Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Linux and audio pro

Last response: in Home Audio
Share
Anonymous
May 28, 2005 8:52:44 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Hi

I'm actually thinking about a project of home studio, linux based.

Do you think Ardour could be a serious choice for a personal but
"serious" home studio ?
:
Linux agnula
Ardour +
Delta 1010 or RME Hammerfall
soundcraft...
Fostex D 80
etc...
regards :) 

More about : linux audio pro

Anonymous
May 28, 2005 8:52:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <429885e7$0$25062$8fcfb975@news.wanadoo.fr> perso@lapo.fr writes:

> I'm actually thinking about a project of home studio, linux based.
>
> Do you think Ardour could be a serious choice for a personal but
> "serious" home studio ?

Only for the serious Linux fanatic who'd rather build his own
operating system from a kit and keep adding to it weekly than buy a
Microsoft or Apple product. But then, aren't all Linux users like
that?

When will you have time to do any recording, or make any music?

--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
Anonymous
May 28, 2005 8:52:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"perso" <perso@lapo.fr> wrote in message
news:429885e7$0$25062$8fcfb975@news.wanadoo.fr...
> Hi
>
> I'm actually thinking about a project of home studio, linux based.
>
> Do you think Ardour could be a serious choice for a personal but
> "serious" home studio ?
> :
> Linux agnula

You should talk to the people who use it or work on it to find out the
viability there. Are you a programmer? Are you into synthesis? How familiar
are you with Linux? I'm asking because you might be better off with
something like Mandrake, and doing some customization.

> Ardour +

It's being debugged in preparation for coming out of Beta. It's taking a
long, long time. You shouldn't use Beta software for things you care about.

> Delta 1010 or RME Hammerfall

By all accounts the drivers are solid.

Whatever you do, I'd strongly recommend NOT keeping your DAW on the
internet, after you build it. Build it once and leave it alone. Make music.

jb
Related resources
Anonymous
May 28, 2005 8:52:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

It really depends on how you're using it and how important your
recordings are. For personal stuff it's definitely usable; sound
quality and usability of the tools are no issue.

However personally I'm not (yet) trusting it for live recording of
paying clients. If you have a recoverable crash in a home recording
situation, nothing is lost; of you have one during recording a live
concert, you lose the concert.

In my current setup, I'm mostly using Linux for recording the final
mixdown (which I do with a digital console), editing it and burning it
to CD, but not yet for realtime critical stuff.

Bit by bit things are getting more and more usable, and I do think you
can get quite far with just Linux. It's definitely not the easiest way,
but a bit of persistence goes a long way. I've had ardour crashing on
me more than once but that might be related to my unstable jackd setup
back then.

GNU wavecleaner does the trick of denoising (always make a backup of
your original before denoising, cause gwc is unstable as hell but it
does its work well otherwise). For normalizing etc I use rezound and
audacity, so personally I don't really have a big need for using
ardour. If I want to do any composing, my tools of choice are usually
soundtracker, or if I need something a bit more pro I use rosegarden
for a sequencer and fluidsynth/zynaddsubfx as softsynths (and aeolus if
I need a realistic sounding pipe organ).

Best of luck and keep us posted!
Anonymous
May 28, 2005 8:52:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.misc (More info?)

Linux?
Do you want to create music or twiddle with your computer?
Linux currently has at least 5 different sound servers, none of which
talk to each other. If you are interested in low latency you will have
to run Jack which is supposedly a low latency sound server that uses
ALSA (one of the Linux sound systems) to interface with your audio
hardware. The entire thing is one gigantic mess that requires endless
care and feeding.
How do I know?
I tried to do the very same thing about a month ago and finally gave up
because I found myself spending more time trying to make things work
than creating music. And before the Linux loonatics crawl out of mix, I
use Linux for my webserver and all my day to day operations and for
that, Linux is preferred over Windows in my opinion.
As for programs, your biggest problem is going to be QUALITY plugins.
There are many plugins that come with say Ardour (a decent program) but
they can't match the quality of even the most basic Windows/Mac plugin
in general.
Ardour is highly unstable and has an interface that reminds me of Logic
1.0.
Terrible!
Audacity is not a bad program, but it is no SoundForge.

If I were you, and I am assuming you are on a budget (why else would
anyone consider Linux for professional audio?) I would try N-Tracks and
scour the net for free plugins, many of which are very good.
If you are not on a budget, Sony was recently running a special on
SoungForge 8.0 for $99.00 and nothing Linux has can come close.

However, if your time is not worth anything and you don't mind losing
clients or at least having them laugh at you, try dynabolic for a
decent audio based distribution.

It will allow you to try things before hosing your entire system by
installing Linux.

http://lab.dyne.org/DyneBolic

You might also want to look up a person who calls himself "flatfish"
and resides in the Linux discussion groups.

One final note, the Linux quacks will come out of the woodwork telling
you how great Linux is and for many applications that is true. However
digital audio studio work is NOT one of them and also understand most
of them are programmers not musicians so their view on this is tilted
that way. They will also tell you how major Hollywood production
houses, ie:p ixar, have moved to Linux which is also true. Ask them when
you can purchase Pixar's grown in house software and also what on earth
does that have to do with a project studio?

Good luck
Marko





perso ha escrito:
> Hi
>
> I'm actually thinking about a project of home studio, linux based.
>
> Do you think Ardour could be a serious choice for a personal but
> "serious" home studio ?
> :
> Linux agnula
> Ardour +
> Delta 1010 or RME Hammerfall
> soundcraft...
> Fostex D 80
> etc...
> regards :) 
Anonymous
May 28, 2005 8:52:45 PM

Archived from groups: comp.os.linux.advocacy,rec.audio.pro,comp.os.linux.misc (More info?)

They appear out of the woodwork like worms looking for a place to feed.
I'm convinced these Linux screwballs sit in waiting, just looking to
defend Linux.
Notice he hasn't said a word about your topic.
Sadly, this is a typical Linux screwball who can't see anything but
Linux and will lead unsuspecting noobs down the garden path in an
attempt to get them to switch to Linux.
These zealots unfortunately do much more harm than good.
Marko


Ku Karlovsky ha escrito:
> [rec.audio.pro and comp.os.linux.misc unfloundered]
>
> "Marko Shindler" <flatko_shindler@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Linux?
>
> Yes, Flatfish. Linux.
Anonymous
May 28, 2005 8:52:45 PM

Archived from groups: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.misc,rec.audio.pro (More info?)

And here we have another Linux screwball who obviously has never used
any type of professional digital audio programs, but yet feels the need
to jump in and make baseless accusations without ever providing any
source for his information.
This is also typical of the Linux screwball.

See what I mean about Linux?
If you went to a Cubase group and asked about Sonar, you might get one
or two zealots attacking you, but when you get involved with Linux, and
tell it like it is, IOW in this case Linux is an extremely poor choice,
the kooks will come out of the woodwork looking to save the good name
of Linux.

Just remember that since Linux isn't a company so to speak, these are
the same people that you will be depending upon for support when the
program fails to perform, which is typical.

FWIW I got Ardour/Audacity/Jack working fine, I just didn't like the
programs. They were unstable, had horrid plugins and awful interfaces.

