On Fri, 27 Aug 2004, Lee Revell wrote:
> Why do we need to /dev/null messages from nonsubscribers then?
because its 100% effective unlike the other methods.
if they cant be arsed to subscribe then their messages arent all that
important.
-Dan
On Fri, 27 Aug 2004, Lee Revell wrote:
> On Fri, 2004-08-27 at 08:15, Clemens Ladisch wrote:
> > Messages from non-subscribers are routed to /dev/null because there
> > isn't a moderator.
> Is this really necessary in this day and age?
Yes, it is.
> The spam problem is solved, it has been for a w
On Fri, 27 Aug 2004, Arnold Krille wrote:
> On Friday 27 August 2004 00:08, Eric Dantan Rzewnicki wrote:
> > 3)Does it matter what ieee1394 interface I get, or are they all
> > basically the same as long as there's kernel support for them?
> This was indeed discused recently: It doesn't matter at a
On Mon, 16 Aug 2004, Lee Revell wrote:
> Don't need to. The email, now archived all around the world, is proof
> of prior art.
Theyll just make a tweak here, a tweak there (some technical detail
overlooked in the email, but obviously critical to its implementation).
Look at what happened with r
On Mon, 16 Aug 2004, John Check wrote:
> That was exactly what I was thinking when the penny dropped for me.
> Originally I was thinking of offload the softsynths, but FX are expensive too.
> The ideal is to make a total system, but make it modular, and give it the
> ability to connect with exis
On Sun, 15 Aug 2004, Steve Harris wrote:
> But if youre going to do that, why use ethernet? You'd need dedicated NICs
> and switches, so you may as well use firewire, which has dedicated
> realtime channels, more bandwidth and doesnt require switching. 400meg
> Firewire cards are down to about 7 or
On Fri, 2 Jul 2004, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
> On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 18:18:41 +0200
> Benno Senoner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Eric what do you think ? can something like that be coded efficiently
> > using SSE/SSE2 ?
> Probably not. There are some algorithms which simply can't be vectorized.
On 22 Jun 2004, Michael Ost wrote:
> On Mon, 2004-06-21 at 23:20, Benno Senoner wrote:
> > we could divide 400 bytes into 100 midi events consisting in:
> > 1 byte timestamp relative to the audio fragment (0-127) , this would
> > limit the fragmentsize to max 256 frames
> > 3 byte midi payload
> A
On Tue, 9 Sep 2003, Ismael Valladolid Torres wrote:
> Blocking rima-tde.net, maybe you will be blocking almost all spanish
> DSL users, including myself. I have my own DSL connection, and SMTP
> running on my computer. I could spam the entire world without using my
> provider's smarthost. Please, t
On Mon, 8 Sep 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> [ criminal scam deleted ]
It's time to just block rima-tde.net, they don't care about their spam and
they won't do anything about the nigerian criminals infesting their
networks.
-Dan
--
[-] Omae no subete no kichi wa ore no mono da. [-]
On Fri, 18 Jul 2003, Denis de Leeuw Duarte wrote:
> So, to wrap it all up: Paul, while you have every right to make any request
> regarding the usage of your software, please be aware of the fact that, to
> atheists (incidentally, that is my camp) your choice of words is rather
> offensive. If y
On Wed, 4 Jun 2003, Paul Davis wrote:
> >>keep in mind yamaha's announcement that they would be using linux in
> >>most of their keyboards starting within a year or so.
> >I heard about this announcement as a rumoure but haven't seen
> >anything 'official' on it. However if the mighty Paul Davis
On Fri, 21 Mar 2003, David Olofson wrote:
> On Thursday 20 March 2003 23.08, Paul Davis wrote:
> > >Anyway, I believe this goes for a bunch of other cards as well, so
> > > no news here, really.
> > there are plans to try to generalize the "firmware" loading for
> > ALSA drivers to load stuff from
On Thu, 15 Aug 2002, Dave Phillips wrote:
> WRT Propellerheads: David indicated that he had written to them
> regarding any possible copyright infringement. They responded by
> claiming that ReBorn's GUI does violate their copyright.
You can't copyright a GUI! Apple learned this the hard way. T
On 4 Jul 2002, Bob Ham wrote:
> Undoubtedly I can. I may even be able to have 16 96/24 channels each
> way. But I doubt any of them will let me send to or receive from an amp
> or guitar or mixer or effects box or synth or .
Do you have a magic-enabled guitar or mixer or effects box or syn
On 3 Jul 2002, Bob Ham wrote:
> Speak for yourself :P I still want to hack a magic stack. If gibson
> sue me, they sue me. Doesn't affect the fact that I'll be able to stick
> a £6 NIC in my machine and easily be able to shove 'nuff audio data
> through it :)
you dont need magic to do that. th
On Wed, 3 Jul 2002, Mark Rages wrote:
> Is anyone here working on an open-source implementation of MaGIC
> (http://magic.gibson.com)?
