Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #81   Report Post  
Richard Crowley
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Noah Roberts" wrote ...
Richard Crowley wrote:
On the "Applications" page http://www.agnula.org/packages/
I saw lots of "gui front ends" and "tookits" for synthisizer
applications, but nothing even remotely resembling a ready-
to-run recording/editing application (like Audacity, Ardour,
etc.) Did I miss something?


Yes. You have missed a lot. That is what happens when you
make snap judgments about things you know nothing of.


Thanks for the "help". You have confirmed that Linux is just
as arcane and inaccessable as ever.

http://apt.agnula.org/demudi/pool/main/a/


Which means what exactly? Are you saying that all of these apps
are included in the agnula distro? Where is that documented? There
is no apparent mention of them on the recommended Agnula URL. Or
is documentation something outsiders should know nothing about?
  #82   Report Post  
Kurt Albershardt
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Scott Dorsey wrote:
In article znr1117410129k@trad, Mike Rivers wrote:

So why hasn't some enterprising Linux/Ardour advocate put together an
Ardour distribution package that can be easily installed on a fresh
out of the box computer to provide a stable, capable DAW for less
money than ProTools, Nuendo, Samplitude, Cakewalk, and the like? Seems
like if Linux, Ardour, and the support programs are as solid as is
claimed, this could be a great deal for, say, $100 or so.



They have. It comes with a Linux distribution that is very stripped
down and doesn't have a lot of other stuff available.



IMO this simplicity is a *good* thing.



I'll see if I can find the CD that someone gave me at a show.


I'd be interested to try it. I think this is how open source multimedia
tools might make it into the mainstream.

  #83   Report Post  
JEDIDIAH
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 2005-05-30, andy wrote:
It is only cheap if you put zero cost on your time. If you put a
realistic charge on your time for someone familiar with windows and
unfamiliar with linux then a few hours struggling with a new operating
system is going to exceed any software charges. This ignores issues of


...until something needs maintained or fixed under Windows.

[deletia]

Unix may be difficult to deal with at times but it is at least
reliable and well engineered. You can even build genuine appliances with
it for those that are really interested in such things.


--
The best OS in the world is ultimately useless |||
if it is controlled by a Tramiel, Jobs or Gates. / | \

  #84   Report Post  
Geoff Wood
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Noah Roberts" wrote in message
...
Geoff Wood wrote:
"perso" wrote in message news:429b7088$0$11705


Pro Tools Ardour Samplitude same level/



You clearly do not require much of a DAW if you really think that.


How the **** would you know? Are you another, "I used Linux for a week
and know all about it," kind of nimrod?


Nothing to do with Linux - we are talking about an application here -
Ardour. A particularly lame application when compared with current
state-of-the-art.

geoff


  #85   Report Post  
Noah Roberts
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Geoff Wood wrote:

Nothing to do with Linux - we are talking about an application here -
Ardour. A particularly lame application when compared with current
state-of-the-art.


Again, how would you know? How is it lame?


  #86   Report Post  
Tim Smith
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article .com,
"andy" wrote:
It is only cheap if you put zero cost on your time. If you put a
realistic charge on your time for someone familiar with windows and
unfamiliar with linux then a few hours struggling with a new operating
system is going to exceed any software charges.


If you are going to count time that way, though, you also have to count
time maintaining the operating system. If the system is not being used
as a dedicated audio workstation, but is also being used for general
purpose stuff, Windows usually requires more maintenance than Linux or
OS X.

--
--Tim Smith
  #87   Report Post  
Noah Roberts
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Waldo wrote:
On Mon, 30 May 2005 18:37:28 -0700, Noah Roberts wrote:


Geoff Wood wrote:


Nothing to do with Linux - we are talking about an application here -
Ardour. A particularly lame application when compared with current
state-of-the-art.


Again, how would you know? How is it lame?



Well, I wouldn't call Ardour lame, but it is not in the same league as
even the lite versions of Cubase, Sonar or Samplitude.
Just 10 minutes using Ardour is more than enough to prove that point.
Waldo


Heh, if you say so. Thanks for being a perfect example.

As you can see, these anti-linux whack jobs that pop out of the woodwork
every time the name Linux is mentioned do not actually know anything
about what they are talking of. Any program that is meant to tackle
something as complex as what Ardour does takes a LOT longer than 10
minutes to learn. Statements like this guy is making are just silly.
Not only that but they have chosen to attack a single application when
in fact Linux audio work involves a whole slew of interoperating
programs. These people know just enough to sound like they know
something to the uninitiated. Reader beware...

Linux DAW is MORE than adiquate for the home studio. Linux is even used
in pro applications. You can either try it or not. If you try it you
will either like it or not. I of course recommend you try...it costs
nothing to do so. The investment in time is no longer than learning how
to use any other system.
  #88   Report Post  
Geoff Wood
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Noah Roberts" wrote in message
...
Geoff Wood wrote:

Nothing to do with Linux - we are talking about an application here -
Ardour. A particularly lame application when compared with current
state-of-the-art.


Again, how would you know? How is it lame?


Clunky, crashes with plugins.

Well, it was a few months ago when I had a play.