Marko



Kier ha escrito:
> On Sat, 28 May 2005 13:36:58 -0700, Marko Shindler wrote:
>
> > Linux?
> > Do you want to create music or twiddle with your computer?
>
> Depends. Maybe I'd like to do both. It has been known.
>
> > Linux currently has at least 5 different sound servers, none of which
> > talk to each other. If you are interested in low latency you will have
> > to run Jack which is supposedly a low latency sound server that uses
> > ALSA (one of the Linux sound systems) to interface with your audio
> > hardware. The entire thing is one gigantic mess that requires endless
> > care and feeding.
>
> No it isn't. It's pretty sophisticated. Probably too sophisticted for
> someone like you.
>
> > How do I know?
>
> You don't.
>
> > I tried to do the very same thing about a month ago and finally gave up
> > because I found myself spending more time trying to make things work
> > than creating music. And before the Linux loonatics crawl out of mix, I
> > use Linux for my webserver and all my day to day operations and for
> > that, Linux is preferred over Windows in my opinion.
>
> I don't believe you.
>
> > As for programs, your biggest problem is going to be QUALITY plugins.
> > There are many plugins that come with say Ardour (a decent program) but
> > they can't match the quality of even the most basic Windows/Mac plugin
> > in general.
>
> Nonsense.
>
> > Ardour is highly unstable and has an interface that reminds me of Logic
> > 1.0.
> > Terrible!
>
> Then use something else.
>
> > Audacity is not a bad program, but it is no SoundForge.
>
> Why should it be?
>
> >
> > If I were you, and I am assuming you are on a budget (why else would
> > anyone consider Linux for professional audio?)
>
> They are interested in controlling all aspects of their music. And why do
> you suppose musicians aren't on a budget?
>
> I would try N-Tracks and
> > scour the net for free plugins, many of which are very good.
> > If you are not on a budget, Sony was recently running a special on
> > SoungForge 8.0 for $99.00 and nothing Linux has can come close.
>
> Yeah right. Liar.
>
> >
> > However, if your time is not worth anything and you don't mind losing
> > clients or at least having them laugh at you, try dynabolic for a
> > decent audio based distribution.
>
> Why are you lying?
>
> >
> > It will allow you to try things before hosing your entire system by
> > installing Linux.
>
> No one will hose their system installing Linux, unless they're very
> careless or stupid. But Dyne:bolic is certainly a great place to start
> trying out Linux multimedia.
>
> >
> > http://lab.dyne.org/DyneBolic
> >
> > You might also want to look up a person who calls himself "flatfish"
> > and resides in the Linux discussion groups.
>
> Why? Flatfish is a serial nymshifter and liar. His opinions are worthless.
>
> >
> > One final note, the Linux quacks will come out of the woodwork telling
> > you how great Linux is and for many applications that is true. However
> > digital audio studio work is NOT one of them and also understand most
> > of them are programmers not musicians so their view on this is tilted
> > that way. They will also tell you how major Hollywood production
> > houses, ie:p ixar, have moved to Linux which is also true. Ask them when
> > you can purchase Pixar's grown in house software and also what on earth
> > does that have to do with a project studio?
>
> Linux has a lot of very interesting and creative software for audio
> creation. Some of it kind of technical. If you don't care for that, fine,
> but don't slag it because you don't understand it. Others do.
>
> (fup2COLA)
>
> --
> Kier
Anonymous
May 28, 2005 8:52:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.misc (More info?)

Marko Shindler wrote:
> <snip>

Seriously flatfish, you need to get a life.
Anonymous
May 28, 2005 8:52:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.misc (More info?)

perso ha escrito:
> not really: i have sonar,
> i 'm interested by Samplitude (good)

Ok, I apologize for mis-understanding.
If you use Sonar (I do!) and are interested in Samplitude (I use 7.x
myself) you will not be interested in Linux because those programs are
in a totally different league than ANY of the Linux offerings.


> I think Linux is an interesting OS.
> And Agnula a very good project
> Ardour is only a beta version 0.9beta29 so let's wait.
> interesting that's all ;-)))

Interesting is fine, but if you are a musician your burning desire is
to create music and Linux will hinder that big time.
If you are interested in learning about computers, operating systems
and learning Linux while at the same time tinkering with digital audio,
then maybe Linux is a good choice for you.
Only you know what your goals are.



> maybe Pro tools LE for live recordings and Linux Audio Agnula/Ardour for
> testing.

That's essentially the way I approached it. I did a dual boot on my DAW
workstation and shared a FAT32 drive between Suse 9.3 Linux and
Windows.
What I discovered was that Linux audio programs, while functional and
certainly inexpensive enough, are WAY behind the curve of even the most
basic Windows based program, like N-tracks for example.



> [(i posted here but i'm not a professional. so i don't mind loosing
> clients because i'm a jurist not a sound engineer ;) ))) it will be for
> semi pro applications and recordings, not professional. i don't care
> about pro tools TDM... even it's my favorite soft+hardware... ]

I don't use Protools either.
Look, if you want to test try dynebolic because it is much more
current, and better supported than agnula.
BTW I don't hate Linux, like I said it runs my web server and I use it
for all my other stuff.
However, I tell it like it is and Linux is a disaster for a home studio
unless your time means nothing and you have no money.
Seeing as you already use Sonar, Linux will be a major step down.

> > thanks :) 

You're welcome!
Marko
May 28, 2005 9:41:01 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.misc (More info?)

On Sat, 28 May 2005 13:36:58 -0700, Marko Shindler wrote:

> Linux?
> Do you want to create music or twiddle with your computer? Linux
> currently has at least 5 different sound servers, none of which talk to
> each other. If you are interested in low latency you will have to run
> Jack which is supposedly a low latency sound server that uses ALSA (one
> of the Linux sound systems) to interface with your audio hardware. The
> entire thing is one gigantic mess that requires endless care and
> feeding.
> How do I know?
> I tried to do the very same thing about a month ago and finally gave up
> because I found myself spending more time trying to make things work
> than creating music.




I dunno anything about sound processing, but I know there are similar
problems with other categories of software. There is some discussion
going on right now over at debianhelp.org about the failure of the open
source movement to produce enough decent software.

One recommended solution was that we start paying programming teams to
come up with high-grade usable software that is released to the public
domain. This makes sense - we will not attract and hold new users unless
we start meeting their program needs and expectations. The last thing a
newcomer wants to see is massively buggy programs or a console and command
line programs.

I would imagine that a quality music processing suite (as sophisticated as
Open Office, Gimp or Mathematica) would go a long way to attracting new,
young users. What do you folks think?
Anonymous
May 28, 2005 11:16:43 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Mike Rivers a écrit :
> In article <429885e7$0$25062$8fcfb975@news.wanadoo.fr> perso@lapo.fr writes:
>
>
>>I'm actually thinking about a project of home studio, linux based.
>>
>>Do you think Ardour could be a serious choice for a personal but
>>"serious" home studio ?
>
>
> Only for the serious Linux fanatic who'd rather build his own
> operating system from a kit and keep adding to it weekly than buy a
> Microsoft or Apple product. But then, aren't all Linux users like
> that?
>
> When will you have time to do any recording, or make any music?
>
> --
> I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
> However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
> lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
> you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
> and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

Hi
I was talking about Agnula Demudi: ready for music.

