Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Dumping Pro-Tools for Linux. Is it feasable?

Last response: in Home Audio
Share
Anonymous
July 16, 2005 2:19:44 AM

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

I have a Digi-01 system and after what I have been reading on the net
about Linux and lot latency, not to mention cost, I am considering
moving over to the Linux platform.

Has anyone in a professional venue done this or am I going to be a
pioneer in this venture?

Pitfalls?

How do clients react to Linux?

tia for any and all advice!!
Anonymous
July 16, 2005 2:52:11 AM

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

unless you are a professional coder, stay away from linux. it's great
that it keeps Microsoft on its toes. but audio apps are finicky enough
without adding more chaos.

my advice is to pay the ferryman and get yourself Windows 2000 pro or
Windows XP.

linux is a never ending open-source project that computer pros add to
on their spare time for fun. it's very sprawling and never-ending
nature makes it a nightmare for audio app developers to write code to.
most pro DAW companies don't bother with it...they have their phone
lines flooded with enough tech support as it is.

the main idea is for Apple and Linux to keep Microsoft on its toes.
then you buy Microsoft anyway, but you are thankful other people are
keeping the Darth Vader of software from completely ruling the galaxy.

Final Cut Pro and iPod is what keeps Apple running these days. God
bless them, because Microsoft needs competition just to keep them
honest.

so let others over-pay for Apple, and let others geek-out for no reason
with linux.

a "client" would think you are on mars if you are on linux.

the advantage for Linux is with server farms. the stuff works well
with servers, and since you don't have to pay a licence on it, it's a
boon for a giant server farm that needs 1200 servers cranking along
together. 1200 free operating systems is a big cash savings. and the
people running the server farms are IT pros that enjoy and get paid for
doing software tweaks.

but for you, spend the $150 for God's sake and get Windows.
Anonymous
July 16, 2005 12:56:22 PM

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

Load Sack wrote:
> I have a Digi-01 system and after what I have been reading on the net
> about Linux and lot latency, not to mention cost, I am considering
> moving over to the Linux platform.
>
> Has anyone in a professional venue done this or am I going to be a
> pioneer in this venture?
>
> Pitfalls?
>
> How do clients react to Linux?
>
> tia for any and all advice!!
>

Upgrade to XP, upgrade PTLE to 6.4 (that's as far as you're going to get
with a Digi001 anyways) and keep it moving. There's no real reason to go
to Linux at this time. I've tried Ardour and Rosegarden and, while
they're nice apps, they don't hold a candle to ProTools (Ardour), Logic
or Cubase (Rosegarden).
Anonymous
July 16, 2005 1:44:30 PM

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

In my opinion if you are a professional (ie:you make your living from
audio) it would be financial suicide to move to Linux. I run several
Linux clients and a Linux server in my home because I believe Linux is
better suited than Windows for that situation. However my studio runs
Windows because for that situation Windows is better suited than Linux.
The main problem with Linux is that the applications are immature,
constantly changing and support is terrible. The people writing these
applications tend to look at them from a programmer POV and not a
musicians POV which means you will be talking bits and bytes instead of
beats and ticks.

Your digi will not work with Linux so you need a new board from the
start.
If you like tinkering with computers, writing your own code then maybe
you can write drivers for your board? Join the various Linux mailing
lists (there must be 1000's of them) and get to work!
Anonymous
July 16, 2005 1:55:41 PM

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

Well put! I know several people using Linux as a back up and storage
facility, but not as a digital workstation for a professional recording
studio. The Linux audio programs are just too unstable and featurless,
for example VST support, to be used for anything other than
experimenting. With a Protools system at least you can pick up a
project, carry it to another shop and go to work on it there. With
Linux? You'll be lucky if you can keep it running long enough to even
get into a project.
Linux was designed from the ground up to be a programmers tool, a
tinkerers delight and the perfect OS for a person who wants to be able
to tweak every aspect of the OS.

