Find the answer to your Linux question:
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 29
Originally Posted by argosy There is room for improvement here I couldn't concur more with you. Well, this is the whole gist of this thread, I guess. Thank you for ...
Enjoy an ad free experience by logging in. Not a member yet? Register.
  1. #11
    Just Joined!
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    17

    Quote Originally Posted by argosy View Post
    There is room for improvement here
    I couldn't concur more with you. Well, this is the whole gist of this thread, I guess.

    Thank you for the insights in regards to JACK, PulseAudio and ASIO. I'm not sure whether I have ASIO or not; whatever is on the Macs and PCs, it works. Here it is to hope that one day we'll be able to talk in the same way about JACK (or its successor)

  2. #12
    Just Joined!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by mrdelurk View Post
    As a potential target user of Linux music distros I agree with your points 1 through 4. A UNIX kernel itself is a viable host for audio; the music industry's mainstay, (Mac) OSX is based upon the Mach kernel, with certain parts from FreeBSD's and NetBSD's UNIX implementation in a POSIX compliant core. My hunch says, if you peak under XP/Win7's hood real good past the Microsoft smoke (and mirrors), you'll probably also discover a similar UNIX core. So a UNIX core itself works, it's just what gets piled on top of it.
    MS isn't unix/linux by any stretch of the imagination. this is very in accurate info!
    the kernel's are vastly different. i will say though, they are similar only to the point of how
    any OS is similar, and comparisions be made...

    stacks, IO, modules, etc...

    but still very different..

  3. #13
    Just Joined!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by minthaka View Post
    Obviously the audio part of the Linux is the worst part of the entire system.
    I'm trying to have a real audio experience on Linux since 4 years, but I think that day will never dawn. Why there's no possibility to have an all in one kernel for all purposes? I'm using a wide range of applications. My favorite would be Ardour. But it is based on a farting called jack. I had to see how people are putting their efforts into developing something like PulseAudio, which is 0% needed and useful and at the same time leaving xruns from kernels untouched. I'm getting convinced that a Linux kernel is the worst piece of software ever written. I love Linux, but how on earth can it happen, that a crippled OS like Windows has a perfect audio system, with no real-time issues, no overruns, and other ********s so characteristic for Linux. What is the point in monolithic kernel, if we have to bow before the PC if its audio system works normally? Can somebody explain me why is audio so bad?
    Please, don't tell me "You should use UbuntuStudio, ..." for audio purposes. This answer is simply not acceptable. Should I install for each task a separate OS?
    A Linux for graphics, another for music creation, a third one for office...
    I even would help develop some applications, but it seems to me, that the kernel itself is sick. Any Linux audio professional here?

    Intel Celeron-D 2.66 GHz
    1.5 GB RAM
    Audigy 2

    That would make rock'n roll on Windows!
    if you have spent 4 years to have a good linux proaudio experience and haven't figured it out by now, my guess is maybe linux isn't for you... i do proaudio with linux. I have very few problems.
    I use wineASIO, all of my favorite Windows VST's - with lower latencies than the same hardware provides in WinXP. Jack is great(if setup properly). it allows for some interesting design and flexibility. I do agree linux' weak area is audio - but that has to do with it's history, being used mostly for servers. it would be nice to see ALSA fixed up, but as long as you have decent hardware and a little knowledge most, if not all problems can be solved.

    As far as the linux kernel goes. it's not the worst peice of garbage written, it sounds like your understanding of how it works might be the problem. Linux at this point(for proaudio) is not plug and play....but it is very scalable, and you can be the architect of your OS. i run Fedora 12 with a modded-Zen-kernel(rt-kernel with ck's BFS scheduler) on my CoreDuo dell laptop and it benchmarks like Core 2 Duo. it runs my highly graphical desktop with 130-140meg of RAM and runs smoothly. I often will be running Native Instruments VST's : Battery3, Massive, FM8 - multiple instances of each and i can throw in some FX, or maybe couple really good LV2 or Native-VST plugins(Loomer), i use my sequencer to control them all at once and play my keyboard no problem! with latencies under 5msec. and that's on a 32-bit old laptop. did i have to figure out how to make it all work, and work well...? yes i did, but that is apart of using linux and i don't complain about it...