> There was some discussion about the legal situation a while back, but
> it is cool to use it in opensource products?
> On the web page it mentions a 10-year roy
On Mon, 1 Jul 2002, Martijn Sipkema wrote:
> I sure hope that Emagic will now be willing to give the specifications
> on their AMT protocol for MIDI interfaces.
Apple has bee buying companies left and right, and the killing the windows
products (or killing the product altogether, to integrate th
On Thu, 20 Jun 2002, Paul Davis wrote:
> >I just tripped over this while browsing some other products:
> >http://www.digigram.com/products/getinfo.htm?prod_key=11100
> their website seems messed up. any attempt to get this URL either
> directly or via a click on the main product index results in a
FWIW here is the gibson patent 6,353,169:
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1='6353169'.WKU.&OS=PN/6353169&RS=PN/6353169
-Dan
--
[-] Omae no subete no kichi wa ore no mono da. [-]
I just tripped over this while browsing some other products:
http://www.digigram.com/products/getinfo.htm?prod_key=11100
Digigram claims its patented. Wonder what they are claiming patent on?
USPTO database searches come up with only 4 patents listed to digigram,
and nothing regarding audio ov
On Tue, 18 Jun 2002, Paul Davis wrote:
> VST does not relate to the patent; Halion does, and Steinberg have
> refused even semi-private comment on how they avoided patent issues.
Probably because they haven't. But as long as they keep it in binary
closed source, noone will ever know they are vio
On 12 Jun 2002, Bob Ham wrote:
> On Wed, 2002-06-12 at 21:18, Dan Hollis wrote:
> > I talked to gibson directly about magic. They stated it's patented and
> > they won't give permission for open source implementation.
> I wonder what they have patents on, and whether
On 12 Jun 2002, Bob Ham wrote:
> On Wed, 2002-06-12 at 17:25, Men Muheim wrote:
> > Has anyone ever thought of implementing a library for transfer of audio
> > across networks?
> Indeed I have and it is, in fact, what I plan to be spending most of
> this summer working on. I don't know if you've
On Tue, 11 Jun 2002, Frank Neumann wrote:
> I had visited the booth of Egosys at this year's Musikmesse in
> Frankfurt, Germany, and asked for Linux driver support. I got a business
> card from one of the developers, exchanged a few mails, and then
> received some driver source for the (slightly o
On Tue, 11 Jun 2002, Vincent Touquet wrote:
> There is some bad news lurking too,
> let's hope this posting:
> http://sourceforge.net/forum/forum.php?thread_id=687636&forum_id=164360
> doesn't reflect the authors real intentions for the future ... :(
if they choose windoze purely for PHB/marketi
On Tue, 4 Jun 2002, Tom Browne wrote:
> > According to these specs, my athlon XP 1600+ has a typical power
> > consumption of 56.3W. A 1.6G pentium 4 has a spec of 60.8W.
> Why compare to the old pre-0.13 chips?
> Celeron 1.2A is rated at 30W P4 1.6A is rated at 38.7W.
These are incredibly
On Tue, 21 May 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> They are not based on Envy24 (ICE1712) chipset, they use ASIC from some other
>company who's name I can't remember (I guess it's desgined by Egosys anyway).
>Audiotrak Maya is practically the same card that comes with the Steinberg Project
>Pack.
On Tue, 26 Mar 2002, wrote:
> [... spam deleted ...]
Can the list manager PLEASE set the ML so it doesn't strip From: headers?
It makes it impossible to track the source of the poster's IP to report
him for spamming. (it also makes it very convenient because harassers and
abusers are effective
On Mon, 11 Mar 2002, Jussi Laako wrote:
> > and a lot of extra CPU cycles when all the high end applications use
> > non-interleaved data so that editing is easy.
> You can effectively process interleaved data with SIMD as you can
> parallelize operations for 2-4 channels.
This leaves all the oth
On Sat, 9 Mar 2002, Ivica Bukvic wrote:
> It is no rocket science to figure out that Alsa is the way to go, and I
> am all for it. But one thing I do not comprehend is why is the
> user-space driver better than the kernel space one?
It is simply 100,000,000 times more flexible than a kernel space
On Tue, 5 Mar 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> (Has anyone started the ALSA usb project yet?)
Nope. Noone in ALSA team has USB audio hardware, I think...
-Dan
--
[-] Omae no subete no kichi wa ore no mono da. [-]
On Wed, 27 Feb 2002, wrote:
> [...] spam deleted ...
I really wish the ML wouldn't strip the headers, so that we can report the
individual user posting the spam to their ISP.