Why should a layperson give a hoot about having the source code to
programs?
Most people wouldn't know what to do with it anyway, yet Linux users
have orgasms over that stuff.
I could care less about GPL and GNU.
I pay my money and I get a program that works and comes with full
support.
Of course Linux users will whine about how unstable Windows is and how
stable Linux is which is a complete fallacy.
According to them Windows crashes (for them anyway) 10 times a day.
What a bunch of malarchy.

Linux was never designed for artistic types who look at a computer and
operating system as a tool to create.
That's one reason why the Mac is big in the arts although Windows is
catching up.
Who wants to tinker with programs when they have a song in their head
just dying to be tracked?

Clients will lose faith in your abilities because unfortunately in this
business the kind of gear you have does make a difference. First
question I get from prospective clients is "what kind of protools
system are you running" and yes I know it's stupid and unfair, but
that's the way it works.

Answering a question like that with "well I don't run Protools, I run
Linux" will be the kiss of death for your business.

Linux just isn't ready for professional, or in some cases amateur
digital audio work.
It just isn't.
Anonymous
July 16, 2005 2:02:35 PM

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

That's what I would do because there is nothing wrong with the Digi001
system for what it is. Save up the money you make and spring for one of
the larger Protools systems later.
Or consider moving off Protools to something like a high end RME card
and Samplitude or something similar.

Linux would be a complete nightmare for a person who has not used it
before and you are right Rosegarden and Ardour are decent, but they
simply
are not in the same league as Cubase, Protools or Samplitude.
And where is the support?
When I have a problem and the clock is ticking, I make a phone call and
from experience I am back in business real fast.
With Linux?

I'm forced to depend upon either a programmer who wrote the
application, and generally is thinking from the programmers point of
view, not a musicians pov or I have to dive into the seamy underbelly
of the Linux help groups where I will be called an idiot, stupid, RTFM,
Windope and every other foul phrase the Linux users seem to have in
their box of Trix.

Thanks but no thanks!

Linux is not an option!
Anonymous
July 16, 2005 3:02:09 PM

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

Load Sack wrote:

> I have a Digi-01 system and after what I have been reading on the net
> about Linux and lot latency, not to mention cost, I am considering
> moving over to the Linux platform.
>
> Has anyone in a professional venue done this or am I going to be a
> pioneer in this venture?

I don't think you're the first, but not many people have done this.
I know I'd hesitate before doing this in a professional environment, and I
wouldn't even _think_ about attempting this without a fallback system of
some kind.

If you're serious about it, set it up, but on a secondary system. If it
works, use it. If not, you've still got the main system instead.
If it were me, I'd treat the Linux installation as a kind of pet-project
until it's ready to make the switch.

Take what I say with a grain of salt, as I'm a Linux guy, and don't run a
professional studio.

> Pitfalls?

No VST plugins. There is a method of running Win32-x86 plugins inside
Linux, but AFAIK it's still at the witchcraft-and-incantations stage,
without a pretty interface to string it all together.
Personally I think that plugins are of the Devil anyway, and that
rack-mounted effects are the way to go ;-)

> How do clients react to Linux?

Do they need to know? ;-)

> tia for any and all advice!!

I'm going to stick with tape for as long as I can. But when I have to
migrate, it's not going to be Windows acting as the recorder.

--
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
July 16, 2005 6:03:39 PM

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

Did you absolutely have to cross post this to
comp.os.linux.advocacy? Here we go again. Heavy sigh.


Bob

Charles Karlsson wrote:
> Well put! I know several people using Linux as a back up and storage
> facility, but not as a digital workstation for a professional recording
> studio. ...

--
"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein
Anonymous
July 16, 2005 6:07:07 PM

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

Troll Alert!