And when you get a single file to run to install it on a standard OS
install, I'll think about trying it again on one of my DAW machines.


geoff


  #89   Report Post  
Jim Richardson
 
Posts: n/a
Default

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Tue, 31 May 2005 19:50:03 +1200,
Geoff Wood wrote:

"Noah Roberts" wrote in message
...
Geoff Wood wrote:

Nothing to do with Linux - we are talking about an application here -
Ardour. A particularly lame application when compared with current
state-of-the-art.


Again, how would you know? How is it lame?


Clunky, crashes with plugins.

Well, it was a few months ago when I had a play.

And when you get a single file to run to install it on a standard OS
install, I'll think about trying it again on one of my DAW machines.




Get an OS with a decent package manager, apt-get install ardour works
for me, or click on the icon for synaptic, and click on what I want to
install. The state of affairs of package management on MS-Windows is
pathetic.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFCnCiTd90bcYOAWPYRAifrAJsF2yqStGKSyQjRA+8MsV YQfbKRfACg0SQi
oRZNsLB/tda/MhmVqxVNLHA=
=FssQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
The United States of America: Screwing with the
English Language for over 200 years.
--Mike Sphar
  #90   Report Post  
Lorin David Schultz
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"perso" wrote:

but i'm sure Windows won't be future of DAW applications.
for toys ok ... but not for pros applis.



Bzzt. You lose. I make my living with Pro Tools on a Windows machine.

With that particular application it's actually more stable than our Mac.

--
"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)




  #91   Report Post  
Lorin David Schultz
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Tim Smith" wrote:

If the system is not being used as a dedicated audio workstation, but
is also being used for general purpose stuff, Windows usually
requires more maintenance than Linux or OS X.




Like what? I'm not arguing, I just don't get it. I've heard people say
that before, and I figure there must be something I'm missing. I'm a
total turd-for-brains when it comes to computers, and my XP laptop with
Pro Tools Mbox works fine, with no "maintenance" required. I'm even
doing everything wrong, by leaving it networked and MSOfficed and iTuned
and pretty-much-everything-elsed.

Admittedly I've never tried anything Unix based, except our Mac G4. It
blows its brains out twice a week for no apparent reason whatsoever, and
I'll be damned if I can figure out how to do even a simple disk defrag
on that mother****er. It really is "foolproof" -- this fool can't
figure the thing out at ALL. Yet my XP machine just... works.

So how come everyone says Windows is hard to live with? It hasn't been
for me, and I'm not even smart or careful. What am I missing?

--
"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)


  #92   Report Post  
Geoff Wood
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Jim Richardson" wrote in message news:jtltm2- And
when you get a single file to run to install it on a standard OS
install, I'll think about trying it again on one of my DAW machines.




Get an OS with a decent package manager, apt-get install ardour works
for me, or click on the icon for synaptic, and click on what I want to
install. The state of affairs of package management on MS-Windows is
pathetic.


WTF are you talking about ? Check what you need to know about and ensure
pior to installing Ardour - screeds. In Win you run setup.exe (or whatever)
for any DAW and Bob's your uncle. In some DAW apps you may have some
options in the setup.

geoff


  #93   Report Post  
Mike Rivers
 
Posts: n/a
Default


In article writes:

LiveCD, no need to even install Linux:


I don't think dynebolic comes with ardour, at least it is not among its
advertized features.

Complete audio distribution:
http://www.agnula.org/ - free

Then of course you have Gentoo, which is not an audio distro but makes
creating a DAW very easy once you get past the install, which admitedly
takes some knowledge.


You can also modify Slackware, RH, and Mandrake with these pre-built
setups (all free):


So there you have it. It IS that easy.


Easy? You've listed six things, none of which I clearly understand is
a ready-to-go auido package. And you apparently haven't tried
something that you've listed.

So, where's the audio ready-to-bo audio appllication?



--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
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 he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
  #94   Report Post  
alex bazan
 
Posts: n/a
Default

En/na Lorin David Schultz ha escrit:
"Tim Smith" wrote:
I'll be damned if I can figure out how to do even a simple disk defrag
on that mother****er.


hahahahahahahaha! tipically MS minded! you have to defrag periodically
in MS because the filesystem is a turd. you will not find a defrag
utility on serious OSs because there is no need to!!

i can't believe how MS can sell defragging as a great idea when it's
precisely a downside of their filesystem.
  #95   Report Post  
Richard Crowley
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Mike Rivers" wrote ...
Easy? You've listed six things, none of which I clearly understand is
a ready-to-go auido package. And you apparently haven't tried
something that you've listed.

So, where's the audio ready-to-bo audio appllication?


"Ready-to-go" apparently has a different meaning to them.
I have yet to meet a Linux user that wasn't a Linux Hacker
and Evangelist. Never met one that was primarily a user
of an application that happened to run on Linux.

To me, it is a clear indication that Linux is still a raggedy,
fiddly, non-mainstream platform that is still far from ready
for "ordinary users". And then there is the matter of the
layered applications.


  #96   Report Post  
alex bazan
 
Posts: n/a
Default

En/na perso ha escrit:
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


http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/feb0...irrorimage.htm
  #97   Report Post  
Tim Smith
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article cHXme.26062$on1.10670@clgrps13,
"Lorin David Schultz" wrote:
"Tim Smith" wrote:

If the system is not being used as a dedicated audio workstation, but
is also being used for general purpose stuff, Windows usually
requires more maintenance than Linux or OS X.




