Re: [News] Red Hat Developer's Update on PulseAudio, Fedora Live CDs Interview

  • Thread starter Thread starter Moshe Goldfarb
  • Start date Start date
On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 05:36:54 +0200, Hadron wrote:

> DanS <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@a.d.e.l.p.h.i.a.n.e.t> writes:
>
>> Hadron <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote in
>> news:ftmev7$1k1$1@registered.motzarella.org:
>>
>>> DanS <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@a.d.e.l.p.h.i.a.n.e.t> writes:
>>>
>>>> Moshe Goldfarb <brick.n.straw@gmail.com> wrote in
>>>> news:157i64ax9oq8z$.1dj8ysl6450oc$.dlg@40tude.net:
>>>>
>>>>>>> And thats the easy bit. There are many distro specific hacks and
>>>>>>> the need to compile from CVS in many cases.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I did absolutely nothing with my sound setup, in either Hardy or
>>>>>> Gutsy, it all just worked. My use of sound is mostly watching
>>>>>> movies or listening to music.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> i
>>>>>
>>>>> Try running Ardour and see what happens.
>>>>
>>>> Well, when I installed Ubuntu, the audio just, worked, and I just
>>>> installed Ardour a couple of days ago, and by golly, that just worked
>>>> too.
>>>
>>> That's nice.
>>>
>>> It didn't work for the fellow who replied to that "how to use apt-get"
>>> "article" that Marti posted a link to.
>>>
>>> What sound system are you using? What HW?
>>
>> Honestly, I have no clue as to what SS (and can't check right now),
>> whatever was installed when the OS was installed and detected it. It
>> worked properly right off the bat, so no reason to dig into it at all.
>
> Please report back.
>
>>
>> I'm sure I'd be able to tell you if I had a major problem and had to
>> troubleshoot it, but all went smooth.
>
> Sure it did.
>
>>
>> The HW is a CreativeLabs ES1371 chipset, so I'm sure quite common. Well,
>> maybe not, it is a PCI card and not on-board.
>
>
> Uh huh.
>
>>
>> I didn't use Ardour much, just to check it out to see if it worked. I
>> didn't build a large project or anything, but it accepted tracks, allowed
>> editing, mixing, etc. I didn't try recording with it though.
>
> So, you really dont know much about it at all?
>
>>
>> Ardour seems like a decent OSS application, comparable to some of the
>> commercial (not top-end though) Windows audio s/w just like it I have
>> used.
>
> And yet you didn't record anything with it?
>
> Uh, ok.

I was trying to be nice, but obviously he didn't get anything working with
Ardour because you need Jack to get it going and he would have mentioned
that.
IOW I set him up, but the other guy spilled the beans.

It's just another Linux advocate's "works for me" post, and not a very good
one at all.

--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
 
Moshe Goldfarb <brick.n.straw@gmail.com> writes:

> On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 05:36:54 +0200, Hadron wrote:
>
>> DanS <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@a.d.e.l.p.h.i.a.n.e.t> writes:
>>
>>> Hadron <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote in
>>> news:ftmev7$1k1$1@registered.motzarella.org:
>>>
>>>> DanS <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@a.d.e.l.p.h.i.a.n.e.t> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> Moshe Goldfarb <brick.n.straw@gmail.com> wrote in
>>>>> news:157i64ax9oq8z$.1dj8ysl6450oc$.dlg@40tude.net:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And thats the easy bit. There are many distro specific hacks and
>>>>>>>> the need to compile from CVS in many cases.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I did absolutely nothing with my sound setup, in either Hardy or
>>>>>>> Gutsy, it all just worked. My use of sound is mostly watching
>>>>>>> movies or listening to music.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> i
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Try running Ardour and see what happens.
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, when I installed Ubuntu, the audio just, worked, and I just
>>>>> installed Ardour a couple of days ago, and by golly, that just worked
>>>>> too.
>>>>
>>>> That's nice.
>>>>
>>>> It didn't work for the fellow who replied to that "how to use apt-get"
>>>> "article" that Marti posted a link to.
>>>>
>>>> What sound system are you using? What HW?
>>>
>>> Honestly, I have no clue as to what SS (and can't check right now),
>>> whatever was installed when the OS was installed and detected it. It
>>> worked properly right off the bat, so no reason to dig into it at all.
>>
>> Please report back.
>>
>>>
>>> I'm sure I'd be able to tell you if I had a major problem and had to
>>> troubleshoot it, but all went smooth.
>>
>> Sure it did.
>>
>>>
>>> The HW is a CreativeLabs ES1371 chipset, so I'm sure quite common. Well,
>>> maybe not, it is a PCI card and not on-board.
>>
>>
>> Uh huh.
>>
>>>
>>> I didn't use Ardour much, just to check it out to see if it worked. I
>>> didn't build a large project or anything, but it accepted tracks, allowed
>>> editing, mixing, etc. I didn't try recording with it though.
>>
>> So, you really dont know much about it at all?
>>
>>>
>>> Ardour seems like a decent OSS application, comparable to some of the
>>> commercial (not top-end though) Windows audio s/w just like it I have
>>> used.
>>
>> And yet you didn't record anything with it?
>>
>> Uh, ok.
>
> I was trying to be nice, but obviously he didn't get anything working with
> Ardour because you need Jack to get it going and he would have mentioned
> that.
> IOW I set him up, but the other guy spilled the beans.
>
> It's just another Linux advocate's "works for me" post, and not a very good
> one at all.

I dont generally shy away from things, but the Linux sound mess has got
me running backwards and forwards. Everything is reinventing the wheel
and introducing stubs so that other systems can talk to theirs and so
forth. What an absolute horrible mess. And the COLAtards think KDE and
Gnome having different servers is a good "choice" thing? The ming
boggles.

--
However, my enthusiasm for the modular tree is tempered by some parts of
it not existing.
-- Daniel Stone on debian-{x,devel}, commenting on the
future of X
 
On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 05:54:21 +0200, Hadron wrote:

> Moshe Goldfarb <brick.n.straw@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 05:36:54 +0200, Hadron wrote:
>>
>>> DanS <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@a.d.e.l.p.h.i.a.n.e.t> writes:
>>>
>>>> Hadron <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote in
>>>> news:ftmev7$1k1$1@registered.motzarella.org:
>>>>
>>>>> DanS <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@a.d.e.l.p.h.i.a.n.e.t> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Moshe Goldfarb <brick.n.straw@gmail.com> wrote in
>>>>>> news:157i64ax9oq8z$.1dj8ysl6450oc$.dlg@40tude.net:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And thats the easy bit. There are many distro specific hacks and
>>>>>>>>> the need to compile from CVS in many cases.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I did absolutely nothing with my sound setup, in either Hardy or
>>>>>>>> Gutsy, it all just worked. My use of sound is mostly watching
>>>>>>>> movies or listening to music.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> i
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Try running Ardour and see what happens.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well, when I installed Ubuntu, the audio just, worked, and I just
>>>>>> installed Ardour a couple of days ago, and by golly, that just worked
>>>>>> too.
>>>>>
>>>>> That's nice.
>>>>>
>>>>> It didn't work for the fellow who replied to that "how to use apt-get"
>>>>> "article" that Marti posted a link to.
>>>>>
>>>>> What sound system are you using? What HW?
>>>>
>>>> Honestly, I have no clue as to what SS (and can't check right now),
>>>> whatever was installed when the OS was installed and detected it. It
>>>> worked properly right off the bat, so no reason to dig into it at all.
>>>
>>> Please report back.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm sure I'd be able to tell you if I had a major problem and had to
>>>> troubleshoot it, but all went smooth.
>>>
>>> Sure it did.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> The HW is a CreativeLabs ES1371 chipset, so I'm sure quite common. Well,
>>>> maybe not, it is a PCI card and not on-board.
>>>
>>>
>>> Uh huh.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I didn't use Ardour much, just to check it out to see if it worked. I
>>>> didn't build a large project or anything, but it accepted tracks, allowed
>>>> editing, mixing, etc. I didn't try recording with it though.
>>>
>>> So, you really dont know much about it at all?
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ardour seems like a decent OSS application, comparable to some of the
>>>> commercial (not top-end though) Windows audio s/w just like it I have
>>>> used.
>>>
>>> And yet you didn't record anything with it?
>>>
>>> Uh, ok.
>>
>> I was trying to be nice, but obviously he didn't get anything working with
>> Ardour because you need Jack to get it going and he would have mentioned
>> that.
>> IOW I set him up, but the other guy spilled the beans.
>>
>> It's just another Linux advocate's "works for me" post, and not a very good
>> one at all.
>
> I dont generally shy away from things, but the Linux sound mess has got
> me running backwards and forwards. Everything is reinventing the wheel
> and introducing stubs so that other systems can talk to theirs and so
> forth. What an absolute horrible mess. And the COLAtards think KDE and
> Gnome having different servers is a good "choice" thing? The ming
> boggles.

