to the concept of "using" a computer outside of what
> Windows could do.  Free software?  Online support?  I can actually do cool
> things?  Consider me sold!  And a few years after I first experienced
> Ubuntu, Canonical released Ubuntustudio!? Winning!  I had SO MUCH fun doing
> all kinds of multimedia things that would otherwise have been prohibitively
> expensive under my other OS, and I've happily dualbooted Ubuntustudio since
> its first release.
>
> In a universe of Linux choices, including several multimedia options, I've
> stayed with Ubuntustudio for many reasons, not least being the multiple and
> dynamic support options.  I've not experienced any of the purported
> downsides of Canonical "ownership" of Ubuntustudio.
>
> I have seen and tested other distros.  Should Ubuntustudio die, I have
> selected a well-known alternate, but I truly hope it never comes to that.
>
> What I WOULD like to see is concerted efforts to improve, proof and polish
> the existing product.  I fully support directing the bulk of the efforts
> towards the LTS releases.  I suspect ALL users would enthusiastically
> welcome improved and updated documentation of the various workflows.
> Finally, updating the list of "verified Ubuntu friendly" hardware should be
> ongoing.
>
> As always, nothing I have written should be construed as discouraging
> anyone from creating another OS.  It's just that THIS user would almost
> certainly have no interest in it.
>
> Thanks for reading.  YMMV.
>
> --
> ubuntu-studio-devel mailing list
> ubuntu-studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel
>
-- 
ubuntu-studio-devel mailing list
ubuntu-studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel

Re: [ubuntu-studio-devel] "elementary OS" ... ONE Ubuntustudio user's thoughts ...

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Fri, 4 Sep 2015 15:40:54 +0800, C. F. Howlett wrote:
>I had SO MUCH fun doing all kinds of multimedia things that would
>otherwise have been prohibitively expensive under my other OS, and
>I've happily dualbooted Ubuntustudio since its first release.

That's a good evidence that the Linux public relation works. This is
what many Linux users claim, but actually there's a huge scene for free
as in beer software for Windows too, especially for audio and that's the
reason that so many people wish to get native Windows VSTs to work,
since they miss a lot of high quality free as in beer plugins, let a
lone that much software is multi-platform, e.g. GIMP.

I don't like Apple and Microsoft and excepted of a tablet PC (an iPAD),
I got for free as in beer, I don't use it. There are good reasons to be
against those companies, but costs, available free or inexpensive art
applications, user base aren't those reasons.

Regarding the idea of making a new independent audio distro, I would
prefer an Ubuntu independent distro, assumed the user base would be huge
enough. I'm against small distros with small user bases.

A new independent distro would cause additional issues. Ubuntu has got
a clear-cut course, this is an advantage, because making a policy about
the core architecture of a distro is much work, would come with much
bikeshedding, flame wars, IOW it would waste much time.

Thinking of the averaged user, beginner, it makes sense to stay with
Ubuntu. To get something more powerful does mean to restrict some
things, but this is hard to do for a huge community, regarding the
different thinking of the individuals. OTOH Ubuntu has it's
restrictions too. Anyway, balancing pros and cons is easy.

My multi-boot is Arch Linux and Ubuntu. Arch's clear-cut course is to
be _not_ user-friendly, Arch is user-centric. "[Arch Linux] is what you
make it."

IMO to provide a good OOTB experience it's good to stay with Ubuntu. To
avoid the bad side effects I wished there would public relation for
diversity. There's no need for an oath of allegiance, to stay with one
distro, one WM/DE etc. forever. Unfortunately Linux has got a religious
aura.

IMO Ubuntu/Debian, Suse etc. are good for averaged needs, such as
mailing, browsing, office work, for beginners and power users and for
special needs, such as audio work those distros are good for beginners
and perhaps power users too, but power users also can switch to other
distros that are more DIY based.

My last bikeshedding comment to this thread:

The goal to provide a multimedia distro that automagically works with
everybody's hardware and that ships with an OOTB to use default
environment is easier to provide, when being an Ubuntu flavour, then
when being an independent distro.

Something that should appeal to be independent, tuned, optimised,
requires interest of the individual user and can't be the goal of an
OOTB approach distro.

Regards,
Ralf

-- 
ubuntu-studio-devel mailing list
ubuntu-studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel

Re: [ubuntu-studio-devel] "elementary OS" ... ONE Ubuntustudio user's thoughts ...

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Fri, 04 Sep 2015 13:59:51 -0400, lukefro...@hushmail.com wrote:
>For something totally tuned and optimized to one system and one user,
>the usual recommendation is something like Gentoo.