Charles Karlsson wrote:
> In my opinion if you are a professional (ie:you make your living from
> audio) it would be financial suicide to move to Linux. I run several
> Linux clients and a Linux server in my home because I believe Linux is
> better suited than Windows for that situation. However my studio runs
> Windows because for that situation Windows is better suited than Linux.
> The main problem with Linux is that the applications are immature,
> constantly changing and support is terrible. The people writing these
> applications tend to look at them from a programmer POV and not a
> musicians POV which means you will be talking bits and bytes instead of
> beats and ticks.
>
> Your digi will not work with Linux so you need a new board from the
> start.
> If you like tinkering with computers, writing your own code then maybe
> you can write drivers for your board? Join the various Linux mailing
> lists (there must be 1000's of them) and get to work!
>

--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein
Anonymous
July 16, 2005 6:26:54 PM

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

Load Sack <loaded_sack@yahoo.com> wrote:
>I have a Digi-01 system and after what I have been reading on the net
>about Linux and lot latency, not to mention cost, I am considering
>moving over to the Linux platform.

PLEASE DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Anonymous
July 16, 2005 6:42:40 PM

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

Ardour and Rosegarden are better than Cubase SX3 which tends to crash
all the time.
Tell me how can you advocate using an application like Cubase when it
is so unstable?
Why are you throwing money away on Windows XP and overpriced programs
when you can get better programs for Linux and Open Source and the
programs are free?

Only an idiot with a lot of money to waste runs Windows or worse yet
the Mac which has to be the moet over priced computer
on the market.

Linux is free.
Linux works great!
Long live Open Source!

Stephen Tisi
Anonymous
July 16, 2005 6:43:00 PM

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

Ardour and Rosegarden are better than Cubase SX3 which tends to crash
all the time.
Tell me how can you advocate using an application like Cubase when it
is so unstable?
Why are you throwing money away on Windows XP and overpriced programs
when you can get better programs for Linux and Open Source and the
programs are free?

Only an idiot with a lot of money to waste runs Windows or worse yet
the Mac which has to be the moet over priced computer
on the market.

Linux is free.
Linux works great!
Long live Open Source!

Stephen Tisi
Anonymous
July 16, 2005 6:47:17 PM

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

There is nothing wrong with the Linux help groups and they are
certainly much better than the Windows groups I have seen which are
overloaded with kiddies.
Linux does indeed rock, but acting like a zealot only hurts the cause
of the Linux mission.
We are like soldiers in a foreign country. We have to treat the enemy
with respect and always be positive about our cause.
Dissing our fellow Linux users is just playing into the hands of the
Windroids.
Think about it.
Stephen Tisi
Anonymous
July 16, 2005 6:52:26 PM

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

On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 22:19:44 -0700, Load Sack wrote:

> I have a Digi-01 system and after what I have been reading on the net
> about Linux and lot latency, not to mention cost, I am considering
> moving over to the Linux platform.
>
> Has anyone in a professional venue done this or am I going to be a
> pioneer in this venture?
>
> Pitfalls?
>
> How do clients react to Linux?
>
> tia for any and all advice!!

Your Digi-01 box is not supported in Linux, so you'd need a new sound card
for a start.

I strongly advise trying Fedora Core 4 and the planet CCRMA rpm collection.
I set up an Ardour box the other day with FC4 and it took a total of two
hours from a blank hard drive to a fully working Linux DAW. Buy a new hard
drive for FC4 and try it out with whatever compatible sound card you can
find. You won't get decent latencies without a decent sound card, but you
will at least get an idea of what software's available.

As far as professional use goes, there was a good thread on
linux-audio-user mailing list about users recently. Go have a look in the
archives. You will probably get more pragmatic and useful replies by
posting this question there too.

Really, it's hard to say whether the audio software available will be
suitable for you without knowing more about your requirements. If your
digi system is working fine at the moment I'd think very seriously before
committing yourself to changing platform.
Anonymous
July 16, 2005 8:54:49 PM

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

On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 09:44:30 -0700, Charles Karlsson wrote:

>
> In my opinion if you are a professional (ie:you make your living from
> audio) it would be financial suicide to move to Linux.

