e stagnation that inevitably occurs when
people are doing things for love, and little other motivation.
;
--
Jay Vaughan
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
raphics) in the new version. insmod gadget-audio for the
win, w00t!
;
--
Jay Vaughan
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
e for
the prototypes for which the code was written .. of course that was
all for naught in favour of hacky, ugly, proprietary solutions, (such
as "Total Integration"), but hey .. it can be done, realistically.
;
--
Jay Vaughan
___
Linu
they are designed
to solve so many of the issues that have risen, time and again. The
distinction between MIDI 'standard controllers' and 'manufacturer-
specific controllers' is also kablooey - we can thank Yamaha and
Roland hati
I have the time. It shouldn't be too difficult to adapt my
> patches
> for FC8.
>
I for one look forward to future progress in this regard .. MidiShare
is one lovely API/realtime operating system. ;)
;
--
Jay Vaughan
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
#x27;m guessing the hard-coded paths and the sub-tree Makefile scheme in
MidiShare presented a dilemna?
;
--
Jay Vaughan
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
On Jan 20, 2008, at 9:37 PM, Dave Phillips wrote:
> Thank you, Albert, I did compile it with your patches. :) It's working
> fine with Open Music now. I also had to build the Player and
> Recorder, I
> don't recall any trouble with them.
See? MidiShare works great!
y more people knew about it, and ditched the attempt
at re-inventing a well-rounded wheel, already. The MidiShare design
lends itself to integration with JACK, for example, very, very well ..
;
--
Jay Vaughan
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
t with you, get rid of it. :)
(Yes, I'm being troll'ish. But after 10 years of working in Linux,
and pro-Audio, I can truly say that the only solution to the dilemna
that I've seen actually be viable, is to wrap hardware around
ot my own fork) so .. maybe you want to describe them?
;
--
Jay Vaughan
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
>> Does this mean that pulseaudio is preferred to Jack?
>
> For desktop and user applications yes, for professional audio no.
>
There should be no distinction. The fact that there is, means that
the designs are broken. Audio should just plain work - period.
;
On Jan 20, 2008, at 11:11 AM, victor wrote:
> Does this mean that pulseaudio is preferred to Jack?
>
I currently perfer it, but I'm writing totally new software (for
OpenMoko), not trying to use existing software.
;
--
Jay Vaughan
__
> Basically we got swindled. ALSA has not been the utopia that
> it was claimed to be. ALSA sucks. It's not even documented."
>
pulseaudio + midishare == nirvana.
;
--
Jay Vaughan
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing l
hats what its there for.
;
--
Jay Vaughan
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
ation. They still may deliver on that
promise, though I have moved on (from them) and am instead focusing
on putting synth software on whatever hardware Linux is capable of
running on ..
--
;
Jay Vaughan
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audi
15 matches
Mail list logo