IIRC regarding a poll Ubuntu and Arch are the most used distros by Linux
audio users, so I would recommend Arch Linux instead of Gentoo. This
wasn't the reason that I decided to use Arch instead of Gentoo, but at
least is something to consider, when recommending a distro. Btw. I
don't know if the poll at LAU/LAD does represent reality.

However, this kind of distro is definitively nothing I would recommend
a musician without computer knowledge. Ubuntu likely fits better. 

Regards,
Ralf

-- 
ubuntu-studio-devel mailing list
ubuntu-studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel

Re: [ubuntu-studio-devel] "elementary OS" ... ONE Ubuntustudio user's thoughts ...

[lukefromdc]

For something totally tuned and optimized to one system and one user, the
usual recommendation is something like Gentoo. probably better for my uses
but no way in hell I'd want to have to tech support this for someone else. For 
those who are not hackers, Ubuntu-based distros still have a lot going for them,
such as easy online search for help due to the large userbase.

What forced me to Debian was fears that the Snappy transition would screw up 
running a system that is never reinstalled, only update continuously from the 
alpha or rolling release of the day. That sort of thing has no bearing on what 
is
suitable for someone to download and install in the place of their Windows 
install
that got flagged by their ISP for sending spam after being botted.

On 9/4/2015 at 10:43 AM, "Ralf Mardorf"  wrote:
>
>On Fri, 4 Sep 2015 15:40:54 +0800, C. F. Howlett wrote:
>>I had SO MUCH fun doing all kinds of multimedia things that would
>>otherwise have been prohibitively expensive under my other OS, and
>>I've happily dualbooted Ubuntustudio since its first release.
>
>That's a good evidence that the Linux public relation works. This 
>is
>what many Linux users claim, but actually there's a huge scene for 
>free
>as in beer software for Windows too, especially for audio and 
>that's the
>reason that so many people wish to get native Windows VSTs to work,
>since they miss a lot of high quality free as in beer plugins, let 
>a
>lone that much software is multi-platform, e.g. GIMP.
>
>I don't like Apple and Microsoft and excepted of a tablet PC (an 
>iPAD),
>I got for free as in beer, I don't use it. There are good reasons 
>to be
>against those companies, but costs, available free or inexpensive 
>art
>applications, user base aren't those reasons.
>
>Regarding the idea of making a new independent audio distro, I 
>would
>prefer an Ubuntu independent distro, assumed the user base would 
>be huge
>enough. I'm against small distros with small user bases.
>
>A new independent distro would cause additional issues. Ubuntu has 
>got
>a clear-cut course, this is an advantage, because making a policy 
>about
>the core architecture of a distro is much work, would come with 
>much
>bikeshedding, flame wars, IOW it would waste much time.
>
>Thinking of the averaged user, beginner, it makes sense to stay 
>with
>Ubuntu. To get something more powerful does mean to restrict some
>things, but this is hard to do for a huge community, regarding the
>different thinking of the individuals. OTOH Ubuntu has it's
>restrictions too. Anyway, balancing pros and cons is easy.
>
>My multi-boot is Arch Linux and Ubuntu. Arch's clear-cut course is 
>to
>be _not_ user-friendly, Arch is user-centric. "[Arch Linux] is 
>what you
>make it."
>
>IMO to provide a good OOTB experience it's good to stay with 
>Ubuntu. To
>avoid the bad side effects I wished there would public relation for
>diversity. There's no need for an oath of allegiance, to stay with 
>one
>distro, one WM/DE etc. forever. Unfortunately Linux has got a 
>religious
>aura.
>
>IMO Ubuntu/Debian, Suse etc. are good for averaged needs, such as
>mailing, browsing, office work, for beginners and power users and 
>for
>special needs, such as audio work those distros are good for 
>beginners
>and perhaps power users too, but power users also can switch to 
>other
>distros that are more DIY based.
>
>My last bikeshedding comment to this thread:
>
>The goal to provide a multimedia distro that automagically works 
>with
>everybody's hardware and that ships with an OOTB to use default
>environment is easier to provide, when being an Ubuntu flavour, 
>then
>when being an independent distro.
>
>Something that should appeal to be independent, tuned, optimised,
>requires interest of the individual user and can't be the goal of 
>an
>OOTB approach distro.
>
>Regards,
>Ralf
>
>-- 
>ubuntu-studio-devel mailing list
>ubuntu-studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
>Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
>https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel


-- 
ubuntu-studio-devel mailing list
ubuntu-studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel