Re: couple of problems
Alex, Thanks once again for your thoughts. As a small preface for what I am about to ask, I wish to say, the aspect of modern computing that really truly interests me, is the open architecture dimensions. It is, in short, to me, much like the inclusive democratic process, very necessary to constantly struggle, variously, appropriately as possible, to maintain in actual functionality possible realization. I have been mulling over some of the proposed paths you suggest... My one outstanding thought is simply this ( it may be simplistic, but it is a real question for me, now): With all due respect to the Ubuntu Studio team, who clearly have put in an a heroic effort in to building it, from what I understand you to say, seems like a good argument to not use Ubuntu Studio at all... as it seems rather like a monster which one cannot extract important parts themselves from except perhaps at the risk of totally falling apart. Why not just install the regular Ubuntu, build from there...? I just downloaded the CD install image, it was less than 700 mb (though I do realize it gets expanded once installed updated. Regards, Henry p.s., I have become reasonably functional in Windows XP. My sound card works... I can, with a minimal effort (though not in a too terribly sophisticated manner) do midi audio production , I use for notation composition Finale 2008 (I have been using a version of this program since about 1995). alex stone wrote: Henry, if you're in the mood to experiment, then i respectfully suggest you do a clean install of Hardy, rather than a overbuild. I've tried that, and got burnt. The Ubuntu desktop is a decent bit of craftsmanship, but if you're building a dedicated Audio box, then you have choices. Before you step in, have a think about using a lightweight desktop. What will happen here is you'll get a more sprightly working environment. When you install deb packages, and some GTK, or KDE dependencies are required, they'll generally get picked up in the repos, as part of a package install process. Some other observations i made: When i install up to date packages like Ingen, Patchage, etc, they tell me in the configure stage if my installed dependency packages are 'modern' enough. I found that is was easier, if a bit longer, to downloaded some required libs from source. (and that was the case with the example i gave of libsoundfile 1.0.18. Debian has this now as a deb package, but at the time, i installed it from source.) This process takes a while if you're new at linux like me, so patience is the order of the day. The same is true of great apps like linuxsampler, rosegarden, etc. Up to date versions from source have many new features, and with all of these, you can, from online repos, through SVN, CVS, GIT, and Waf, up date your source, then simply compile and reinstall. It doesn't take long to get into the rhythm of this, and i have found once a week works for me. Every Sunday evening, i go through my list, and update the apps, and recompile in a test partition. If they build without problems, then they get the same treatment in the 'real' partition. It seems clumsy, but it works, and doesn't leave with a broken app. (Not including the wonderful animal that is User Error.) You mentioned the RT kernel. In UbStudio, and other media oriented distros, there is (generally) an RT build for your kernel, waiting to be installed. That makes it easy for us to change a domestic use build to something a little more enthusastic, and of a lower latency, by nature of the RT kernel intent. In UbuntuHardy, there's an RT kernel ready to be installed, but in UBstudio, the RT kernel is already installed as part of the UBstudio framework. Jack. When i first started with Jack, it was an exercise in confusion. It took me a little while to figure it out, but when i did, it was easy to maintain, install, use, and tweak. To put it simply, ALSA sits in the kernel, and Jack is a layer above that. Jack will use the device you choose, be it Alsa, Freebob, OSS, or FFADO, and it creates a server framework with which you can cable multiple apps together in a 'live' environment. With an RT kernel, you can tweak Jack effectively to lower latency to that sweet spot that is a balance between extremely low latency and potential instability, usually referred to as Xruns, and a generous enough allowance in latency that gives you a reasonably live playing feedback and stability. Mileage with this varies from user to user according to hardware, and it's a case of tweak and try, tweak and try, until you find that spot that suits your working environment, and the type of music you want to write. (Some will want really low latency for live use, i.e. Sing along through a mike, or play an instrument, and others may be happy with a slightly higher latency as they do everything 'in the box.') Since i started using Jack, i'm still amazed at how versatile and powerful it is. The only limits are
Re: couple of problems
Henry, It may well be the case that i am indeed saying that. That's not to detract from the value of the UBStudio project at all. We all have different uses, and requirements. I have an orchestral writing requirement, so, for example, i'm chasing a lot of ports, and features that enhance the workflow of my particular process. The UBStudio team got me started in Linux, and as a straight install of Gutsy, with a few tweaks and updates to fix small challenges, it worked well. Since my initial trip through the Tux Stargate, i've learnt a little and been able to refine what it is i'm expecting. Kind of like knowing which question to ask i guess. UBS isn't a monster by any means, quite the contrary. But for updates beyond the UBS cycle, and a user driven intent of using brand new features to enhance the workflow, then there is the choice of building to a finer level, by source, selecting more specifically what it is we want to install, and importantly, install. As my still desperately modest knowledge grows, and given my specific requirements, i've learnt there is a big opportunity in a user specific build, tailored to a higher standard, for daily use. If you were a writer of pop, or hiphop music, my intended build could be totally unsuitable, for example, as i'd have apps and utilties installed, and configured to a different setup. So UBS performs a valuable service in getting a general audio centric OS in the hands of users who want to write, and record music, (Even pop, or hiphop. :) ) within the overall Ubuntu philosophy. For a unique build, we have the choice of a clean sheet, and build from there, app by app. As you wrote, it may be more useful to you to install vanilla Ubuntu, and add from there. It depends entirely on your usage requirements. I've offered just one perspective, that may or may not give you a view of what's possible, but practically, there are far cleverer chaps than me here, who could offer to you still another choice, or set of choices that are more suited, and almost certainly more intelligent than my perspective. You could say we have so many choices, that they.persuade the User to be 'more' sure of what he or she wants. There's been a few comments in this mailing list from those who just use a vanilla Ubuntu install, and are happy with that. Maybe a bit of a peruse could reveal something that will catch your eye. :) Alex. -- Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users
couple of problems
I am having troubles with my Ubuntu Studio 8.10: It came with Ardour ver. 2.5, aside from sound input problems (which I shall try to briefly address below), that version gave ( now again, gives) me problems. I believe I need to uninstall the earlier version to reinstall 2.7.1, is this correct... if so, I do not have the source folder to do a 'make uninstall' command, the synaptic package manager wants to take out 'ubuntustudio sound' if I go this route. Is Ardour 2.7.1 even compatible with Studio 8.10, if it is, I am wondering why was it not included in this system upgrade, including the latest version of jack qjackctl? What to do? There was, a while back, some discussion regarding Pulse audio ( possibly OSS), I do not wish to reignite that discussion (I think I do not wish to use them), but I do think some one mentioned taking Pulse Audio out (possible conflict w/ Alsa???). Is there some way to do this (or even determine if this might have some conflict with my sound card/alsa setup (including OSS?)? My sound card is MiaMidi (Echo Corp., manufactured). The sound preferences control panel also has a very confusing array of options... which I may need to get back on, that is if the possible solutions mentioned to the above are not resolving my no sound input problem... (by the way, the sound input I am trying to connect from (I say from, because I get sound out, just fine) is a s/pdif from my Yamaha 01v digital mixer. I do get internal sound to run some radio/sound players, the echomixer does seem to control the digital output of the Yamaha 01v, but no sound to the above mentioned programs ( also, not exclusive to Ardour) etc., but cd players are another matter, or should I say, puzzle for me at the moment; first things first). Please feel free to ask for any clarifications (I have been trying my best since my foray to Ubuntu, going on a year now to resolve with out adding to the oft heard battle cry: "I can't get no sound), etc. Any help would be, as usual, most appreciated. Henry -- Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list Ubuntu-Studio-users@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-users
Re: couple of problems
And i'll leave the flame suit in the locker as well, but i will say i don't think Pulse, which is a...domestic sound server, should be auto installed in what i consider a 'craftsman's' OS like Ubuntustudio. However some apps we use aren't built with Jack, and i can see why, given the continuity that Ubuntu seeks to maintain, pulse gets a viewing. But i maintain my view that Jack is a much better end result for a recording/graphic/mixing environment. That said, i faced the same situation as you when i graduated from Gutsy to Hardy, and i decided at the time to install a barebones setup with Hardy, and install as much as i could from up to date source, for precisely the reason you gave, of the multiple app dependencies that, when 1 app was removed, seemed to take a shedload of others with it. So i share the following based on my own modest experience: UbuntuStudio, like it's counterparts in the Ubuntu family, is based on stability, hence the lag in updates. Ubuntu isn't on its own with this, and it's worth remembering here that the UB team is a small one, and they cover a lot of ground maintaining the Ubuntu standard, for our benefit. We get good value as users, and we have the choice as to installation direction, either in Deb packages, or removing a handful of apps, and patiently reinstalling them from source, taking the chance that we'll be able to without too much angst. There are exceptions, Musescore being an obvious example, where user enthusiasm drove a fairly significant update, quickly. (Thanks Toby for doing this.) So I respectfully suggest here that you take a step back, grab a decent nip of cognac, and plan ahead. I wrote a list of apps that i use regularly based on experiments in workflow that i conducted over some period of time. After the list was done, and i'd collected all the source, SVN, CVS, Waf, and Git addresses, i then installed Hardy UbStudio, selecting NONE of the software install options for sound or graphic during the install process. The first thing i did when the install was finished, was remove pulse, through Synaptic. As i hadn't installed a shedload of apps, the 'damage' was minimal, and didn't pull much back out at all. I then scoured the bin, lib, share, and include directories for any vestiges of pulse, that may have got left behind in some obscure dependency requirement. I then updated Alsa, to a later build, installing only those modules i wanted. Then Jack. Then LAD/Ingen/Patchage, and LASH, including all the up to date libs and lib dev files from both ubstudio repos, and online. (libsoundfile being a good example here.) That's the sound server, and it's environment done, including any GUI's required. This a good place to check progress, and make sure the framework is sound, and reliable. (Good foundations, right?) After that it was LV2 and ladspa plugs. Then the main apps like Linuxsampler, Rosegarden, Ardour, Jconv, Aeolus, and so on, carefully reading install instructions, and taking note of any dependencies required, and importantly, their version numbers. I guess you could say this is a fairly methodical approach, but it's born out of clumsy user experience on my part, as i learnt to plan ahead, and not go through 1 step forward, and 2 sideways, trying to match dependencies, and not lose a handful of apps in the process. I got the message eventually. It's obvious to say this isn't windows, or simple out of the box stuff, but the reward for me was a lean, fast, powerful system, with ONLY the apps i wanted, and no bloat. (Within my very limited linux perception of what constitutes bloat.) You might well be happy with installing everything, and shuffling back and forth, and that's certainly more than suitable for those who like this approach. But after a lot of experiments, and associated mistakes, i finally get the wisdom of the modular mindset of linux, and the high percentage of satisfaction that comes with that. Henry, i have no idea of your linux skill level, or what you want out of your setup, so i only offer a personal experience of what works for me. I wouldn't go back to a 'install the lot then up date' approach, as the plan ahead and patiently install method, gives me a better result, with good stability, and the advantage of all those extra tools clever devs are building, and have done so in the last 6 months or so. I can't offer anything for your soundcard, as i'm using something else, but a trip to the ALSA site, and a browse in their soundcard matrix, may turn up something in changelogs that may give a clue to the current state of your particular module. So as far as Pulse goes, and only as my experience, i pulled it all out, and then followed Alsa and Jack instructions to setup a dedicated, or 'craftsman's' sound server. I find it easy now i know a little bit, and Jack's no bother at all. In my humble opinion, it smacks anything else i've ever used for ease of use, and i used to run 5 boxes, running the nightmare that was multiple