Like what? I'm not arguing, I just don't get it.


There are several areas:

1. For the typical user, dealing with viruses and/or spyware.

2. For those who are into games, dealing with drivers and DirectX.
Whenever you get a new game, that requires a later version of DirectX
than you have, it often requires a lot of fiddling to keep your old
stuff working. Same when ATI or NVidia releases new drivers.

3. Hardware setup. Wireless networking on Windows, for example, can be
much more time consuming to set up than wireless on OS X, because too
much is left up to the hardware vendor, and hardware vendors often have
some strange notions as to how to design setup and configuration
software.

4. Keeping software up to date. With most Linux distributions and with
OS X, you don't need any third-party software for safe, effective basic
computer use. With Windows, you need to get a third-party browser and
email client, or at least get third-party add-ons to the bundled browser
and email client. That means you end up with important software that is
not covered by Windows Update, and so you've got to deal with keeping
that software up to date. On Linux or OS X, everything you need for
basic computer use is included, and covered with the system update
mechanism.

--
--Tim Smith
  #98   Report Post  
Richard Crowley
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Tim Smith" wrote ...
"Lorin David Schultz" wrote:
"Tim Smith" wrote:
If the system is not being used as a dedicated audio workstation,
but
is also being used for general purpose stuff, Windows usually
requires more maintenance than Linux or OS X.


Like what? I'm not arguing, I just don't get it.


There are several areas:

1. For the typical user, dealing with viruses and/or spyware.


Subscribe to McAfee. It is completely automatic. Always
up to date without even looking at it. I believe there are free
versions out there also. The more Apple people tout their
virus-free environment, the farther they have to fall when
one hits them. I'd be concerned, but they believe they are
exempt.

2. For those who are into games, dealing with drivers and
DirectX. Whenever you get a new game, that requires a later
version of DirectX than you have, it often requires a lot of
fiddling to keep your old stuff working. Same when ATI or
NVidia releases new drivers.


Google for "apple video driver update" returned only 902,000
hits. Whatever could they be?

4. Keeping software up to date. With most Linux distributions
and with OS X, you don't need any third-party software for safe,
effective basic computer use. With Windows, you need to get a
third-party browser and email client, or at least get third-party
add-ons to the bundled browser and email client.


Why? Most of us find Outlook and Outlook Express to be great.
I have tried the top dozen or so 3rd party newsreaders and was
significantly disappointed in all of them.

To address the larger question. My audio workstation has not
had a single update since it was built 5 years ago (Windows 98),
and my video workstations have not been touched since the day
they were built, either.

  #99   Report Post  
Les Cargill
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Noah Roberts wrote:

Geoff Wood wrote:

Nothing to do with Linux - we are talking about an application here -
Ardour. A particularly lame application when compared with current
state-of-the-art.



Again, how would you know? How is it lame?


Noah, "you guys" ( the Linux dewds ) are like Car Club
folks/tinkerers. You wanna crack open the box.

The other group ( rec.audio.pro ) wants to be able to quickly
assemble a stable, running, high-feature system. They're not
wanting to be "pit crew", they wanna drive the thing.

They're not above tinkering, but it's not a primary goal.

I recently bought a new computer, running XP, put up N-Track
on it and was running that night. I was able to finally diagnose
that one plugin was causing all my old crashes on Win98SE.

The requirements of the pro audio guys include:

- all but mission-critical levels of stability.
- plugin support, with access to a very rich suite
of plugins.
- SMPTE/MTC synch capability, both ways
- drivers for soundcards.

and they want it pretty much precompiled.

Does this exist?

--
Les Cargill
  #100   Report Post  
Scott Dorsey
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article 0vXme.26061$on1.9735@clgrps13,
Lorin David Schultz wrote:
"perso" wrote:

but i'm sure Windows won't be future of DAW applications.
for toys ok ... but not for pros applis.


Bzzt. You lose. I make my living with Pro Tools on a Windows machine.
With that particular application it's actually more stable than our Mac.


What is really sad about all of this stuff is that the operating systems
that _do_ really provide actual realtime functions to build a DAW around
are pretty much dead. Stuff like BeOS and pSOS just will never have the
market share that they deserve and there will never be enough of an
installed base for serious DAW development on them. Which is a shame, since
it would be nice to have the OS be your friend and not your enemy for
realtime work.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."


  #101   Report Post  
Scott Dorsey
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Lorin David Schultz wrote:

Admittedly I've never tried anything Unix based, except our Mac G4. It
blows its brains out twice a week for no apparent reason whatsoever, and
I'll be damned if I can figure out how to do even a simple disk defrag
on that mother****er. It really is "foolproof" -- this fool can't
figure the thing out at ALL. Yet my XP machine just... works.


One of the nice things about the Berkeley filesystem is that file
fragmentation isn't really an issue. As long as you keep below 80% of
the total disk usage, you should never need to defragment.

So how come everyone says Windows is hard to live with? It hasn't been
for me, and I'm not even smart or careful. What am I missing?