As it is now, the majordomo settings on l-a-d anonymize the sender so they
can abuse the ML without fear of being repo
On Fri, 18 Jan 2002, Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
> Dan Hollis writes:
> > On Tue, 15 Jan 2002, Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
> > > IANAL, but as near as I can tell the USPTO has almost completely given
> > > up on their responsibility to actually evaluate patents before
> >
On Tue, 15 Jan 2002, Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
> IANAL, but as near as I can tell the USPTO has almost completely given
> up on their responsibility to actually evaluate patents before
> granting them. The philosophy seems to be that they'll let anything
> go through, and if somebody doesn't like it le
On Mon, 14 Jan 2002, Steve Harris wrote:
> Shurely you would be better to design something that communicated with the
> host via. USB or Firewire, you don't have as many electrical problems and
> USB and firewire comms chips are cheap and plentiful.
What's wrong with 100mb ethernet? That has even
On Sun, 13 Jan 2002, Jussi Laako wrote:
> Finally I got the my system back to 2.4.12-ac3-ll level latencies and
> smoothness and it's in fact performing significantly better.
> See http://www.pp.song.fi/~visitor/latencytest5/3x256.html for latency
> results. (Sound driver is OSS 3.9.5f)
Does ALSA
Dunno if I mentioned this already, but I received response back from
Gibson and they said they hold patents on MAGiC.
-Dan
On Wed, 9 Jan 2002, Tim Goetze wrote:
> we had a similar story to this one on alsa-dev a few months ago when
> the ice1712 driver turned out to fail with the audiophile 24/96, and
> m-man (the us headquarter that time) refused to release any
> information to anyone except Jaroslav from ALSA, but h
On Wed, 2 Jan 2002, DeMeo, William wrote:
> "David Gerard Matthews Jr." wrote:
> > I run a really stripped-down Blackbox when doing audio work. For
> > general tasks (websurfing, etc.) I usually use Gnome, but as you pointed
> > out, it's way too bloated for audio (and KDE is even worse). Some pe
On Tue, 18 Dec 2001, Jussi Laako wrote:
> Dan Hollis wrote:
> > On Tue, 18 Dec 2001, Jussi Laako wrote:
> > > Where can I download hardware specs for the RME Hammerfall series so
> > > that I can write some own code for it? It's not available at ALSA site.
>
On Tue, 18 Dec 2001, Jussi Laako wrote:
> Dan Hollis wrote:
> > Tell us how to cleanly fit multichannel cards eg RME or ice1712 into this
> > OSS model.
> I don't have any problems with my Delta 1010 using OSS. I've been using it
> all the ways I need. What _is_
On Mon, 17 Dec 2001, Paul Davis wrote:
> At least in Windows you can enter single thread blocking routine to
> wait for any kind of event (file descriptor ready, semaphore, message,
> signal). Under POSIX you can't do this, and you have to use a separate
> thread for every type of event. How's tha
On Tue, 18 Dec 2001, Jussi Laako wrote:
> Btw. OSS follows the original unix idea and POSIX rule of "everything is a
> file" very well. It works with open()/read()/write()/close() as the other
> devices do. And it's controlled via ioctl() as it should.
Tell us how to cleanly fit multichannel card
On Tue, 18 Dec 2001, Jussi Laako wrote:
> Where can I download hardware specs for the RME Hammerfall series so that I
> can write some own code for it? It's not available at ALSA site. Why?
The same reason andre hedrick doesn't make available the chipset
documentation for ALI or serverworks sout
On Wed, 5 Dec 2001, David Matthews wrote:
> It would be easy enough to ask. They've got an email address for potential
> developers and a reference board (basically an ethernet card with an
> onboard sharc DSP chip) available.
Their email bounced, and an inspection of dns records reveals they ha
On Sun, 9 Dec 2001, Paul Davis wrote:
> http://aes.harmony-central.com/111AES/Content/Wave_Digital/PR/Microwave.html
> no linux in sight, obviously :(
It's a repackaged saintsong "cappuccino" pc. It's only about $700. It's
been around for quite some time actually. Wave Digital didn't invent it.
On Thu, 6 Dec 2001, Tim Goetze wrote:
> though i'm yet to find dsp that can equal my tube collection.
Well yes, modeling the harmonic distortions you get from tubes is pretty
hard. But not everyone wants that :-)
At one point I considered making a "15-minute tube warmup" filter :-)
-Dan
--
[-]
On Wed, 5 Dec 2001, David Matthews wrote:
> --On Wednesday, December 05, 2001 1:08 PM -0800 Dan Hollis
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:r>
> > My only concern is if it is patent encumbered or not. The PDF doesn't make
> > that clear.
> It would be easy enough to ask
On Wed, 5 Dec 2001, Steve Harris wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 01:08:56PM -0800, Dan Hollis wrote:
> > I don't know of any network card which *wouldn't* be able to send such
> > frames. I don't think any card will have problems with it.
> I think the probl
On Wed, 5 Dec 2001, Steve Harris wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 04:16:07PM -0800, Neil Brideau wrote:
> > http://magic.gibson.com/specification.html
> Interesting. Is a domestic network card under linux capable of obeying
> this spec?
I don't know of any network card which *wouldn't* be able to
On Tue, 4 Dec 2001, DAVID G MATTHEWS wrote:
> I just saw this on slashdot (and it actually looks interesting/useful):
> http://www.techtv.com/news/culture/story/0,24195,3363342,00.html
> 64 channels on cat5! Ethernet ports on a strat!
... "latency will be horrible", etc etc
the whining begins..
On Sat, 20 Oct 2001, Phil Kerr wrote:
> DCMP3 - MP3 Audio Player for the Dreamcast
> Current Version: 1.3
> Released: 04-Mar-2001
> By: strat76
> Info: Burn this to a disc along with your MP3 audio
> files and lis
On Fri, 19 Oct 2001, Maarten de Boer wrote:
> It's only an idea, but I wanted to share it with you.
> Add a midi interface to the Dreamcast, and you could
> build a great synthesizer.
Actually I think dreamcast as standalone OGG vorbis player would be cool.
Make an ISO anyone can burn to boot on
On Fri, 19 Oct 2001, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> I heard that dremacast uses an extra ARM chip for audio
> processing.. Anyway it's quite interesting.
> Hmm, wait, how about ps2 linux, then?
Developing on PS2 is painful slow, and not well supported yet.
Also, PS2+PS2-linux is quite expensive... dream
On Tue, 16 Oct 2001, Steve Harris wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 16, 2001 at 04:46:33PM +0300, Juhana Sadeharju wrote:
> > In extreme, people would have to design a new free surround format
> > and offer the decoder to amplifier manufacturers.
> What about ambisonics? I think the decoder hardware is expensi
On Mon, 15 Oct 2001, Fred Gleason wrote:
> You might also want to check out Digigram's PCXPocket product line. Last
> I spoke to them (about a year ago) they had no Linux support but were
> considering adding it. http://www.digigram.com/
That is interesting because when we last spoke to them (a
On Fri, 21 Sep 2001, Patrick Shirkey wrote:
> I'm sending this to you because the consequences of not doing so may
> have a severe effect on the future of Linux Audio.
Uh, no.
Stop spreading these goddamn chain letters.
-Dan
On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, Sander van Zoest wrote:
> I am not sure what to do about it, but I am not surprised and I hope
> there is something we can do to fight this and get our rights back.
Go for the criminal prosecution angle. There is a pretty clear case of
price fixing among the distributors and
On Mon, 9 Jul 2001, Tom Pincince wrote:
> > How do I access all of the channels of my Hoontech DSP24 II?
> The DSP24 II uses the Envy 24 i/o controller chip, ICE1712. It is used
> in a number of digital i/o cards, such as the midiman delta series.
> ALSA supports the delta cards. The DSP24 is cu
On Fri, 25 May 2001, Steve Harris wrote:
> Sorry, I thought ATM refered to the fibre too. There *are* a lot of people
> throwing out ATM kit, because Newbridge's ATM customers have found
> themselves with unsupported hardware, and the company that bought
> Newbridge (can't remember who) is virtual
On Fri, 25 May 2001, Steve Harris wrote:
> On Fri, May 25, 2001 at 03:07:08AM -0700, Dan Hollis wrote:
> > On Fri, 25 May 2001, Steve Harris wrote:
> > > On Fri, May 25, 2001 at 10:15:05AM +0100, Iain Sandoe wrote:
> > > > If you want to network low-latency audio I
On Fri, 25 May 2001, Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
>I think that collision resolving is part of the ethernet (physical access layer),
>so
>UDP packets always get sent without collision _once_. When they get dropped by a
>router
>who is flooded eg., then the packet dissapears of course... but p
On Fri, 25 May 2001, Steve Harris wrote:
> On Fri, May 25, 2001 at 10:15:05AM +0100, Iain Sandoe wrote:
> > If you want to network low-latency audio I think you must find a network
> > solution with a reliable physical layer.
> Hear, hear. Ethernet just isn't designed to send low latency streams.
On Wed, 23 May 2001, Paul Davis wrote:
> >I get 150-250usec (yes, microseconds) roundtrip through 100mbps switch.
> is this on a previously quiescent connection (TCP or UDP) ? my
> impression is that once things get rolling round trip times are pretty
> good, but that moving a packet or two when t
On Wed, 23 May 2001, Jay Ts wrote:
> I'm just wondering, since I'm getting a .7 ms roundtrip time when
> pinging my other Linux system here, which is connected to this one
> by 100 Mbps ethernet through a 100 Mbps switch. Is that number
> for real? Because it seems almost too good.
I get 150-25
66 matches
Mail list logo