    and using say "ubuntustudio" for audio IS acceptable! again linux' roots are in servers, therefore by default most distro's aren't setup to be an ideal desktop(although they are getting better all the time), let alone a DAW or something of that nature... You don't need seperate OS's for each task, depending on what you have in mind you might need a seperate kernel or two. in my case, i don't use my multimedia kernel when i am building, compiling, or using an IDE. as i can get better performance out of another kernel. but linux can be used for proaudio, just look at the "receptor2" made by muse research it is a very high-end synth-module....and it's based on
    linux, and it solid-state reliable - unlike windows, in fact i could sit around and build my own linux based audio hardware. this is something you simply cannot do properly with windows or OSX. another cool piece of linux audio gear is the MISA digital guitar...based on gentoo.
    look them up!

    lastly, saying that you would help develop software for linux, only if the kernel wasn't sick seems like an excuse. after four years of using linux, if you were going to do help develop the platform, then you already would be.

    linux has it's issues, but it is a step in the right direction and can be made to be very useful, if you have the right ideas and a little knowledge to make it work. i use OSX as well, but i definetly prefer my linux setups. i like OSX for LOGIC 9, and drawing with my tablet.
    linux for everything else including bringing my setup to jams..

  4. #14
    Linux Enthusiast minthaka's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Mol, Vojvodina
    Posts
    556
    I'm also using a rt-kernel with Ingo-Molnar patch. It's not bad, but with the same architecture Windows gives much better results. In past, I was experimenting with recompiling the kernel, but that didn't bring any significant improvements, or if it did, that was on account of other abilities. Some hardware parts just stopped to work.

    I still believe, that a simplicity is something must-have, and I admit that I don't understand what goes under the hood, but what I see is not I'd like.

    I'm not developing the platform itself, just I'm adding my two coins (see below), since I have too many a tasks, so I'm just suggesting what ought to be changed.


    So you are using the VST plugins used for Windows? I like GuitarRig, but I've never tried to use it with Ardour. Perhaps I didn't wanted to recompile it from sources. Anyway, I don't understand why is there a restriction in a regular release. If I develop my own bridge toward someone's application, how can that person hinder me from using it?
    If you need a CD/DVD catalogizer, give a try to my program:
    http://www.kde-apps.org/content/show...content=100682
    Linux Usert#430188

  5. #15
    Just Joined!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    9
    Maybe your hardware isn't well supported in linux, you say windows gives much better results. then maybe you should stick with windows, obviously you have better support there, and aren't required to have intimate knowledge of your OS. like i said before linux isn't plug aqnd play. everyone would love it, if it was, but that is simply not the case!

    to use linux for pro applications pretty much requires that you know what's going on under the hood. it requires more effort than hacking MacOSX to run on a PC with un-supported hardware... as an example! Linux takes a lot effort and experimentation to yield the best results, and have a finely tuned system.

    -what distro are you using??

    in my experience the right distro can make a big difference...

    -what window manager do you use, are you using compiz?

    a bloated WM and certain parts of Compiz can interfere with audio production, cause Xruns, etc. this is probably true of Kwin too, although i do not like KDE, so i cant be sure.

    -how much of your OS and software are compiled from source? (and optimized)
    or is most of it, pre-built and installed from your package manager?

    this make all the difference. if you simply rely on your distro's standard packages your performance will suffer. using source code is often better, you can optimize and customize..

    when configuring your system how many modules/drivers are being loaded into your kernel that you aren't using???

    this can cause bad performance and conflicts!

    just some food for thought!

    About VST:

    yes i use windows VST in linux. I don't use GuitarRig, although i know other people do. I am more interested in using VST instruments, as linux lacks good synths, drum machines, etc. - in comparison to Mac and MS.

    as far as why Ardour doesn't come stock with VST support, it is buggy. just like Ardour's MIDI is buggy. So this isn't a restriction on a "regular release" and no one is stoppping you from using this stuff. they just can't include it by default because it has problems.

    so if you develop your own bridge towards someone's application and that application is OpenSource, no one can hinder you from using it. they can only hinder you from using it, if it is proprietary. which happens all the time, that's why your hardware isn't well supported, that's why VST wasn't a standard in linux. It seems the root of your issues with linux have more to do with manufactures and proprietary licences, that are hindering your OS(linux).

  6. #16
    Just Joined!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    9
    ]

    Jack is the equivalent of ASIO+Rewire+coreaudio+Soundflower. It is sample accurate, synchronous and suitable for professional use. There is no hidden sample rate conversion or bit depth reduction. This is what people who are recording music professionally want.

    I hope that clears things up a little.
    that is misleading Coreaudio = ALSA. and Jack = ASIO,rewire,Soundflower. if jack equaled Coreaudio, it would handle the all of the audio hardware drivers, but it doesn't. instead it runs on top of alsa..

    I really love the rest of your points though, the guy you were responding too was pretty much incorrect or inaccurate in almost everything he was saying.

    cheerz

  7. #17
    Linux Enthusiast minthaka's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Mol, Vojvodina
    Posts
    556
    And where would you place the PulseAudio? I'd put it into waste bin. Each and every time I switch to another distro, one of my first activities is to wipe PA entirely. Prejudice? No. Needs. I cannot manage my sources with this piece of junk. I cannot use the input/output channels on my will. I'm getting some sort of mixer, which is even worse than in Windows. And the distribution maintainers are blind and deaf: you can cry as much as you can, they won't remove PA. No goals, no use, no functionality, nor even a NEED for it...
    If you need a CD/DVD catalogizer, give a try to my program:
    http://www.kde-apps.org/content/show...content=100682
    Linux Usert#430188

  8. #18
    Just Joined!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by minthaka View Post
    And where would you place the PulseAudio? I'd put it into waste bin. Each and every time I switch to another distro, one of my first activities is to wipe PA entirely. Prejudice? No. Needs. I cannot manage my sources with this piece of junk. I cannot use the input/output channels on my will. I'm getting some sort of mixer, which is even worse than in Windows. And the distribution maintainers are blind and deaf: you can cry as much as you can, they won't remove PA. No goals, no use, no functionality, nor even a NEED for it...
    i completely agree with you

    i won't even allow PulseAudio to install, i have the option on install to not have it or any other crap
    that i don't need. which is a good thing!

    PulseAudio just creates more latency and causes more hassles, and is unnecessary.

    ts9

  9. #19
    Linux Guru coopstah13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    NH, USA
    Posts
    3,149
    i suppose if you only need one application at a time to use the sound then that is fine, but otherwise you need a mixer like pulse or ESD

    I purposefully install pulseaudio on arch linux and have no problems with it whatsoever

  10. #20
    Linux Enthusiast minthaka's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Mol, Vojvodina
    Posts
    556
    But you see, coopstah, the problem is very essential. It's not just me or you: there are tens of thousand dissatisfied Linux users, just read the articles about PA's removal! ! If you've ever used kmix, you probably saw, that there are channels for different parts of the sound devices, so the user could adjust which to use: whether to use microphone only to record, or to let it be mixed with other channels.

    The point is: an averaged user is FORCED to use PulseAudio, since it is preinstalled, and there are no signs that the main stream distros intend to remove that abortion , or in other case they are condemned to seek complicated solutions to remove it. It is not fair. IT IS THE BETRAYAL OF THE VERY IDEA OF LINUX! Another good example of Linux' decay is the trouble with K3B/cdrtools: Although there are "possibilities" to use burning engine different than Debian's farting 'Cdrkit', in reality you cannot use the good old cdrtools, at least since version 1.0.5 and above. Of course the cdrkit doesn't support my Pioneer 111-D. I see all this as a new kind of tyranny. You cannot configure things as you like anymore! Is this a new kind of closed-sourcedness rising here?
    If you need a CD/DVD catalogizer, give a try to my program:
    http://www.kde-apps.org/content/show...content=100682
    Linux Usert#430188

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •