[Agua]

Well, it has been a year or so since the last Linux/Ubuntu post
(unless I missed something), so I think I will bring it up again.
Sometime in the next twelve hours or so I will be getting my new sound
card :-D (rme 9632) which has been supported in Linux for quite some
time. I'm excited to try it out and was wondering if there is anyone
else out there using Ubuntu Studio (I'm using 8.04) with an RME
interface--especially if you have encountered any snags along the way.

Cheers and a tip of the hat to my profs and the folks I met at AES
this year...

[Emiliano Grilli]

Agua writes:

Well, it has been a year or so since the last Linux/Ubuntu post
(unless I missed something), so I think I will bring it up again.
Sometime in the next twelve hours or so I will be getting my new sound
card :-D (rme 9632) which has been supported in Linux for quite some
time. I'm excited to try it out and was wondering if there is anyone
else out there using Ubuntu Studio (I'm using 8.04) with an RME
interface--especially if you have encountered any snags along the way.

Hi,

I don't have an RME card and I don't run ubuntustudio, but I use
GNU/Linux for my audio needs since many years.

You should go fine with ubuntustudio, but since they are tied to the
main ubuntu release, they ship a 2.6.26 kernel in 8.04.

Other audio distributions such as planetCCRMA@home and 64studio use an
older kernel (2.6.21) that is said to perform better with the patches
needed for realtime operation (these patches are known as "Ingo
Molnar").

So if you find the performance of the system unsatisfying, you can try
one of these instead:

http://www.64studio.com/
http://ccrma.stanford.edu/planetccrma/software/

The first is debian based (like ubuntu, and with direct access to the
huge debian repository) the second is fedora based.

You should be able to get an acceptable performance with ubuntustudio,
and probably a better user experience overall. But be aware that the
ubuntustudio crew had to make compromises on the realtime side of
things to stay current with ubuntu.

To seek for live help, go to #ubuntustudio or #ardour channels on
irc.freenode.net

Another place full of knowledgeable people is the linux-audio-users
mailing list:

http://lad.linuxaudio.org/subscribe/lau.html
archives: http://lalists.stanford.edu/lau/

If you like forums better:

http://www.linuxmusicians.com
http://www.soundonsound.com/forum/po...p?Board=LinMus

HTH
Ciao
--
Emiliano Grilli
Linux user #209089
http://www.emillo.net

[Randy Yates]

Emiliano Grilli writes:

Agua writes:

Well, it has been a year or so since the last Linux/Ubuntu post
(unless I missed something), so I think I will bring it up again.
Sometime in the next twelve hours or so I will be getting my new sound
card :-D (rme 9632) which has been supported in Linux for quite some
time. I'm excited to try it out and was wondering if there is anyone
else out there using Ubuntu Studio (I'm using 8.04) with an RME
interface--especially if you have encountered any snags along the way.

Hi,

I don't have an RME card and I don't run ubuntustudio, but I use
GNU/Linux for my audio needs since many years.

You should go fine with ubuntustudio, but since they are tied to the
main ubuntu release, they ship a 2.6.26 kernel in 8.04.

Other audio distributions such as planetCCRMA@home and 64studio use an
older kernel (2.6.21) that is said to perform better with the patches
needed for realtime operation (these patches are known as "Ingo
Molnar").

So if you find the performance of the system unsatisfying, you can try
one of these instead:

http://www.64studio.com/
http://ccrma.stanford.edu/planetccrma/software/

Hi Emiliano,

Thanks for this information.

The ccrma build for fedora 8 looks interesting to me as I was
considering basing our church's sound computer on a linux OS and I've
been using F8 happily for about a year now.

The big potential problem I see is this: does the patched real-time
version of the kernel have a corresponding set of video drivers (e.g.,
my machine uses the nvidia driver)?
--
% Randy Yates % "She tells me that she likes me very much,
%% Fuquay-Varina, NC % but when I try to touch, she makes it
%%% 919-577-9882 % all too clear."
%%%% % 'Yours Truly, 2095', *Time*, ELO
http://www.digitalsignallabs.com

[Emiliano Grilli]

Randy Yates writes:

Emiliano Grilli writes:

http://ccrma.stanford.edu/planetccrma/software/

Hi Emiliano,

Thanks for this information.

The ccrma build for fedora 8 looks interesting to me as I was
considering basing our church's sound computer on a linux OS and I've
been using F8 happily for about a year now.

The big potential problem I see is this: does the patched real-time
version of the kernel have a corresponding set of video drivers (e.g.,
my machine uses the nvidia driver)?

I don't use the CCRMA bundle anymore, but it should be possible.

See this thread for example:

http://ccrma-mail.stanford.edu/piper...ay/014767.html

There are two ways, one more "brutal" using the nvidia installer and
the other using a package called livna. People reported
success... But things may also have changed since these posts...

HTH
Ciao
--
Emiliano Grilli
Linux user #209089
http://www.emillo.net

[Randy Yates]

Emiliano Grilli writes:

Randy Yates writes:

Emiliano Grilli writes:

http://ccrma.stanford.edu/planetccrma/software/

Hi Emiliano,

Thanks for this information.

The ccrma build for fedora 8 looks interesting to me as I was
considering basing our church's sound computer on a linux OS and I've
been using F8 happily for about a year now.

The big potential problem I see is this: does the patched real-time
version of the kernel have a corresponding set of video drivers (e.g.,
my machine uses the nvidia driver)?

I don't use the CCRMA bundle anymore, but it should be possible.

What do you use?

See this thread for example:

http://ccrma-mail.stanford.edu/piper...ay/014767.html
There are two ways, one more "brutal" using the nvidia installer and
the other using a package called livna. People reported
success... But things may also have changed since these posts...

Yes, I always use the livna repo for the associated nvidia driver
version when fedora updates the kernel - I don't know of anyone else
that has it. I just didn't know if the "real-time" kernel version had a
matching nvidia driver.
--
% Randy Yates % "Though you ride on the wheels of tomorrow,
%% Fuquay-Varina, NC % you still wander the fields of your
%%% 919-577-9882 % sorrow."
%%%% % '21st Century Man', *Time*, ELO
http://www.digitalsignallabs.com

[Emiliano Grilli]

Randy Yates writes:

Emiliano Grilli writes:

Randy Yates writes:

Emiliano Grilli writes:

http://ccrma.stanford.edu/planetccrma/software/

Hi Emiliano,

Thanks for this information.

The ccrma build for fedora 8 looks interesting to me as I was
considering basing our church's sound computer on a linux OS and I've
been using F8 happily for about a year now.

The big potential problem I see is this: does the patched real-time
version of the kernel have a corresponding set of video drivers (e.g.,
my machine uses the nvidia driver)?

I don't use the CCRMA bundle anymore, but it should be possible.

What do you use?

This installation began as 64studio, but I upgraded to debian lenny,
keeping the good low-latency64studio kernel.

I used CCRMA for about two years when it was Red Hat 8.0 and it was a
very positive experience, but dificult to mantain on the long term
without reinstalling a new one. Debian has its very roough edges, but
for package management and system administration is a paradise

I installed this system I think three or more years ago and I've been
able to stay relatively up to date without reinstalling. Free software
moves fast and a debian system is very flexible in this respect.

See this thread for example:

http://ccrma-mail.stanford.edu/piper...ay/014767.html
There are two ways, one more "brutal" using the nvidia installer and
the other using a package called livna. People reported
success... But things may also have changed since these posts...

Yes, I always use the livna repo for the associated nvidia driver
version when fedora updates the kernel - I don't know of anyone else
that has it. I just didn't know if the "real-time" kernel version had a
matching nvidia driver.

Now I'm not using the proprietary nvidia driver but the free "nv"
driver for X, I tried the proprietary one once to see compiz and all
the "bells & whistles" but I don't need that for working, so I simply
use the free non-accelerated driver.

The 3D destkop is impressive, but after a week I switched back to "no
visual effects"

Cheers
--
Emiliano Grilli
Linux user #209089
http://www.emillo.net

[Agua]

Thank you for all of this info!

I will check out those sites.

Enjoy the day,
Shaun Wall

[Moshe Goldfarb.]

On Mon, 13 Oct 2008 00:59:21 -0700 (PDT), Agua wrote:

Well, it has been a year or so since the last Linux/Ubuntu post
(unless I missed something), so I think I will bring it up again.
Sometime in the next twelve hours or so I will be getting my new sound
card :-D (rme 9632) which has been supported in Linux for quite some
time. I'm excited to try it out and was wondering if there is anyone
else out there using Ubuntu Studio (I'm using 8.04) with an RME
interface--especially if you have encountered any snags along the way.

Cheers and a tip of the hat to my profs and the folks I met at AES
this year...

I've used Ubuntu Studio as well as the CCRMA and others and they are
alright however the Linux offerings in general have a long, long, long way
to go before they even approach the lowest rung on the Mac or Windows DAW
software ladder.

You will find that you will screw around more with the system than create
music.

Jack, Ardour, Low latency kernels this that and the other thing "oh my"
make Linux a real PITA IMHO.

Then there are the plugins.
Windows and Mac have them and Linux does not.
Stuff like Oxford, Waves, Drums From Hell, Ivory, Garritan, URS, UAD etc
all run under Windows/Mac but not under Linux, or if they can be made to
run it's such a PITA it's not worth it.

The interesting thing is if you look at the Linux audio user groups and
sample the questions being asked, it's almost exclusively about how to make
the system work and there is very little about actually making music.
Seriously.
And then if you ask questions, chances are you are talking to a developer
who may know the program very well, obviously, but has no clue when you
start talking about a ring in a reverb or an artifact in a sample
conversion etc.
It's like asking Bill Gates how to click on a window and getting a 3 hour
tutorial on how the software generates the title bar, scroll bar, color etc
of the Window when all you wanted to know is where to click.