I'm sure you do Flatfish.
Anonymous
July 16, 2005 8:56:53 PM

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

On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 09:55:41 -0700, Charles Karlsson wrote:

<snip>

Forget to nymshift before replying to yourself Flatfish?
Anonymous
July 16, 2005 9:09:04 PM

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

On 15 Jul 2005 22:19:44 -0700, Load Sack <loaded_sack@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I have a Digi-01 system and after what I have been reading on the net
> about Linux and lot latency, not to mention cost, I am considering
> moving over to the Linux platform.
>
> Has anyone in a professional venue done this or am I going to be a
> pioneer in this venture?
>
> Pitfalls?
>

You (and lotta folks) need to adjust your mental model.

A computer might just as well be a doorstop UNLESS the software is the
right software for the job at hand.

If the job requires Pro Tools, you need a computer that will reliably
run Pro Tools.

OTOH, if they job is firewalling, you need iptables (Linux). Mail, you
need sendmail et all (Linux), File serving you need SMB (Linux), web
serving Apache (Linux).

I use Linux for MANY things. It's even good for NORMAL desktop
applications via OpenOffice.

But the SOFTWARE (remember, only SW really matters) for professional
audio just isn't there yet.
July 16, 2005 9:53:56 PM

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

on July 16 16:44:34 +0000 (UTC) Charles Karlsson wrote:

> In my opinion ..

No history Yahoo email account cross posting through Google and an open
proxy and talking about his imaginary life as a record producer. Who
could it be I wonder?
Anonymous
July 16, 2005 9:59:55 PM

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

On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 09:44:30 -0700, Charles Karlsson wrote:

> In my opinion if you are a professional (ie:you make your living from
> audio) it would be financial suicide to move to Linux. I run several
> Linux clients and a Linux server in my home because I believe Linux is
> better suited than Windows for that situation. However my studio runs
> Windows because for that situation Windows is better suited than Linux.

Which is fine. If you're happy with that solution. Some are not.

> The main problem with Linux is that the applications are immature,
> constantly changing and support is terrible. The people writing these
> applications tend to look at them from a programmer POV and not a
> musicians POV which means you will be talking bits and bytes instead of
> beats and ticks.

Maybe. maybe not. There have been a number of articles recently in a
couple of the linux mags I buy, talking about Linux and artistic creation,
and this includes music creation.

Also, Windowsmusic apps did not spring fully developed from the head of
Zeus - they developed. Linux apps develop at a tremendous rate sometimes,
so your problem may go away sooner than you think, if you have nay
interest in using Linux musically.

The latest music/media Live CD MediaInLinux 3 (beta) is out now and worth
checking out. I downloaded it the other day and it's pretty good, with a
large variety of apps:

www.mediainlinux.org/

There's the agnula project too:

http://agnula.org/

>
> Your digi will not work with Linux so you need a new board from the
> start.
> If you like tinkering with computers, writing your own code then maybe
> you can write drivers for your board? Join the various Linux mailing
> lists (there must be 1000's of them) and get to work!

Surprisingly, that is exactly what a lot of musicians using Linux are
doing, rather than moaning about lack of Linux support and tools. It's
not for everyone, of course, but if more musicians get involved, it can
only be to the good. Just saying 'it's not ready' without attempting to do
anything to remedy the situation doesn't help much, IMO.

(Fup2COLA)

--
Kier
July 16, 2005 10:11:26 PM

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

on July 16 09:56:53 PDT Liam Slider wrote:

> On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 09:55:41 -0700, Charles Karlsson wrote:

> <snip>

> Forget to nymshift before replying to yourself Flatfish?

This is just so funny ...

He must be switching meds or something.

Rolling On The Floor Laughing and trying to not burst a rib.
Anonymous
July 16, 2005 10:22:08 PM

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

On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 09:55:41 -0700, Charles Karlsson wrote:

> Well put! I know several people using Linux as a back up and storage
> facility, but not as a digital workstation for a professional recording
> studio. The Linux audio programs are just too unstable and featurless,
> for example VST support, to be used for anything other than
> experimenting. With a Protools system at least you can pick up a
> project, carry it to another shop and go to work on it there. With
> Linux? You'll be lucky if you can keep it running long enough to even
> get into a project.