My idea: dual boot winXp /linux
soundcard: Delta audio 1010 rack 19"

- Hard disk 1: Win Xp pro + M.Powered Pro Tools (I noticed a pb of
latency with new drivers for Delta soundcards...)
- Hard disk 2: Linux agnula demudi + ardour :-)

regards
:-)
Anonymous
May 29, 2005 1:59:39 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.misc (More info?)

On Sat, 28 May 2005 13:36:58 -0700, Marko Shindler wrote:

> Linux?
> Do you want to create music or twiddle with your computer?

Depends. Maybe I'd like to do both. It has been known.

> Linux currently has at least 5 different sound servers, none of which
> talk to each other. If you are interested in low latency you will have
> to run Jack which is supposedly a low latency sound server that uses
> ALSA (one of the Linux sound systems) to interface with your audio
> hardware. The entire thing is one gigantic mess that requires endless
> care and feeding.

No it isn't. It's pretty sophisticated. Probably too sophisticted for
someone like you.

> How do I know?

You don't.

> I tried to do the very same thing about a month ago and finally gave up
> because I found myself spending more time trying to make things work
> than creating music. And before the Linux loonatics crawl out of mix, I
> use Linux for my webserver and all my day to day operations and for
> that, Linux is preferred over Windows in my opinion.

I don't believe you.

> As for programs, your biggest problem is going to be QUALITY plugins.
> There are many plugins that come with say Ardour (a decent program) but
> they can't match the quality of even the most basic Windows/Mac plugin
> in general.

Nonsense.

> Ardour is highly unstable and has an interface that reminds me of Logic
> 1.0.
> Terrible!

Then use something else.

> Audacity is not a bad program, but it is no SoundForge.

Why should it be?

>
> If I were you, and I am assuming you are on a budget (why else would
> anyone consider Linux for professional audio?)

They are interested in controlling all aspects of their music. And why do
you suppose musicians aren't on a budget?

I would try N-Tracks and
> scour the net for free plugins, many of which are very good.
> If you are not on a budget, Sony was recently running a special on
> SoungForge 8.0 for $99.00 and nothing Linux has can come close.

Yeah right. Liar.

>
> However, if your time is not worth anything and you don't mind losing
> clients or at least having them laugh at you, try dynabolic for a
> decent audio based distribution.

Why are you lying?

>
> It will allow you to try things before hosing your entire system by
> installing Linux.

No one will hose their system installing Linux, unless they're very
careless or stupid. But Dyne:bolic is certainly a great place to start
trying out Linux multimedia.

>
> http://lab.dyne.org/DyneBolic
>
> You might also want to look up a person who calls himself "flatfish"
> and resides in the Linux discussion groups.

Why? Flatfish is a serial nymshifter and liar. His opinions are worthless.

>
> One final note, the Linux quacks will come out of the woodwork telling
> you how great Linux is and for many applications that is true. However
> digital audio studio work is NOT one of them and also understand most
> of them are programmers not musicians so their view on this is tilted
> that way. They will also tell you how major Hollywood production
> houses, ie:p ixar, have moved to Linux which is also true. Ask them when
> you can purchase Pixar's grown in house software and also what on earth
> does that have to do with a project studio?

Linux has a lot of very interesting and creative software for audio
creation. Some of it kind of technical. If you don't care for that, fine,
but don't slag it because you don't understand it. Others do.

(fup2COLA)

--
Kier
Anonymous
May 29, 2005 2:23:31 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Mike Rivers wrote:

>> Do you think Ardour could be a serious choice for a personal but
>> "serious" home studio ?
>
> Only for the serious Linux fanatic who'd rather build his own
> operating system from a kit and keep adding to it weekly than buy a
> Microsoft or Apple product. But then, aren't all Linux users like
> that?

That reads very much like some kind of troll, but I'll give you the
benefit of the doubt.

Whether Linux is the answer really depends on what you want, and what
your priorities are.
Linux has several advantages, and the obvious disadvantages that it
currently expects a technical user rather than any old moron.

What Linux will give you is a system that doesn't require activation
or monthly subscription fees to keep it going (which is what Microsoft
has been wanting to do for a long time).

If one of your PCI cards flakes out and you have to replace it, Linux
won't hold the system hostage like Windows has to me, e.g.:

'You will plug me into the phone line NOW that I may commune with
Microsoft. If you fail to comply, Windows will be destroyed.
You have three earth days.'

And what are you going to do when Microsoft turns off the activation
server for XP? Preventing XP from being able to be installed ever
again is a truly fantastic way to 'persuade' people to upgrade to
Longhorn, or Blackcomb, or whatever the product of the day happens to
be at that point.
Your audio software might not even work on the new version, or it
might be so full to the hilt with DRM that it just can't be used for
audio work at all.

One of Microsoft's grand ideas is to rework the OS so that only
..NET bytecode programs can be run, and thus kept safely in line
through VM sandboxing.
Legacy applications will run inside an x86 VM based on VirtualPC,
which will let you run Doom or whatever, but the performance hit
will totally destroy a softsynth or DAW.

> When will you have time to do any recording, or make any music?

The same can often be said of Windows, unfortunately.

However, you can customise the system to a far greater degree
than Windows. If you DO go the torturous route of building the
system up from scratch, you get to choose exactly what runs and when.
You can at a stroke abolish the Windows bugbear of some obscure and
hidden system process that decides to thrash the disk in the middle of a
take, draining the audio buffer and causing dropouts.

But you spoke only of Linux, Windows and the Mac. There is also
a fourth alternative which you have not mentioned, and that is ReactOS.
Sadly it is early days yet, but the promise is of a Windows-compatible
OS without the Sword-Of-Damocles that is Windows Product Activation.

It can be found here: http://www.reactos.com

I say again, it is early days. It won't even run on my hardware yet.
But I eagerly await the day when it becomes feature-complete enough
to run Sonar. Then I can rid myself of Windows once and for all.

--
JP Morris - aka DOUG the Eagle (Dragon) -=UDIC=- jpm@it-he.org
Fun things to do with the Ultima games http://www.it-he.org
Reign of the Just - An Ultima clone http://rotj.it-he.org
d+++ e+ N+ T++ Om U1234!56!7'!S'!8!9!KAW u++ uC+++ uF+++ uG---- uLB----
uA--- nC+ nR---- nH+++ nP++ nI nPT nS nT wM- wC- y a(YEAR - 1976)
Anonymous
May 29, 2005 2:23:32 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"J. P. Morris" wrote ...
> Whether Linux is the answer really depends on what you
> want, and what your priorities are.
> Linux has several advantages, and the obvious disadvantages that it
> currently expects a technical user rather than any old moron.

And if you can't get it to work, you'll be relying on help from
people who think you are a moron. Good luck with that.