Things like disk defragmentation are an excellent example of the annoyances
that Windows users have to put up with, that people in the rest of the
world don't really have to worry about.
--scottt




--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
  #102   Report Post  
Roger Christie
 
Posts: n/a
Default



--

Somewhere in Texas, a village is missing its idiot.
"Lorin David Schultz" wrote in message
news:0vXme.26061$on1.9735@clgrps13...
"perso" wrote:

but i'm sure Windows won't be future of DAW applications.
for toys ok ... but not for pros applis.



Bzzt. You lose. I make my living with Pro Tools on a Windows machine.

With that particular application it's actually more stable than our Mac.


He said the -future- of DAW applications.


  #103   Report Post  
Noah Roberts
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Les Cargill wrote:
Noah Roberts wrote:

Geoff Wood wrote:

Nothing to do with Linux - we are talking about an application here -
Ardour. A particularly lame application when compared with current
state-of-the-art.



Again, how would you know? How is it lame?


Noah, "you guys" ( the Linux dewds ) are like Car Club
folks/tinkerers. You wanna crack open the box.


So you say. I don't think you know what you are talking about.

The requirements of the pro audio guys include:

- all but mission-critical levels of stability.
- plugin support, with access to a very rich suite
of plugins.
- SMPTE/MTC synch capability, both ways
- drivers for soundcards.

and they want it pretty much precompiled.

Does this exist?


I am unsure of #3 but I believe that is a yes on all of those.

  #104   Report Post  
reddred
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
news:znr1117314028k@trad...

In article

writes:

It's not that bad. If you're building a dedicated workstation, and want

to
have as much of your system's resources as possible dedicated to audio,

the
only platform that you can truly do that with is Linux. You can boot
straight to the GUI of your audio software, and don't need to run all

the
crap that Windows and Mac crowbar into the OS.


Commendable, but how many people who ask on an audio newsgroup if
Linux is a reasonable platform are really savvy enough to build a
dedicated audio workstation? I'm not saying it can't be done, just not
advisable for anyone who still needs advice. Here, we're better
equipped to advise someone who already has a solid Linux based audio
workstation running what would be good peripheral hardware.


I don't disagree. If the question is something akin to 'Is Linux ready for a
professional audio production environment?' I'd generally say 'No'. It's the
potential that intrigues me, and pretty soon, I think there will be select
applications that a Linux box is suitable for, at least comparable if not
better than the 'competition'. The only application that I can recommend
Linux for now is advanced sound synthesis, and there isn't much of a demand
for that.

Frankly, I feel that newbies are better off starting out with a little
standalone, and spending time getting fundamentals. But everybody wants to
use thier PC.

A lot of people like to mess
around with updates daily or weekly because it's a learning process for

them
and they have software that isn't finished.


Isn't Ardour still in that phase?


It's been 'almost out of beta' for a very long time.

I suppose, though, that at any time
now, a user could declare it "finished" and just use it. That's kind
of the sense I get from reading their web page recently. But not many
people have the discipline to not update their system whenever
something new comes along. It's one thing (Microsoft notwithstanding,
sometimes) when the update comes from a major manufacturer with
thorough testing behind it, but with an open development environment,
it's hard to tell when an update is stable, or even worth while,
without each user spending some time with it.


Too true. Across the board, I advise people to build a system and leave it
alone, except for antivirus updates etc., unless there is a real problem, or
they are going to do a complete overhaul and start from scratch. I think
this applies to Windows boxes too.

Not to mention, any computing device which has a limited function set is by
nature 'better' at what it does, and any maintenance or repair that needs to
happen is easier.


If
one wanted to build a machine that could, say, replace a multitrack

device,
you only need to do it once - if, and only if, your chosen software

works.

Well, TASCAM did it, Mackie did it, Fostex did it, Alesis did it.
Where are those machines today? It's a great concept. I thing that my
Mackie HDR is a big step up from my 2" analog recorder both in sound
and reliability, plus there are some things that I can do easily with
the Mackie that are difficult or impossible with the Ampex.
Fortunately I don't need to do those those tricks often with the
projects that I have, but they're available if I need them.


I think a lot of people new to recording want a PC DAW because it's a hot
rod. It's more about the PC than it is about audio, and they often know how
to build a PC and want to use their skills. They've also been told it's
cheaper. I'm not sure that it's very much cheaper.

On the other hand, I built my second PC DAW as a 24 channel multitrack that
also had a MIDI sequencer, but because of it's software capabilites, and a
cheap motherboard upgrade, I often mix in the DAW too (I've never tested
it's track count, but I typically use between 30 and 40). So even if it's
not cheaper in outlay, there is an increased capability. The tradeoff is in
the poor interface.

Still, the market seems to be strongly bent toward general purpose
computers configured as full blown audio workstations. Cost and
availability seem to be the major forces. There's still room for
pioneers and experimenters, but it takes a fair amount of time to keep
up with the technology, and that takes time away from the presumed
goal of audio production.