Come off it.

> Linux was designed from the ground up to be a programmers tool, a
> tinkerers delight and the perfect OS for a person who wants to be able
> to tweak every aspect of the OS.

That's true. But it's perfectly usuable as an ordinary desktop OS, and is
making huge strides into that arena.

>
> Why should a layperson give a hoot about having the source code to
> programs?

Depends on the layperson? Why do you lump all people together, as if all
were equally uninterested, lay person or no?

> Most people wouldn't know what to do with it anyway, yet Linux users
> have orgasms over that stuff.

I don't recall doing so.What is important is what the source code
represents - Freedom.

> I could care less about GPL and GNU.

So, because you could care less, everyone else must feel the same? I think
not.

> I pay my money and I get a program that works and comes with full
> support.

You can do just the same with Linux.

> Of course Linux users will whine about how unstable Windows is and how
> stable Linux is which is a complete fallacy.

Is it? There are a great many in COLA who can tell you different. Linux is
generally much more inclined to stability over long periods than Windows

> According to them Windows crashes (for them anyway) 10 times a day.

According to whom? Everyone? I doubt you'll find that many who agree.

> What a bunch of malarchy.

It doesn't crash much on me, but then I don't use it much, either. XP is
pretty stable, and Win2000, but the rest have no great reputation for
stability.

>
> Linux was never designed for artistic types who look at a computer and
> operating system as a tool to create.

That is a very large and not too accurate generalisation, I'm afraid. It
was designed in fact by people who look upon coding as creation that is
just a valid as music.

> That's one reason why the Mac is big in the arts although Windows is
> catching up.
> Who wants to tinker with programs when they have a song in their head
> just dying to be tracked?

Any 'tinkering' is done long before hand. Then you just let it run. That's
what Linux does, once you set it up right it just runs.

>
> Clients will lose faith in your abilities because unfortunately in this
> business the kind of gear you have does make a difference. First
> question I get from prospective clients is "what kind of protools system
> are you running" and yes I know it's stupid and unfair, but that's the
> way it works.

Yeah, we heard all this the last time.

>
> Answering a question like that with "well I don't run Protools, I run
> Linux" will be the kiss of death for your business.
>
> Linux just isn't ready for professional, or in some cases amateur
> digital audio work.
> It just isn't.

You haven't shown any proof of that. Just some opinions, not backed
up by much at all.

(Fup2COLA)

--
Kier
Anonymous
July 16, 2005 10:27:16 PM

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

On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 10:02:35 -0700, Charles Karlsson wrote:

<snip>
>
> I'm forced to depend upon either a programmer who wrote the
> application, and generally is thinking from the programmers point of
> view, not a musicians pov or I have to dive into the seamy underbelly
> of the Linux help groups where I will be called an idiot, stupid, RTFM,
> Windope and every other foul phrase the Linux users seem to have in
> their box of Trix.

If you go into hepl groups with that attitude, is it any wonder you are
not well-received? As for foul phrases, maybe you haven't seen what we are
called by wintrolls and other malcontents, every day, in our own newsgroup.

>
> Thanks but no thanks!
>
> Linux is not an option!

For you, maybe. For others, it can be.

--
Kier
Anonymous
July 17, 2005 12:50:42 AM

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

On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 13:43:18 -0700, Suzie Linux wrote:

<snip>

And here we see the other side of Flatfish....fanning the flames with
s/h/it's fin.
Anonymous
July 17, 2005 1:44:03 AM

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

Charles Karlsson wrote:
> In my opinion if you are a professional (ie:you make your living from
> audio) it would be financial suicide to move to Linux. I run several
> Linux clients and a Linux server in my home because I believe Linux is
> better suited than Windows for that situation.

Yes, Linux is very well suited to many situations.

> However my studio runs Windows because for that situation
> Windows is better suited than Linux.

Have you looked at any of these?

http://www.hitsquad.com/smm/linux/

> The main problem with Linux is that the applications are immature,
> constantly changing and support is terrible.

Are you comparing Linux FreeWare bundled with a freely downloadable
distribution of Linux to commercial software purchased for Windows?

You see, the problem with this comparison is that there are several
commercial packages that were written for UNIX and have recently been
ported to Linux.

http://www.rosegardenmusic.com/
This is a Linux package.

You may also find that you can break down the big monolithic package
you got for Windows and have each of the components competing in their
niche.

What do you want? A music editor system? A Midi Synthisizer
controller? A Midi sequencer? A mulitrack recording system? A
multitrack editor? Effects generators? Conversion to MP3?

This reminds me of the days when WinTrolls were claiming that Excel was
better than any spreadsheet for Linux. For a modest fee, you could
purchase Applix, which had "live-cells" which made it possible to
recalculate the spreadsheet and revise charts each time any of the
cells was altered - all in real time.

Live cells could be fed with statistics ranging from network statistics
to stock tickers. At the time, most of the stock tickers similar to
those offered by Ameritrade were not yet available, they weren't even
feasable for Windows 3.0 or Windows 9x. It was even a challenge for
Windows NT.

Of course, if you really wanted complex triggering and charting, you
could take an SNMP management system such as Tivoli, OpenView, or
Solstace and monitor thousands of stocks in real time.

Keep in mind that many of the really big studios actually DO create
custom equipment based on the needs of their particular organization,
artist and sound requirements.

What you want is freeze-dried instant microwavable success. You want
to be able to pull down free software have it all work perfectly, and
then cut a platinum record with a band who hasn't even rehearsed
together.

If you were a real record producer, paying real money to real
professional musicians and recording engineers, you would certainly not
want to leave yourself at the risk of some software that could be down
for several hours while you are paying a crew and band $600/hour.

Your statement above - claiming that Windows has the best recording
studio software available is suspicious. It's a bit like claiming that
Windows has the best video editing and graphics animation software even
though nearly all of the major studios use Linux and SGI software
(OpenGL based) for their studios. They also use lots of UNIX as well.
Windows isn't normally even a factor anymore. You would probably be
better off using an X-box than Windows.

> The people writing these
> applications tend to look at them from a programmer POV and not a
> musicians POV which means you will be talking bits and bytes instead of
> beats and ticks.

This is certainly true of the "freebie" software that is bundled with
Debian and other "OSS Only" distributions. This doesn't mean that
there isn't commercial software available - but you might need a very
big wallet.

Top of the line studio software can cost thousands or even tens of
thousands of dollars. This is why many studios don't even blink at the
cost of a couple of Sun or SGI workstations and servers.
July 17, 2005 3:27:34 AM

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

on July 16 21:47:23 +0000 (UTC) Stephen Tisi wrote:
msg: <1121550437.934717.213050@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 210.22.155.237

> There is nothing wr ..

What ever happened to Charles Karlsson flatfish?
Anonymous
July 17, 2005 4:11:34 AM

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

Charles Karlsson wrote:

> W

Blah...blah...blah. Yet Another flamebait troll crossposted to cola and
csma from rec.audio.pro, one of flatfish's favorite swimming holes.

Ooh, and look at that, they even set f-ups back to rec.audio.pro! How
considerate!

Just say no to trolls.

--
rapskat - 00:07:17 up 5:08, 2 users, load average: 0.02, 0.28, 0.58
We're upping our productivity with Linux - so up yours!
Anonymous
July 18, 2005 10:38:45 PM

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

In article <1121575443.288589.19360@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>, r.e.ballard@usa.net wrote:
> This reminds me of the days when WinTrolls were claiming that Excel was
> better than any spreadsheet for Linux. For a modest fee, you could
> purchase Applix, which had "live-cells" which made it possible to
> recalculate the spreadsheet and revise charts each time any of the
> cells was altered - all in real time.
>
> Live cells could be fed with statistics ranging from network statistics
> to stock tickers. At the time, most of the stock tickers similar to
> those offered by Ameritrade were not yet available, they weren't even
> feasable for Windows 3.0 or Windows 9x. It was even a challenge for
> Windows NT.

The Mac had this with System 7 in 1991.

--
--Tim Smith
July 19, 2005 5:25:03 PM

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

To dump pro-tools would be a mistake. It's a fantastic Hardware/Software
solution. Pro-tools is better in an OSX environment than Windows. I know,
I've used it in both.
Linux has some great tools for amateur recording, knocking up a demo or
recording for a small indie label. In the niche of home recording on a
budget, Linux rocks! The quality factor is mainly in the realm of soft
synths and effects although if you are using outboard equipment that
problem disappears and that copy of Ardour you've been waiting to play
with looks all the more attractive.

It's only when you get to the level of perfection major labels
require in sound quality and mastering, OSX and Pro-tools are the only
real choice.

--
Jafar Calley
Producer - http://moonlife-records.com
--------------------------------------
See the latest Mars and Saturn images
http://fatcat.homelinux.org
Anonymous
July 20, 2005 8:55:04 PM

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

"jafar" <nooo@nospam.com> wrote:
>
> Pro-tools is better in an OSX environment than Windows.

In what way(s)?



> I know, I've used it in both.

Me too. In fact, I go back and forth between the two every day. Seems
essentially identical to me, but maybe I've missed something. What is
it that's better about Pro Tools in OSX?

--
"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)
July 21, 2005 3:18:19 AM

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

On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 16:55:04 +0000, Lorin David Schultz wrote:

>> I know, I've used it in both.
>
> Me too. In fact, I go back and forth between the two every day. Seems
> essentially identical to me, but maybe I've missed something. What is
> it that's better about Pro Tools in OSX?

Maybe it's just personal choice. It just seems .. more comfortable?
Snappier? I've had lockups on windows protools systems but maybe thats
just the particular person's OS installation rather than protools's fault.
I guess making sure the protools system is isolated from the net helps
too. Windows can be prone to viruses and malware coming up and biting you
when you least expect it.
Maybe next time it happens I should offer my services to the client as a
computer engineer to clean and reinstall their systems for them. At extra
cost of course ;) 

Dreaming of Protools linux running on a custom low latency kernel... sigh...

--
Jafar Calley
Producer - http://moonlife-records.com
--------------------------------------
See the latest Mars and Saturn images
http://fatcat.homelinux.org
Anonymous
July 21, 2005 7:31:38 PM

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

Hello.
I'm a dutchman and i'm looking for protools for windows xp. for privite us.
Can somebody give me an idee
jorgvbeem@wanadoo.nl

"jafar" <nooo@nospam.com> schreef in bericht
news:p an.2005.07.19.11.24.55.406332@nospam.com...
> To dump pro-tools would be a mistake. It's a fantastic Hardware/Software
> solution. Pro-tools is better in an OSX environment than Windows. I know,
> I've used it in both.
> Linux has some great tools for amateur recording, knocking up a demo or
> recording for a small indie label. In the niche of home recording on a
> budget, Linux rocks! The quality factor is mainly in the realm of soft
> synths and effects although if you are using outboard equipment that
> problem disappears and that copy of Ardour you've been waiting to play
> with looks all the more attractive.
>
> It's only when you get to the level of perfection major labels
> require in sound quality and mastering, OSX and Pro-tools are the only
> real choice.
>
> --
> Jafar Calley
> Producer - http://moonlife-records.com
> --------------------------------------
> See the latest Mars and Saturn images
> http://fatcat.homelinux.org
>
Anonymous
July 21, 2005 7:31:39 PM

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

In article <dbob26$emh$00$1@news.t-online.com>,
Peter =?UTF-8?B?S8O2aGxtYW5u?= <peter.koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
>begin virus.txt.scr Jorg van Beem wrote:
>
>> Hello.
>> I'm a dutchman and i'm looking for protools for windows xp. for privite
>> us. Can somebody give me an idee
>> jorgvbeem@wanadoo.nl
>
>You are in the wrong group here
>
>Windows groups with piarted software are over there --->
>You will find most windows users of this group also at those places

Given that Pro Tools Free is available for, well, free... why would anyone
want to bootleg any other version?