> If one of your PCI cards flakes out and you have to replace it, Linux
> won't hold the system hostage like Windows has to me, e.g.:

No. You'll just need to find one that is still in production that
has working Linux drivers. Good luck with that as well.
Anonymous
May 29, 2005 3:00:45 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

kleinebre a écrit :
> It really depends on how you're using it and how important your
> recordings are. For personal stuff it's definitely usable; sound
> quality and usability of the tools are no issue.
>
> However personally I'm not (yet) trusting it for live recording of
> paying clients. If you have a recoverable crash in a home recording
> situation, nothing is lost; of you have one during recording a live
> concert, you lose the concert.
>
> In my current setup, I'm mostly using Linux for recording the final
> mixdown (which I do with a digital console), editing it and burning it
> to CD, but not yet for realtime critical stuff.
>
> Bit by bit things are getting more and more usable, and I do think you
> can get quite far with just Linux. It's definitely not the easiest way,
> but a bit of persistence goes a long way. I've had ardour crashing on
> me more than once but that might be related to my unstable jackd setup
> back then.
>
> GNU wavecleaner does the trick of denoising (always make a backup of
> your original before denoising, cause gwc is unstable as hell but it
> does its work well otherwise). For normalizing etc I use rezound and
> audacity, so personally I don't really have a big need for using
> ardour. If I want to do any composing, my tools of choice are usually
> soundtracker, or if I need something a bit more pro I use rosegarden
> for a sequencer and fluidsynth/zynaddsubfx as softsynths (and aeolus if
> I need a realistic sounding pipe organ).
>
> Best of luck and keep us posted!
>
thanks
:) 
Anonymous
May 29, 2005 3:02:37 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

reddred a écrit :
> "perso" <perso@lapo.fr> wrote in message
> news:429885e7$0$25062$8fcfb975@news.wanadoo.fr...
>
>>Hi
>>
>>I'm actually thinking about a project of home studio, linux based.
>>
>>Do you think Ardour could be a serious choice for a personal but
>>"serious" home studio ?
>>:
>>Linux agnula
>
>
> You should talk to the people who use it or work on it to find out the
> viability there. Are you a programmer? Are you into synthesis? How familiar
> are you with Linux? I'm asking because you might be better off with
> something like Mandrake, and doing some customization.
>
>
>>Ardour +
>
>
> It's being debugged in preparation for coming out of Beta. It's taking a
> long, long time. You shouldn't use Beta software for things you care about.
>
>
>>Delta 1010 or RME Hammerfall
>
>
> By all accounts the drivers are solid.
>
> Whatever you do, I'd strongly recommend NOT keeping your DAW on the
> internet, after you build it. Build it once and leave it alone. Make music.
>
understood thanks.
> jb
>
>
>
mandrake...
i'm french
but i prefer debian... :-)
Anonymous
May 29, 2005 3:15:53 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Marko Shindler a écrit :
> Linux?
> Do you want to create music or twiddle with your computer?
> Linux currently has at least 5 different sound servers, none of which
> talk to each other. If you are interested in low latency you will have
> to run Jack which is supposedly a low latency sound server that uses
> ALSA (one of the Linux sound systems) to interface with your audio
> hardware. The entire thing is one gigantic mess that requires endless
> care and feeding.
> How do I know?
> I tried to do the very same thing about a month ago and finally gave up
> because I found myself spending more time trying to make things work
> than creating music. And before the Linux loonatics crawl out of mix, I
> use Linux for my webserver and all my day to day operations and for
> that, Linux is preferred over Windows in my opinion.
> As for programs, your biggest problem is going to be QUALITY plugins.
> There are many plugins that come with say Ardour (a decent program) but
> they can't match the quality of even the most basic Windows/Mac plugin
> in general.
> Ardour is highly unstable and has an interface that reminds me of Logic
> 1.0.
> Terrible!
> Audacity is not a bad program, but it is no SoundForge.
>
> If I were you, and I am assuming you are on a budget (why else would
> anyone consider Linux for professional audio?) I would try N-Tracks and
> scour the net for free plugins, many of which are very good.

not really: i have sonar,
i 'm interested by Samplitude (good)

I think Linux is an interesting OS.
And Agnula a very good project
Ardour is only a beta version 0.9beta29 so let's wait.
interesting that's all ;-)))

maybe Pro tools LE for live recordings and Linux Audio Agnula/Ardour for
testing.

:) 



> If you are not on a budget, Sony was recently running a special on
> SoungForge 8.0 for $99.00 and nothing Linux has can come close.
>
> However, if your time is not worth anything and you don't mind losing
> clients or at least having them laugh at you, try dynabolic for a
> decent audio based distribution.
>
[(i posted here but i'm not a professional. so i don't mind loosing
clients because i'm a jurist not a sound engineer ;) ))) it will be for
semi pro applications and recordings, not professional. i don't care
about pro tools TDM... even it's my favorite soft+hardware... ]


> Good luck
> Marko
>
>

>
> thanks :) 
>
Anonymous
May 29, 2005 3:21:07 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Marko Shindler a écrit :
> And here we have another Linux screwball who obviously has never used
> any type of professional digital audio programs, but yet feels the need
> to jump in and make baseless accusations without ever providing any
> source for his information.
> This is also typical of the Linux screwball.
>
> See what I mean about Linux?
> If you went to a Cubase group and asked about Sonar, you might get one
> or two zealots attacking you

1 year ago I had at the same time Sonar + Cubase: very funny because no
one could really attack me :) 
Linux was only an idea not MY only choice, gonna try Ardour but have a
closer look to PT or Samplitude (don't know,... )


, but when you get involved with Linux, and
> tell it like it is, IOW in this case Linux is an extremely poor choice,
> the kooks will come out of the woodwork looking to save the good name
> of Linux.

ok you hate linux understood.
it was only a question, keep cool...


>
> Just remember that since Linux isn't a company so to speak, these are
> the same people that you will be depending upon for support when the
> program fails to perform, which is typical.
>


> FWIW I got Ardour/Audacity/Jack working fine, I just didn't like the
> programs. They were unstable, had horrid plugins and awful interfaces.
>
> Marko
>
;-)
Anonymous
May 29, 2005 3:21:22 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On 2005-05-28, perso <perso@lapo.fr> wrote:

> I'm actually thinking about a project of home studio, linux based.
>
> Do you think Ardour could be a serious choice for a personal but
> "serious" home studio ?
>:
> Linux agnula
> Ardour +
> Delta 1010 or RME Hammerfall
> soundcraft...
> Fostex D 80
> etc...
> regards :) 

Hoping this is not another troll,

If you have to ask, the answer is probably no. Unless you're
patient, either knowledgeable or willing to learn, and above all
willing to trade some functionality or convenience for the
pleasure of running libre software on a libre OS.