Which is why I like the little 300 dollar eight tracks. Anyone new to
recording can get one of those, a couple of mics and get started the day he
takes it out of the box. Sooner or later this myth of 'I can build a PC and
make a production quality record tomorrow' will have to fizzle out, just
like the thing about putting your business on the net and becoming rich
overnight. The more people experience the reality, the more the word will
spread.

jb


  #105   Report Post  
Kier
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Tue, 31 May 2005 12:31:25 -0400, Waldo wrote:

snip

And as for a home user being able to figure out how to get Linux and then
all it's baggage running just to use an application like Ardour, he will
have his shiny new sound card installed and the CD that came with it
running Cubase Lite or similar long before he even figures out how to
install Linux and get his sound card to work.


Installing Linux is very easy these days, and unless you have something
exotic or unsupported, your sound card should work straight away. Whatever
the merits or otherwise of its use as an audio platform, it can no longer
be claied with any credibility that Linux is hard to install. It's
certainly a lot easier than windows.

--
Kier



  #106   Report Post  
Noah Roberts
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Waldo wrote:
On Mon, 30 May 2005 21:53:28 -0700, Noah Roberts wrote:


As you can see, these anti-linux whack jobs that pop out of the woodwork
every time the name Linux is mentioned do not actually know anything
about what they are talking of. Any program that is meant to tackle
something as complex as what Ardour does takes a LOT longer than 10
minutes to learn.


But it only takes 10 minutes to import a wave, apply effects and see the
program go belly up.
It only takes 5 minutes to experience a user interface that is terrible.
It takes maybe another 10 minutes to sample some of the Linux plugins and
listen to how terrible they sound.
It takes about 30 seconds to see there is no context sensetive help system.


Whatever. Me thinks you *might* have tried an old version...if you
even tried it at all.


Statements like this guy is making are just silly.
Not only that but they have chosen to attack a single application when
in fact Linux audio work involves a whole slew of interoperating
programs. These people know just enough to sound like they know
something to the uninitiated. Reader beware...



Wrong.
Statements from an amateur trying to compare a toy, Ardour, to
professional applications like Protools, Samplitude and so forth are the
silly ones.


Again, whatever. Ardour isn't a 'toy'.

I never compared the two either. I have said several times I have
never used the other programs and REFUSE to compare them. I guess on
top of talking about **** you know nothing about you also can't read.
Why am I not surprised?

I didn't attack Linux,


Oh really now...

Do you use Protools, Samplitude,Cubase or similar on a daily basis in a
professional or semi-professional setting?


Nope. I have NEVER used any of those systems. I use Linux DAW only.
I have no need for any of the above programs. If I am happy with Linux
why would I need those? The logic of your point here fails me utterly.

If not, you have absolutely nothing of value to add to this thread other
than your obvious Linux zealotism and evangelism which might get you a pat
on the back in the Linux groups.


I have plenty to add. I know a LOT more about Linux than you do. I
also know a LOT more about doing audio work with Linux than you do.
Stick to your own realm of expertice...you are way over your head here.


Linux DAW is MORE than adiquate for the home studio. Linux is even used
in pro applications. You can either try it or not. If you try it you
will either like it or not. I of course recommend you try...it costs
nothing to do so. The investment in time is no longer than learning how
to use any other system.



I didn't say it isn't worth trying, I said it doesn't compare to
professional applications.
It just doesn't.


Says you. Why should what you say matter? You don't even know what
you are talking about. Stick to what you know.


And as for a home user being able to figure out how to get Linux and then
all it's baggage running just to use an application like Ardour, he will
have his shiny new sound card installed and the CD that came with it
running Cubase Lite or similar long before he even figures out how to
install Linux and get his sound card to work.


If you say so. Hopefully everyone can see by now that you don't know
what you are saying anyway.

  #107   Report Post  
hank alrich
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Noah Roberts wrote:

Linux DAW is MORE than adiquate for the home studio.


ProTools and Samplitude, for example, have been ready for professional
work, not home studio work, for a long time. What keeps you from
realizing that part of it? Call people names if you like (I sometimes
like to do that), but you aren't helping your Linux cause by ignoring
some potential differences in the professionally ready-to-go
capabilities of these apps.

--
ha
  #108   Report Post  
hank alrich
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Noah Roberts wrote:

Les Cargill wrote:


The requirements of the pro audio guys include:

- all but mission-critical levels of stability.
- plugin support, with access to a very rich suite
of plugins.
- SMPTE/MTC synch capability, both ways
- drivers for soundcards.

and they want it pretty much precompiled.

Does this exist?


I am unsure of #3 but I believe that is a yes on all of those.


URL's, Noah, this ain't about your religion. Believe what you want;
where is the action that fits the request? Les is right on it. Pay
attention, please. If Linux is going to move into PT or Samplitude
territory it will have advocates that understand the territory.

--
ha
  #109   Report Post  
hank alrich
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Noah Roberts wrote:

andy wrote:


It is only cheap if you put zero cost on your time.


In my experience it is still cheaper.


So you're saying your own time is worth less than zero. That won't work
for my grocery bill.

--
ha
  #110   Report Post  
hank alrich
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Richard Crowley wrote:

"Ready-to-go" apparently has a different meaning to them.
I have yet to meet a Linux user that wasn't a Linux Hacker
and Evangelist. Never met one that was primarily a user
of an application that happened to run on Linux.