Given that he wants a copy for XP, why ask on Linux and Mac groups?

I think this is a troll.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Anonymous
July 21, 2005 10:30:04 PM

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

Scott Dorsey wrote:

> Given that Pro Tools Free is available for, well, free... why would
> anyone want to bootleg any other version?

well, it IS free but:
" Pro Tools FREE for Windows 98 SE & Windows Me (will not run on Windows XP,
2000, or NT) "

so, the reason is simple... ;-) could also be, that he wants more than only
8 audio tracks.

besides that, I´ve tried PTfree some years ago. Horrible latency etc.
IMHO there are multitrack programs for XP with much better performance.

> Given that he wants a copy for XP, why ask on Linux and Mac groups?

maybe he just didn´t notice that there was cross-post?

Phil
Anonymous
July 25, 2005 12:17:05 PM

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

"jafar" <nooo@nospam.com> wrote:
>
> Maybe it's just personal choice. It just seems .. more comfortable?
> Snappier? I've had lockups on windows protools systems but maybe
> thats just the particular person's OS installation rather than
> protools's fault.

My XP laptop has never crashed with a Pro Tools Mbox setup. Our G4
tower locks up a couple times per week. Neither OS is perfect and
neither is immune to cockups. My workday is proof that an XP machine
can be a perfect Pro Tools environment, and that a Mac can screw up
royally when there's no Macxpert around to tweak it up.



> I guess making sure the protools system is isolated from the net
> helps too. Windows can be prone to viruses and malware coming up and
> biting you when you least expect it.

I have two Pro Tools machines running XP (one of them being the laptop
mentioned above) that are on a wireless network connected to the net,
and neither has any problems. I just don't play "free" online games or
use P2P networks or install "helpful" toolbars or do any of the many
other things that invite shitheads into my machine. Viruses and malware
don't just magically appear all on their own; someone has to let them
in.

Using Pro Tools with Windows isn't a problem. Allowing one's machine to
become unstable is, whether that machine runs OSX or XP.

--
"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
July 25, 2005 8:42:38 PM

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

Lorin David Schultz wrote:
>
> "jafar" <nooo@nospam.com> wrote:
> >
> > Maybe it's just personal choice. It just seems .. more comfortable?
> > Snappier? I've had lockups on windows protools systems but maybe
> > thats just the particular person's OS installation rather than
> > protools's fault.
>
> My XP laptop has never crashed with a Pro Tools Mbox setup. Our G4
> tower locks up a couple times per week.

Sounds like a faulty memory strip. Our G4 has never locked
up in a year and a half of use.

I've had XP Home mysteriously reboot on a new laptop. I
suspect that the memory was faulty as well, which allowed me
to take it back for a refund.

To prevent this from happening, the best way is to buy a
machine with ECC memory that prevents this from happening.

> Neither OS is perfect and
> neither is immune to cockups. My workday is proof that an XP machine
> can be a perfect Pro Tools environment, and that a Mac can screw up
> royally when there's no Macxpert around to tweak it up.
>
> > I guess making sure the protools system is isolated from the net
> > helps too. Windows can be prone to viruses and malware coming up and
> > biting you when you least expect it.
>
> I have two Pro Tools machines running XP (one of them being the laptop
> mentioned above) that are on a wireless network connected to the net,
> and neither has any problems. I just don't play "free" online games or
> use P2P networks or install "helpful" toolbars or do any of the many
> other things that invite shitheads into my machine. Viruses and malware
> don't just magically appear all on their own; someone has to let them
> in.

With windows it is a problem and is easier to happen than
other os/es.
!