--
André Majorel <URL:http://www.teaser.fr/~amajorel/&gt;
(Counterfeit: xumymyt@bystander.com qodozoj@allison.com)
What worries me is not the violence of the few, but the
indifference of the many. -- M. L. King
Anonymous
May 29, 2005 3:24:24 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

J. P. Morris a écrit :
> Mike Rivers wrote:
>
>
>>>Do you think Ardour could be a serious choice for a personal but
>>>"serious" home studio ?
>>
>>Only for the serious Linux fanatic who'd rather build his own
>>operating system from a kit and keep adding to it weekly than buy a
>>Microsoft or Apple product. But then, aren't all Linux users like
>>that?
>
>
> That reads very much like some kind of troll, but I'll give you the
> benefit of the doubt.
>
> Whether Linux is the answer really depends on what you want, and what
> your priorities are.
> Linux has several advantages, and the obvious disadvantages that it
> currently expects a technical user rather than any old moron.
>
> What Linux will give you is a system that doesn't require activation
> or monthly subscription fees to keep it going (which is what Microsoft
> has been wanting to do for a long time).
>
> If one of your PCI cards flakes out and you have to replace it, Linux
> won't hold the system hostage like Windows has to me, e.g.:
>
> 'You will plug me into the phone line NOW that I may commune with
> Microsoft. If you fail to comply, Windows will be destroyed.
> You have three earth days.'
>
> And what are you going to do when Microsoft turns off the activation
> server for XP? Preventing XP from being able to be installed ever
> again is a truly fantastic way to 'persuade' people to upgrade to
> Longhorn, or Blackcomb, or whatever the product of the day happens to
> be at that point.
> Your audio software might not even work on the new version, or it
> might be so full to the hilt with DRM that it just can't be used for
> audio work at all.
>
> One of Microsoft's grand ideas is to rework the OS so that only
> .NET bytecode programs can be run, and thus kept safely in line
> through VM sandboxing.
> Legacy applications will run inside an x86 VM based on VirtualPC,
> which will let you run Doom or whatever, but the performance hit
> will totally destroy a softsynth or DAW.
>
>
>>When will you have time to do any recording, or make any music?
>
>
> The same can often be said of Windows, unfortunately.
>
> However, you can customise the system to a far greater degree
> than Windows. If you DO go the torturous route of building the
> system up from scratch, you get to choose exactly what runs and when.
> You can at a stroke abolish the Windows bugbear of some obscure and
> hidden system process that decides to thrash the disk in the middle of a
> take, draining the audio buffer and causing dropouts.
>
> But you spoke only of Linux, Windows and the Mac. There is also
> a fourth alternative which you have not mentioned, and that is ReactOS.
> Sadly it is early days yet, but the promise is of a Windows-compatible
> OS without the Sword-Of-Damocles that is Windows Product Activation.
>
> It can be found here: http://www.reactos.com
>
> I say again, it is early days. It won't even run on my hardware yet.
> But I eagerly await the day when it becomes feature-complete enough
> to run Sonar. Then I can rid myself of Windows once and for all.
>


LOL :) 
(O)S tar) wars III started. "the Sword-Of-Damocles that is Windows
Product Activation "
;-))

windows xp is the worst os never made... I have xp pro and 2000 pro, I
prefer win2K no doubt !
Anonymous
May 29, 2005 3:28:33 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

J. P. Morris a écrit :
Then I can rid myself of Windows once and for all.
>
serious decision.

so, for a non professional project (sorry but i need profesionnals . of
vue), (semi pro) may i try Samplitude + RME soundcards, or pro tools
LE/digidesign systems .?

regards/
Anonymous
May 29, 2005 3:34:21 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.misc (More info?)

On 2005-05-28, Marko Shindler <marko_shindler@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Do you want to create music or twiddle with your computer?
> Linux currently has at least 5 different sound servers, none of which
> talk to each other. If you are interested in low latency you will have
> to run Jack which is supposedly a low latency sound server that uses
> ALSA (one of the Linux sound systems) to interface with your audio
> hardware. The entire thing is one gigantic mess that requires endless
> care and feeding.
> How do I know?
> I tried to do the very same thing about a month ago and finally gave up
> because I found myself spending more time trying to make things work
> than creating music.

My experience with Unix in general and Linux in particular has
been that it's a low-maintenance OS. Initially, getting things
to work can be extremely difficult, but once it works, you can
pretty much forget about it. What part of the system required
endless "care and feeding" ?

--
André Majorel <URL:http://www.teaser.fr/~amajorel/&gt;
(Counterfeit: bycajyg@silverise.biz qevyn@curb.com)
What worries me is not the violence of the few, but the
indifference of the many. -- M. L. King
Anonymous
May 29, 2005 3:36:18 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Sat, 28 May 2005 16:52:44 +0200, perso wrote:

> Hi
>
> I'm actually thinking about a project of home studio, linux based.
>
> Do you think Ardour could be a serious choice for a personal but
> "serious" home studio ?

I'd say the best thing to do is to install agnula, or a live distro like
fervent, and give it a go. Even if you only have a bog standard pc
and sound card right now, at least you will get a feel of the apps and how
it works before committing yourself either way.

I like many of the audio apps on Linux, and run a Linux pc in tandem with
a dual boot Linux/Cubase win2k one. The Linux pc handles soft synths,
heavy duty effects and some recording with Ardour.

I would not record someone's album with Ardour, as I don't trust it yet.
For my personal music, it's fine. It's best suited to use as a traditional
multitrack, as it does not support midi (you can sync a sequencer like
Rosegarden with it, but I find that awkward.)


> :
> Linux agnula
> Ardour +
> Delta 1010 or RME Hammerfall
> soundcraft...
> Fostex D 80
> etc...
> regards :) 
Anonymous
May 29, 2005 4:54:05 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.misc (More info?)

On Sat, 28 May 2005 13:36:58 -0700, Marko Shindler wrote:

> Linux currently has at least 5 different sound servers, none of which
> talk to each other

Nice try Flatfish, but you know that this is incorrect, as are your other
gripes.
Anonymous
May 29, 2005 4:54:58 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.misc (More info?)

On Sat, 28 May 2005 23:34:21 +0000, Andre Majorel wrote:

<snip>
>
> My experience with Unix in general and Linux in particular has
> been that it's a low-maintenance OS. Initially, getting things
> to work can be extremely difficult, but once it works, you can
> pretty much forget about it. What part of the system required
> endless "care and feeding" ?

His ego, it's name is Flatfish.
Anonymous
May 29, 2005 6:17:55 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.misc (More info?)

On Sat, 28 May 2005 17:41:01 -0500, Andrew wrote:


> I dunno anything about sound processing, but I know there are similar
> problems with other categories of software. There is some discussion
> going on right now over at debianhelp.org about the failure of the open
> source movement to produce enough decent software.
>
> One recommended solution was that we start paying programming teams to
> come up with high-grade usable software that is released to the public
> domain. This makes sense - we will not attract and hold new users unless
> we start meeting their program needs and expectations. The last thing a
> newcomer wants to see is massively buggy programs or a console and command
> line programs.
>
> I would imagine that a quality music processing suite (as sophisticated as
> Open Office, Gimp or Mathematica) would go a long way to attracting new,
> young users. What do you folks think?

I like to mess about with sound, and have found that their are some great
packages, I have found that getting sound out of linux box's is easy,
but not when it comes to plugging in Midi keyboards. The problem I keep
finding is that the sound card I have does not have good support (why
manufactures don't realise drivers is beyond reason) and worse I use a
distro SuSe that is configured so Alsa and Jack are not easy to build. I
think the use of linux box's for music processing is slowly building and
will rapidly improve, at the moment if you want to do music processing
pick a distro that is geared up for it and a sound card with good support.

Can anybody reccomend a card with linux drivers?

Jem..
Anonymous
May 29, 2005 9:59:07 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <4298e014$0$541$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader03.plus.net> jpm@it-he.org writes:

> That reads very much like some kind of troll, but I'll give you the
> benefit of the doubt.

Likewise. And that's all I'll say in terms of a reply. I don't want to
dignify this thread any further with comments about getting down to
the business of recording music.

If you don't like Microsoft, use Linux. If you're not smart enough to
use Linux, get a good Ampex or Studer.

--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
Anonymous
May 29, 2005 11:11:36 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Kier" wrote ...
> Marko Shindler wrote:
>> They are as a group, programmers, not musicians and they
>> look down upon anyone asking for help who doesn't have a
>> degree in programming.
>
> Absolutely wrong. Most of us don't have a degree in programming.
> I certainnly don't. i use Linux because it's Free/Open and free from
> cost and fun, and interesting

But many (most?) computer users don't want their operating system
to be "fun and interesting". Reardless of cost. They want it to just
work quietly in the background and let them get on with the primary
task at hand.

>> The Linux community has a difficult time understanding the
>> concept of the computer/operating system as a tool, or a means
>> to an end.
>
> Again, wrong. Linux is about tools - the whole Linux/unixlike
> concept is about toolchains, and creating the tools *you* need
> and want, not adapting yourself to the tools that are given to you.

Again, many (most?) computer users don't have the time or talent to
develop (or even adapt) their own tools. Just as most of us don't
make our own electric drills or even screwdrivers. It seems like
many Linux zealots have a distorted view of the mainstream of
computer users. The fact that you excluded the practical users
(rec.audio.pro) from the "reply-to" would seem to support the
"Linux as an end in itself" worldview.
Anonymous
May 29, 2005 1:49:05 PM

Archived from groups: comp.os.linux.advocacy,rec.audio.pro,comp.os.linux.misc (More info?)

In article <1117314482.499677.127340@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
Marko Shindler <marko_shindler@yahoo.com> wrote:
>They appear out of the woodwork like worms looking for a place to feed.
>I'm convinced these Linux screwballs sit in waiting, just looking to
>defend Linux.

Well, you are crossposting this thread to comp.os.unix.advocacy, where indeed
defending Linux is the whole purpose of the group.

Personally, I don't like computers very much and I think if you want to have
a home studio that you should look into an 8-track Ampex machine. But that's
a personal bias. Maybe we should start a rec.audio.pro.ampex.advocacy.

>Notice he hasn't said a word about your topic.
>Sadly, this is a typical Linux screwball who can't see anything but
>Linux and will lead unsuspecting noobs down the garden path in an
>attempt to get them to switch to Linux.

May I suggest looking at the Newsgroups: line before replying?
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Anonymous
May 29, 2005 3:10:00 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Marko Shindler a écrit :
>
> perso ha escrito:
>
>>not really: i have sonar,
>>i 'm interested by Samplitude (good)
>
>
> Ok, I apologize for mis-understanding.

;-)))

if i could, even i'm a non professional, i'd have pro tools + sam +
sonar + nuendo ;-)


> If you use Sonar (I do!) and are interested in Samplitude (I use 7.x
> myself) you will not be interested in Linux because those programs are
> in a totally different league than ANY of the Linux offerings.
>
>
>

>
> Interesting is fine, but if you are a musician your burning desire is
> to create music and Linux will hinder that big time.
> If you are interested in learning about computers, operating systems
> and learning Linux while at the same time tinkering with digital audio,
> then maybe Linux is a good choice for you.
> Only you know what your goals are.
> ;-)
>
>
>
>>maybe Pro tools LE for live recordings and Linux Audio Agnula/Ardour for
>>testing.
>
>
> That's essentially the way I approached it. I did a dual boot on my DAW
> workstation and shared a FAT32 drive between Suse 9.3 Linux and
> Windows.
> What I discovered was that Linux audio programs, while functional and
> certainly inexpensive enough, are WAY behind the curve of even the most
> basic Windows based program, like N-tracks for example.
>

N-Tracks ? never tried.




>
> I don't use Protools either.
> Look, if you want to test try dynebolic because it is much more
> current, and better supported than agnula.

thanks :) 
> BTW I don't hate Linux, like I said it runs my web server and I use it
> for all my other stuff.
> However, I tell it like it is and Linux is a disaster for a home studio
> unless your time means nothing and you have no money.
> Seeing as you already use Sonar, Linux will be a major step down.
>
> ok as de gaulle said "Je vous ai compris" :) 

>>>thanks :) 
>
>
> You're welcome!
> Marko
>
;-)
my project: sonar or sam (7/8 don't know) on computer 1
linux audio for testing on computer 2 (for fun if you prefer)
Anonymous
May 29, 2005 3:37:56 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Mike Rivers wrote:

>
> In article <4298e014$0$541$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader03.plus.net>
> jpm@it-he.org writes:
>
>> That reads very much like some kind of troll, but I'll give you the
>> benefit of the doubt.
>
> Likewise. And that's all I'll say in terms of a reply. I don't want to
> dignify this thread any further with comments about getting down to
> the business of recording music.

Well said.

> If you don't like Microsoft, use Linux. If you're not smart enough to
> use Linux, get a good Ampex or Studer.

Sometimes you just can't win. I hold off mentioning RTR (which is
my preference) to avoid getting pegged as an analogue zealot, but wind
up playing the Linux zealot instead. Sorry about that..

>
> --
> I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
> However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
> lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
> you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
> and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

--
JP Morris - aka DOUG the Eagle (Dragon) -=UDIC=- jpm@it-he.org
Fun things to do with the Ultima games http://www.it-he.org
Reign of the Just - An Ultima clone http://rotj.it-he.org
d+++ e+ N+ T++ Om U1234!56!7'!S'!8!9!KAW u++ uC+++ uF+++ uG---- uLB----
uA--- nC+ nR---- nH+++ nP++ nI nPT nS nT wM- wC- y a(YEAR - 1976)
Anonymous
May 29, 2005 4:07:10 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"perso" <perso@lapo.fr> wrote in message
news:429885e7$0$25062$8fcfb975@news.wanadoo.fr...
> Hi
>
> I'm actually thinking about a project of home studio, linux based.
>
> Do you think Ardour could be a serious choice for a personal but "serious"
> home studio ?

Look at the feature set of Ardour, it's reliability and functionality. Also
look at te audio subsystems of Linux and compatibility with the tools you
may find you need.

Is the main objective to "construct a project home studio" based on Linux,
or to construct a real usable versatile PCDAW that really works ?

geoff
Anonymous
May 29, 2005 4:10:29 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"J. P. Morris" <jpm@it-he.org> wrote in message news:4298e014$0$541
>
> If one of your PCI cards flakes out and you have to replace it, Linux
> won't hold the system hostage like Windows has to me, e.g.:
>
> 'You will plug me into the phone line NOW that I may commune with
> Microsoft. If you fail to comply, Windows will be destroyed.
> You have three earth days.'

Jeepers, that must be for Liniots only. The rest of us get 30 days. And
not from a trivial PCI card swap.

geoff
Anonymous
May 29, 2005 4:10:30 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Geoff Wood wrote:

>
> "J. P. Morris" <jpm@it-he.org> wrote in message news:4298e014$0$541
>>
>> If one of your PCI cards flakes out and you have to replace it, Linux
>> won't hold the system hostage like Windows has to me, e.g.:
>>
>> 'You will plug me into the phone line NOW that I may commune with
>> Microsoft. If you fail to comply, Windows will be destroyed.
>> You have three earth days.'
>
> Jeepers, that must be for Liniots only. The rest of us get 30 days. And
> not from a trivial PCI card swap.