Kurt A. has stuff working, not audio realted, on some nifty little Linux
boxes he put together. I keep half an eye on Linux for audio, and I
figure that when it's worth a whole eyeball's concentration, Kurt will
be waving flags at me. He knows what it'd take to get a non-nerd's
attention, and he also knows what's not yet ready for breakfast, let
alone primetime.

--
ha


  #111   Report Post  
dbx_boy
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Noah Roberts wrote:

Whatever. Me thinks you *might* have tried an old version...if you
even tried it at all.


That's it, place the blame on the person instead of the program.
When Cubase for Windows was first released it had many problems.
I don't recall seeing such venom released from the professional
community when people using the program complained. We all knew it
needed some work and more importantly we didn't attack people who
posted their troubles with the program.
We worked together and now Cubase spawned Nuendo and these are
excellent programs that are used professionally every single day.

The Linux community really needs to learn something about social skills
especially since it is the community itself that is supporting and flag
waving for Linux. IOW you guys need every body you can find and making
yourselves look like idiots is no way to garner support.


Statements like this guy is making are just silly.
Not only that but they have chosen to attack a single application when
in fact Linux audio work involves a whole slew of interoperating
programs. These people know just enough to sound like they know
something to the uninitiated. Reader beware...



Wrong.
Statements from an amateur trying to compare a toy, Ardour, to
professional applications like Protools, Samplitude and so forth are the
silly ones.


Again, whatever. Ardour isn't a 'toy'.


Maybe to you and your needs it isn't but when compared to Protools etc
Ardour IS a toy.


I never compared the two either. I have said several times I have
never used the other programs and REFUSE to compare them. I guess on
top of talking about **** you know nothing about you also can't read.
Why am I not surprised?


The other person claims useage of all those programs including Ardour,
professionally, and in my book that counts a heck of a lot more than
your claims.

And how do you know the other person doesn't know what he is talking
about?
The same could be said of you and quite frankly there is a lot more
evidence to support the latter.


I didn't attack Linux,


Oh really now...

Do you use Protools, Samplitude,Cubase or similar on a daily basis in a
professional or semi-professional setting?


Nope. I have NEVER used any of those systems. I use Linux DAW only.
I have no need for any of the above programs. If I am happy with Linux
why would I need those? The logic of your point here fails me utterly.


When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

Look, my brother is a carpenter by trade and all of his tools are
professional quality. He cringes when he sees my mostly "Harbor
Freight" specials.
Yet these tools work for me.
They, mostly, would fall apart if he had to use them 12 hours a day
building custom homes.

The same thing applies to programs like Ardour.
What you don't seem to understand is that a crash during your editing
your cousin suzies wedding with your onboard soundchip is a PITA.

A crash when I am tracking 32 tracks LIVE is the potential end of my
relationship with that client.

If not, you have absolutely nothing of value to add to this thread other
than your obvious Linux zealotism and evangelism which might get you a pat
on the back in the Linux groups.


I have plenty to add. I know a LOT more about Linux than you do. I
also know a LOT more about doing audio work with Linux than you do.


How do you know that?
Do you know the other person?
You may know about Linux, but you sure as hell don't know anything
about pro-audio and that is what this thread is about.
See the title?

Stick to your own realm of expertice...you are way over your head here.


You do realize that you have been posting to a group that consists of
people who are professionals in the audio field and many of whom have
been doing this long before Linux was invented?

You do realize that you look like an idiot posting your Linux drivel in
a group where people make a living doing professional audio?

Like I said, you may know something about Linux, but you know zero
about professional audio and it's painfully obvious.

P.S. I'm getting sick and tired of these Linux lunatics preaching in
groups where they don't belong. It's almost like the Moonies that used
to be soliciting at the airports back in the 70's.
Most of these people seem to be on a mission of nastiness and god help
the person who disagrees with them.

Sorry for the rant



Linux DAW is MORE than adiquate for the home studio. Linux is even used
in pro applications. You can either try it or not. If you try it you
will either like it or not. I of course recommend you try...it costs
nothing to do so. The investment in time is no longer than learning how
to use any other system.



I didn't say it isn't worth trying, I said it doesn't compare to
professional applications.
It just doesn't.


Says you. Why should what you say matter? You don't even know what
you are talking about. Stick to what you know.


And as for a home user being able to figure out how to get Linux and then
all it's baggage running just to use an application like Ardour, he will
have his shiny new sound card installed and the CD that came with it
running Cubase Lite or similar long before he even figures out how to
install Linux and get his sound card to work.


If you say so. Hopefully everyone can see by now that you don't know
what you are saying anyway.


  #112   Report Post  
Jim Richardson
 
Posts: n/a
Default

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Tue, 31 May 2005 23:17:05 +1200,
Geoff Wood wrote:

"Jim Richardson" wrote in message news:jtltm2- And
when you get a single file to run to install it on a standard OS
install, I'll think about trying it again on one of my DAW machines.




Get an OS with a decent package manager, apt-get install ardour works
for me, or click on the icon for synaptic, and click on what I want to
install. The state of affairs of package management on MS-Windows is
pathetic.


WTF are you talking about ? Check what you need to know about and ensure
pior to installing Ardour - screeds. In Win you run setup.exe (or whatever)
for any DAW and Bob's your uncle. In some DAW apps you may have some
options in the setup.



You skipped most of the steps with MS-Windows, first, you have to know
what it is you want to install, then, you have to *find* it, hopefully,
a recent version, not some package off in some backwater ftp site. Then
you have to download it, and *then* you can "click setup.exe"

Of course, now, you have little idea what was installed, or where, you
have to go through all this *again* if you want to upgrade it, likely
including removing the old ardour install ( something which goes wrong a
*lot* on MS-Windows) meanwhile, you may, or may not (likely not) have
any idea what was changed in the registry, or how it affected anything
else in that abomination.


Me? apt-get search DAW shows ardour-gtk as the first item returned, sudo
aprt-get install ardour-gtk does everything else. Fetches it, gets any
dependencies, tells me if I have something allready that would conflict
with it (not likely in this case, but in other packages, like an smtp
server, a possibility) and installs, configures and adds it to my menus.

Now, I can tell what *exact* files were installed, and where they were
put. If something else I install tries to overwrite one of ardour's
files, I get a warning, Furthermore, ardour is now part of my system,
and is upgraded with the rest of the system. I don't have to manually
chase down upgrades,


To recap:

Your way? search the internet for what you *hope* is a recent version,
grab it, install it, hope it didn't bugger up the registry, or spray
files all over your filesystem in wierd locations with no tracking of
what went where, then, if you want to update it later, go through it all
again. Every time you want to upgrade.

Me? one command, or click of a list selection, and I am done, when
upgrading, it's taken care of, with the rest of the software on this
system.

I know what I prefer.


Package management on MS-Windows, is barely above the equivilent of
chipping flint for a sharp point...

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFCnLgId90bcYOAWPYRAvRpAKDomPs3nLq/2uogKK4lRQVjg2adkwCeI6mD
aiZJwH5xUxuqm6Nr+1YZZ6k=
=SNg/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
Reality continues to ruin my life.
-- Calvin
  #113   Report Post  
hank alrich
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Noah Roberts wrote:

Nope. I have NEVER used any of those systems. I use Linux DAW only.
I have no need for any of the above programs. If I am happy with Linux
why would I need those? The logic of your point here fails me utterly.


His logic is that only a poseur would say Samplitude and PT were
equalled by the Linux audio apps without deep experience of Smaplitude
and PT. You've outted yourself.

--
ha
  #114   Report Post  
Noah Roberts
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Geoff Wood wrote:
"Jim Richardson" wrote in message news:jtltm2- And
when you get a single file to run to install it on a standard OS
install, I'll think about trying it again on one of my DAW machines.




Get an OS with a decent package manager, apt-get install ardour works
for me, or click on the icon for synaptic, and click on what I want to
install. The state of affairs of package management on MS-Windows is
pathetic.


WTF are you talking about ? Check what you need to know about and ensure
pior to installing Ardour - screeds. In Win you run setup.exe (or whatever)
for any DAW and Bob's your uncle. In some DAW apps you may have some
options in the setup.


Well, Linux doesn't run 'exe' files so of course there is no Setup.exe
you can run. However, when I installed Ardour I did this:

'emerge ardour'

I didn't even have the thing or its dependancies on my system. A
little while later my system had downloaded, compiled, and installed
everything I needed and I was in business.

This was on a 64 bit system even.

  #115   Report Post  
reddred
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Richard Crowley" wrote in message
...
"Mike Rivers" wrote ...
Easy? You've listed six things, none of which I clearly understand is
a ready-to-go auido package. And you apparently haven't tried
something that you've listed.

So, where's the audio ready-to-bo audio appllication?


"Ready-to-go" apparently has a different meaning to them.
I have yet to meet a Linux user that wasn't a Linux Hacker
and Evangelist. Never met one that was primarily a user
of an application that happened to run on Linux.


I'd have to say you haven't met any Linux users then.

To me, it is a clear indication that Linux is still a raggedy,
fiddly, non-mainstream platform that is still far from ready
for "ordinary users". And then there is the matter of the
layered applications.


It's fine for everyday users. The only reason it's not deployed in offices
all over the world is because it costs money to teach people how to click a
different icon or read a different menu, and some users buy the
'compatibility' myth which is the same FUD ms used against Apple (I have to
say it's nice to look at MS word files on a Solaris box). Out of the
package, most distributions have just as much driver support as windows XP,
and if you buy a PC with Linux on it, it's just like buying a Windows PC. It
will do all the same things in pretty much the same way, except you can't go
to wal-mart and buy any old game and expect it to work.

Using some distributions is a bit less mac-like than Windows XP is, in the
sense that there might be less convenience, the interface is less intuitive,
and there is a little more hassle dealing with files and instalations, but
people who have been around windows for a while should be comfortable.

Where Linux is lacking right now is in 'workstation' media production,
specifically audio and video (but for image manipulation, it really is
suitable for most needs). Development is proceeding, and compared to how
long it took Windows to catch up with Mac in that regard, it's coming along
at about the same rate.

Unfortuneately, media production is what we care about on rec.audio.pro.
Fortuneately, you have a couple of other choices out there.

jb




  #116   Report Post  
Mike Rivers
 
Posts: n/a
Default


In article writes:

"Ready-to-go" apparently has a different meaning to them.
I have yet to meet a Linux user that wasn't a Linux Hacker
and Evangelist. Never met one that was primarily a user
of an application that happened to run on Linux.