My advice is to give it a try but don't get wrapped up in trying to make it
function.
If your goal is to make music, get Reaper or Cubase/Sonar/etc lite versions
and create rather than become a programmer.

IMHO the only current advantage to Linux is price and access to source
code.

FWIW I use Linux for most everything except my audio work.

P.S. RME and Maudio (MidiMan) are very well supported under Linux.

--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
Please Visit www.linsux.org

[Bill Ruys]

"Moshe Goldfarb." wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 13 Oct 2008 00:59:21 -0700 (PDT), Agua wrote:

Well, it has been a year or so since the last Linux/Ubuntu post
(unless I missed something), so I think I will bring it up again.
Sometime in the next twelve hours or so I will be getting my new sound
card :-D (rme 9632) which has been supported in Linux for quite some
time. I'm excited to try it out and was wondering if there is anyone
else out there using Ubuntu Studio (I'm using 8.04) with an RME
interface--especially if you have encountered any snags along the way.

Cheers and a tip of the hat to my profs and the folks I met at AES
this year...

I've used Ubuntu Studio as well as the CCRMA and others and they are
alright however the Linux offerings in general have a long, long, long way
to go before they even approach the lowest rung on the Mac or Windows DAW
software ladder.

You will find that you will screw around more with the system than create
music.

Jack, Ardour, Low latency kernels this that and the other thing "oh my"
make Linux a real PITA IMHO.

Then there are the plugins.
Windows and Mac have them and Linux does not.
Stuff like Oxford, Waves, Drums From Hell, Ivory, Garritan, URS, UAD etc
all run under Windows/Mac but not under Linux, or if they can be made to
run it's such a PITA it's not worth it.

The interesting thing is if you look at the Linux audio user groups and
sample the questions being asked, it's almost exclusively about how to
make
the system work and there is very little about actually making music.
Seriously.
And then if you ask questions, chances are you are talking to a developer
who may know the program very well, obviously, but has no clue when you
start talking about a ring in a reverb or an artifact in a sample
conversion etc.
It's like asking Bill Gates how to click on a window and getting a 3 hour
tutorial on how the software generates the title bar, scroll bar, color
etc
of the Window when all you wanted to know is where to click.

My advice is to give it a try but don't get wrapped up in trying to make
it
function.
If your goal is to make music, get Reaper or Cubase/Sonar/etc lite
versions
and create rather than become a programmer.

IMHO the only current advantage to Linux is price and access to source
code.

FWIW I use Linux for most everything except my audio work.

P.S. RME and Maudio (MidiMan) are very well supported under Linux.

--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
Please Visit www.linsux.org

I guess there a two approaches to this kind of thing. One is to seek out
the tool (in this case DAW) that best meets your needs and then install the
underlying operating system that particular DAW runs on. The reality is
that the industry proven and supported tools mostly run on Mac/Windows
platforms right now.

The other approach is to pick your OS and then try and make it do what you
need. This is a valid approach if you enjoy beating new paths and are
turned on by the challenge of tweaking and tuning. There are lots of
compromises required for this approach, but if it turns you on, why not?

I'm a full-time IT guy. I have customers that like the idea of Linux, but
the fact is that often the only supported software tool that is an accepted
solution for their business needs runs exclusively on a Windows server.

I'm somewhat platform agnostic. But in any commercial enterprise, you need
to pick a solution, not a puzzle. The OS underneath becomes secondary to
the solution. But for home experimenters, the same rules don't apply.

Bill.


** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

[Moshe Goldfarb.]

On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 10:56:24 +1300, Bill Ruys wrote:


I guess there a two approaches to this kind of thing. One is to seek out
the tool (in this case DAW) that best meets your needs and then install the
underlying operating system that particular DAW runs on. The reality is
that the industry proven and supported tools mostly run on Mac/Windows
platforms right now.

That is my personal preference.
Find the applications you like and then commit to the OS they run on.

The other approach is to pick your OS and then try and make it do what you
need. This is a valid approach if you enjoy beating new paths and are
turned on by the challenge of tweaking and tuning. There are lots of
compromises required for this approach, but if it turns you on, why not?

Nothing wrong with it at all but most musicians, traditional musicians not
mathematicians making formula's sing and stuff like that, prefer to be
ready to rock and roll when the creative urge hits.
The last thing they want to do is screw around with the underpinnings of
their tools.

I'm a full-time IT guy. I have customers that like the idea of Linux, but
the fact is that often the only supported software tool that is an accepted
solution for their business needs runs exclusively on a Windows server.

True again, however the times are changing and Linux is catching up.
Albeit it very slowly mainly due to fragmentation and total confusion in
the development world.


I'm somewhat platform agnostic. But in any commercial enterprise, you need
to pick a solution, not a puzzle. The OS underneath becomes secondary to
the solution. But for home experimenters, the same rules don't apply.

Bill.

I pretty much agree with what you are saying Bill.

The good thing about Linux is the guy can run a live CD, try it out and not
have to commit it to his hdisk if it doesn't work out.
It will of course run slow, but it's enough to get the idea.


--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
Please Visit www.linsux.org