Try swapping two or three cards then. It does happen, and it is only
three days. Thirty days for initial registration, three days for changing
the hardware. Of course, none of this nonsense will happen with W2K.



By the way, in case my post came off wrongly, which appears to be the
case, I'd like to clarify it a little:

* Windows has problems. You may find these to be acceptable to you.

* Linux solves the licensing problems, but causes other problems.

* For my purposes, Linux is not yet ready as an audio platform.
(Although as you can see from the headers, I use it for everything else)

* I should not have used the word 'moron'. People have inferred from this,
wrongly, that I was calling all Windows users 'morons'.

* People who dislike Windows but are tied to it should explore ReactOS as
a possible alternative, since it should give the ability to deploy
Windows-based audio software without fear of Microsoft pulling the version
you need in future (as they are often wont to do).

>
> geoff

--
JP Morris - aka DOUG the Eagle (Dragon) -=UDIC=- jpm@it-he.org
Fun things to do with the Ultima games http://www.it-he.org
Reign of the Just - An Ultima clone http://rotj.it-he.org
d+++ e+ N+ T++ Om U1234!56!7'!S'!8!9!KAW u++ uC+++ uF+++ uG---- uLB----
uA--- nC+ nR---- nH+++ nP++ nI nPT nS nT wM- wC- y a(YEAR - 1976)
Anonymous
May 29, 2005 4:59:57 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.misc (More info?)

Jeremy Fisher wrote:

> Can anybody reccomend a card with linux drivers?

If you are really interested in Linux DAW, M-Audio or RME are the best
options it seems.
Anonymous
May 29, 2005 5:04:31 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.misc (More info?)

>>perso ha escrito:
>>
>>>Hi
>>>
>>>I'm actually thinking about a project of home studio, linux based.
>>>
>>>Do you think Ardour could be a serious choice for a personal but
>>>"serious" home studio ?

It has done great by me. It has done great by numerous others. You can
do pro level work with Linux if you want...it is up to the task and some
do.

When you ask these questions in recording and music forums though you
quite often run into people who wish to claim they know everything and
will bad mouth Linux every chance they get. Take everything they say
with the standard grain of salt.
Anonymous
May 29, 2005 6:39:07 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

[Please don't crosspost to comp.os.linux.misc. They're inundated with
trolls].

On Sunday 29 May 2005 13:55, Noah Roberts <nroberts@dontemailme.com>
(<119k7n12uh5id8d@corp.supernews.com>) wrote:

> Marko Shindler wrote:
> [snip - nonsense and FUD]
>
> This guy reminds me of someone I keep running into on music forums.

"Marko Shindler" is definitely someone you keep running into, under a
variety of guises. Search Google Groups for "flatfish" and you'll see
he's a obsessive-compulsive troll.
Anonymous
May 29, 2005 6:44:18 PM

Archived from groups: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.misc,rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Sat, 28 May 2005 14:16:30 -0700, Marko Shindler wrote:

> And here we have another Linux screwball who obviously has never used
> any type of professional digital audio programs, but yet feels the need
> to jump in and make baseless accusations without ever providing any
> source for his information.

Incorrect. I am not 'a Linux screwball'. I'm a Linux *user*.

> This is also typical of the Linux screwball.

You're the only one whose behaviour is in any way 'typical', so far.
Typical of a troll, that is.

>
> See what I mean about Linux?

No. I don't. And nor will any other honest user.

> If you went to a Cubase group and asked about Sonar, you might get one
> or two zealots attacking you, but when you get involved with Linux, and
> tell it like it is, IOW in this case Linux is an extremely poor choice,
> the kooks will come out of the woodwork looking to save the good name
> of Linux.

The good name of Linux is not in jeopardy, and we are not kooks. That's
your biggest mistake. Sure, Linux isn't the most obvious platform for
audio work, and you may need some technical expertise to get the best
from it, but it still has huge potential. If you were really interested in
finding out about what it can do, you'd be reading 'Linux User and
Developer', which has been running an in-depth series of articles about
Linux audio, not slagging it off here.

>
> Just remember that since Linux isn't a company so to speak, these are
> the same people that you will be depending upon for support when the
> program fails to perform, which is typical.

No, it isn't typical. Again, you make statements which you cannot support.
And no, Linux iteslf is not a company, but you can buy support for any
regular distro, and the support of the community is also excellent, if you
treat the community with respect.

>
> FWIW I got Ardour/Audacity/Jack working fine, I just didn't like the
> programs. They were unstable, had horrid plugins and awful interfaces.

If you don't are for the programs, that's fine, no one is asking you to.
Just don't lie about them. If you don't find the interfaces appealing, why
not get in touch with the maintainers and suggest some improvements?
That's how the Linux community works.

If you got the apps working fine, why are you complaining?

You may be a genuine poster, but your atitude, and the use fo such
epithets as 'Linux kook', 'Linux screwball', makes that doubtful. If you
have honest criticisms to make, please use less inflammatory language, and
you may be better received.

I don't think Linux audio is perfect, or a slot-in replacement for the
apps you may be used to, but it has many plus points, if you're willing to
put in some effort. You can design your own music creation tools, for a
start, tailored to your own personal needs. That's got to be a good thing,
right? You can have total control over your music making.

And please don't top-post, it makes replying to you unnecessarily
difficult.

--
Kier
Anonymous
May 29, 2005 7:21:24 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.misc (More info?)

On Sat, 28 May 2005 17:41:01 -0500, Andrew wrote:

> On Sat, 28 May 2005 13:36:58 -0700, Marko Shindler wrote:
>
>> Linux?
>> Do you want to create music or twiddle with your computer? Linux
>> currently has at least 5 different sound servers, none of which talk to
>> each other. If you are interested in low latency you will have to run
>> Jack which is supposedly a low latency sound server that uses ALSA (one
>> of the Linux sound systems) to interface with your audio hardware. The
>> entire thing is one gigantic mess that requires endless care and
>> feeding.
>> How do I know?
>> I tried to do the very same thing about a month ago and finally gave up
>> because I found myself spending more time trying to make things work
>> than creating music.
>
>
>
>
> I dunno anything about sound processing, but I know there are similar
> problems with other categories of software. There is some discussion
> going on right now over at debianhelp.org about the failure of the open
> source movement to produce enough decent software.

It's not that simple, though, is it? For a start, who decides what's
decent software, and what's not? We all want stuff that works, obviously.
All some of us will want to do is string together some sound samples and
such, or play with midi synths, but others may wish to delve deep into the
mysteries of sound, right down to the most basic wave-forms. No one
program is ever going to address all needs at once.

>
> One recommended solution was that we start paying programming teams to
> come up with high-grade usable software that is released to the public
> domain. This makes sense - we will not attract and hold new users unless
> we start meeting their program needs and expectations. The last thing a
> newcomer wants to see is massively buggy programs or a console and command
> line programs.

That's true enough. Though there is always going to be a place for the
command line, I hope (I may not use it much myself, but I recognise its
importance). What we need is more musically-inclined users to get involved
in the community. When you think about it, music itself is a kind of
programming language, when it's written down.

>
> I would imagine that a quality music processing suite (as sophisticated as
> Open Office, Gimp or Mathematica) would go a long way to attracting new,
> young users. What do you folks think?

I think you're quite right. More people that ever are creating content of
various kinds, rather than just being passive recipients of it, and to my
mind that's a good thing and should be encouraged. Creative expression of
all kinds can enrich people's lives.

(fup2COLA)

--
Kier
Anonymous
May 29, 2005 7:49:04 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.misc (More info?)

On Sat, 28 May 2005 14:59:31 -0700, masked.slacker@gmail.com wrote:

>
>
> Marko Shindler wrote:
>> <snip>
>
> Seriously flatfish, you need to get a life.

This *is* his life, it seems. Sad...

--
Kier
Anonymous
May 29, 2005 8:15:22 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Richard Crowley a écrit :
> "Kier" wrote ...
>
>> Marko Shindler wrote:
>>
>>> They are as a group, programmers, not musicians and they look down
>>> upon anyone asking for help who doesn't have a degree in programming.
>>
>>
>> Absolutely wrong. Most of us don't have a degree in programming.
>> I certainnly don't. i use Linux because it's Free/Open and free from
>> cost and fun, and interesting
>
>
> But many (most?) computer users don't want their operating system
> to be "fun and interesting". Reardless of cost. They want it to just
> work quietly in the background and let them get on with the primary task
> at hand.
>
>>> The Linux community has a difficult time understanding the
>>> concept of the computer/operating system as a tool, or a means to an
>>> end.
>>
>>
>> Again, wrong. Linux is about tools - the whole Linux/unixlike concept
>> is about toolchains, and creating the tools *you* need
>> and want, not adapting yourself to the tools that are given to you.
>
>
> Again, many (most?) computer users don't have the time or talent to
> develop (or even adapt) their own tools. Just as most of us don't
> make our own electric drills or even screwdrivers. It seems like many
> Linux zealots have a distorted view of the mainstream of computer
> users. The fact that you excluded the practical users (rec.audio.pro)
> from the "reply-to" would seem to support the "Linux as an end in
> itself" worldview.
listen,
mandriva LE 2005 + nyvalls packages are very easy to install,
easier than windows...
ardour is a pro tools like
audacity is a soundforge like etc...
Anonymous
May 29, 2005 8:15:23 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"perso" wrote ...
> mandriva LE 2005 + nyvalls packages are very easy to install,
> easier than windows...

Thanks. I'll download it and try it.

> ardour is a pro tools like

And also claims to be "platform-neutral" so where is the Linux
advantage? Besides it also claims to be still in beta which is
saying a lot since many of the Linux apps I've seen that are in
"release" seem more like "public beta". Not very user-friendly
to people who want to just use the tools rather than help to
develop them.

> audacity is a soundforge like etc...
The Windows version shows promise, but still has some UI
deficiencies.
Anonymous
May 30, 2005 12:33:29 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Noah Roberts" <nroberts@dontemailme.com> wrote:
>
> you have 1 admited month of experience in which you GAVE UP....after 1
> month...pathetic.


If my DAW still wasn't working after a month, I'd be kicking in walls.
In fact, there's no way in hell I'd waste that much time on it.

Some of us have work to do and can't be dicking around for weeks to get
our tools working. For me to consider Linux, I'd have to know that
there's a Pro Tools / Nuendo equivalent ready to go "out of the box."

I have no opinion on Linux pro or con, but I'd suggest that there are
pretty good reasons why someone may choose not to pursue a development
cycle and instead just buy a package off the shelf.

--
"It CAN'T be too loud... some of the red lights aren't even on yet!"
- Lorin David Schultz
in the control room
making even bad news sound good

(Remove spamblock to reply)
Anonymous
May 30, 2005 2:11:35 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Noah Roberts a écrit :
>>> perso ha escrito:
>>>
>>>> Hi
>>>>
>>>> I'm actually thinking about a project of home studio, linux based.
>>>>
>>>> Do you think Ardour could be a serious choice for a personal but
>>>> "serious" home studio ?
>
>
> It has done great by me. It has done great by numerous others. You can
> do pro level work with Linux if you want...it is up to the task and some
> do.
>
> When you ask these questions in recording and music forums though you
> quite often run into people who wish to claim they know everything and
> will bad mouth Linux every chance they get. Take everything they say
> with the standard grain of salt.
;-)
Anonymous
May 30, 2005 2:12:47 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.misc (More info?)

Noah Roberts a écrit :
> Jeremy Fisher wrote:
>
>> Can anybody reccomend a card with linux drivers?
>
>
> If you are really interested in Linux DAW, M-Audio or RME are the best
> options it seems.

NB
and now with Delta 1O10 we can have a dual boot:

- winxp + PRo tools M powered
- linux + ardour

With the same soundcard ;) 
Anonymous
May 30, 2005 3:04:18 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Arkady Duntov a écrit :
> [Please don't crosspost to comp.os.linux.misc. They're inundated with
> trolls].
>
> On Sunday 29 May 2005 13:55, Noah Roberts <nroberts@dontemailme.com>
> (<119k7n12uh5id8d@corp.supernews.com>) wrote:
>
>
>>Marko Shindler wrote:
>>[snip - nonsense and FUD]
>>
>>This guy reminds me of someone I keep running into on music forums.
>
>
> "Marko Shindler" is definitely someone you keep running into, under a
> variety of guises. Search Google Groups for "flatfish" and you'll see
> he's a obsessive-compulsive troll.
thanks for the info
i'm new here, i didn't know
(and as i said, we can use ardour on linux, and also samplitude or sonar
or cubase with winXP : i don't where could be the problem...)

:) 
Anonymous
May 30, 2005 4:28:40 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.misc (More info?)

On Sun, 29 May 2005 12:59:57 -0700, Noah Roberts wrote:

> Jeremy Fisher wrote:
>
>> Can anybody reccomend a card with linux drivers?
>
> If you are really interested in Linux DAW, M-Audio or RME are the best
> options it seems.

The Echoaudio cards are good too, though only Darla20, Gina20, Layla20,
Darla24, Gina24, Layla24, Mona, Mia, Indigo, Indigo DJ, Indigo IO, Gina3G,
and Layla3G are supported.
Anonymous
May 30, 2005 1:45:27 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

philicorda a écrit :
> On Sun, 29 May 2005 12:59:57 -0700, Noah Roberts wrote:
>
>
>>Jeremy Fisher wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Can anybody reccomend a card with linux drivers?
>>
>>If you are really interested in Linux DAW, M-Audio or RME are the best
>>options it seems.
>
>
> The Echoaudio cards are good too, though only Darla20, Gina20, Layla20,
> Darla24, Gina24, Layla24, Mona, Mia, Indigo, Indigo DJ, Indigo IO, Gina3G,
> and Layla3G are supported.
>
thanks for the information.
Anonymous
May 30, 2005 3:34:31 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.misc (More info?)

On Sun, 29 May 2005 12:59:57 -0700, Noah Roberts wrote:

> Jeremy Fisher wrote:
>
>> Can anybody reccomend a card with linux drivers?
>
> If you are really interested in Linux DAW, M-Audio or RME are the best
> options it seems.

I have been told M-Audio is a good card as well, thanks for the input

Jem..
!