That's probably because since the days of the AT&T personal computers,
you can't buy a Unix computer that runs out of the box, with the
exception perhaps of that one that K-Mart (or was it Wal-Mart) was
selling a couple of years back. You can go to Best Buy, but an HP or
Compaq computer that boots to Windows right out of the box, install a
DAW applicaiton on it by putting in a CD and clicking "Setup", plug an
audio interface into a USB or Firewire port, and you're ready to
record. Sure, you can optimize it for better performance, but at least
it will basically work within half an hour of opening the carton.

If Linux audio applications were good enough to be solid contenders,
perhaps it would be cost-effective for companies like Swee****er and
Carillon Computers (who sell ready-to-go systems) to pre-install Linux
and a suite of Linux audio applications. But there would have to be
sufficient cost saving on the software to offset the cost of
developing a reliable Linux configuration that could be installed the
same way on every machine that left the shop.

I know we have a couple of cottage industry folks around here who sell
computer systems pre-configured for audio applications. What do you
guys think? Anyone game? Anyone willing to make the effort, or take
the risk?




--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
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 he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
  #117   Report Post  
reddred
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"hank alrich" wrote in message
.. .
Noah Roberts wrote:

andy wrote:


It is only cheap if you put zero cost on your time.


In my experience it is still cheaper.


So you're saying your own time is worth less than zero. That won't work
for my grocery bill.


I remember spending a very long time getting my first Windows DAW together,
and even longer on the first Windows 'Studio Computer' that did MIDI, 2
track audio, and (ghasp!) still image video capture. The only thing worse
that I've ever had to do was work with Arcnet for PC networks.

jb


  #118   Report Post  
Noah Roberts
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Sammy wrote:
On Tue, 31 May 2005 12:21:52 -0700, Noah Roberts wrote:


'emerge ardour'


Yea and why don't you tell them about the week you spent installing
Gentoo?


Yes, Gentoo is a distribution meant for non-newbies that wish to go
totally custom. It is probably the hardest and most consuming install
of any Linux distribution. You need to know a lot to get to the point
where it will boot itself. Then you tell it to emerge gnome or
something and walk away for a couple days. The system you get is
customized for your own computer and with your own preferences compiled
from the source.

You can install using the GRP and it takes much less time. This is a
setup that contains all the standard apps like mozilla, gnome, and kde
all compiled and ready for install. But you don't get the same
customability with this setup.

At any rate, when I installed Gentoo on my 64 there was no GRP. I did
a stage 3 install and it took 2 days, not a week, in which most of that
time was speant doing yard work and watching TV. You pay in startup
time this way, but I prefer the resulting system to anything else
available. I certainly do not recommend that newbies jump right into
Gentoo.

But even on the most difficult to install Linux installing audio
programs is really easy. If you expect setup.exe you will be
disappointed, but what you get is not much, if any, harder and is a
better way of doing installs.

If you really MUST have setup.exe then stick to Windows.

  #119   Report Post  
Geoff Wood
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Noah Roberts" wrote in message

options in the setup.


Well, Linux doesn't run 'exe' files so of course there is no Setup.exe
you can run. However, when I installed Ardour I did this:

'emerge ardour'


The Ardour page should mention this straightforward method then, rather that
the screeds it does say regarding install.


geoff


  #120   Report Post  
Geoff Wood
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Tim Smith" wrote in message

1. For the typical user, dealing with viruses and/or spyware.


Not a problem, espcially on a DAW machine.


2. For those who are into games, dealing with drivers and DirectX.
Whenever you get a new game, that requires a later version of DirectX
than you have, it often requires a lot of fiddling to keep your old
stuff working. Same when ATI or NVidia releases new drivers.


Auto-update, or a click on a ferebie CD keeps all that up to date.

3. Hardware setup. Wireless networking on Windows, for example, can be
much more time consuming to set up than wireless on OS X, because too
much is left up to the hardware vendor, and hardware vendors often have
some strange notions as to how to design setup and configuration
software.


WIreless network on a DAW ?

4. Keeping software up to date. With most Linux distributions and with
OS X, you don't need any third-party software for safe, effective basic
computer use. With Windows, you need to get a third-party browser


What ?

and
email client, or at least get third-party add-ons to the bundled browser
and email client.


What ?

That means you end up with important software that is
not covered by Windows Update,


Bull****

and so you've got to deal with keeping
that software up to date. On Linux or OS X, everything you need for
basic computer use is included, and covered with the system update
mechanism.


Just like Windows then.

geoff


Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Why Windows is Easier than Linux For An End User, Especially for Multimedia work. rapskat Pro Audio 64 January 22nd 05 12:21 AM
The problem with Linux and digital audio. Pierre de le Sewer Pro Audio 6 May 17th 04 02:43 AM
Is there a non Linux audio group? Twist Turner Pro Audio 2 May 14th 04 12:32 AM
Is there a non Linux audio group? Twist Turner Pro Audio 0 May 13th 04 01:37 PM
Linux blows for any type of serious digital audio work. Rich.Andrews Pro Audio 0 May 12th 04 08:47 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:56 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AudioBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Audio and hi-fi"