I subscribed to ALSA list once to attempt to get information as to how
ALSA/Jack/dmix/etc all work and interact together.

All I got was highly confused.

I have a Delta 1010 which has 10 inputs and 10 outputs.
Under Windows assigning signals to any in/out is one click.

Under ALSA and Linux?
I never did figure it out.
It's a freaking mess.

--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
 
On 2008-04-11, Moshe Goldfarb <brick.n.straw@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Apr 2008 21:36:00 -0400, Jeff Glatt wrote:
>
>>>Hadron
>>>is pulseaudio working with or against jack?!?!?
>>
>> It works against JACK. JACK is essentially another variant upon the same idea
>> as Pulse Audio -- a sound daemon running on top of ALSA.
>>
>> They all run on top of ALSA (well, except for really, really old stuff that
>> runs on top of OSS. But that stuff really is archaic and obsolete).
>>
>> ALSA can do everything that JACK can do, but in a more complicated manner. JACK
>> was meant to simplify use of ALSA for audio (not MIDI. ALSA is both an audio
>> and MIDI API).
>>
>> What you really want is for everyone to drop support for all these daemons and
>> instead use ALSA. Then you just use ALSA dmix plugin, and viola, you have what
>> you're looking for. Every time you encounter some software that makes sound,
>> but doesn't directly use ALSA, write the developers and ask them to directly
>> support ALSA. (And give them a link to my web page article about Linux audio
>> programming)
>
> That is the correct answer, but I strongly suspect the OP didn't know that
> and now you've let the cat out of the bag so to speak :)
>
> Actually I think of Jack as more of a tool to connect various pieces of the
> audio software and hardware together at very low latency's.
> For example piping the output of one program into another one.
>
> I too support the notion of ONE system that works with little or no user
> input.
> The current scheme of things is far too complicated IMHO.
>
>
>

There is one thing that PulseAudio supports, IIRC, which is remote
streaming of audio as part of X session or along one. Which is a very
nice concept that opens way to many interesting future gadgets. For
example, I can envision a plasma TV or a monitor/keyboard/mouse combo
or a monitor/remote combo that would have a built in X server and
Ethernet capability.

The old idea of an X terminal like those Tektronix ones, but with
sound. Now you can make a "multistation home entertainment system",
with a "entertainment server" and those satellite screens, that may be
packaged like a gadget, so the users would not even know it runs
Linux.

I can see rich people shelling out big bucks for it.

i
 
Re: Red Hat Developer's Update on PulseAudio, Fedora Live CDsInterview

On Apr 11, 12:11 am, Moshe Goldfarb <brick.n.st...@gmail.com> wrote:>
> I subscribed to ALSA list once to attempt to get information as to how
> ALSA/Jack/dmix/etc all work and interact together.
>
> All I got was highly confused.
>
> I have a Delta 1010 which has 10 inputs and 10 outputs.
> Under Windows assigning signals to any in/out is one click.

1 click and 100msec of latency. Which is why pro-audio and music-
producing users unders Windows don't generally use the Windows sound
system but instead use ASIO drivers. This has changed somewhat in
Vista, where MS finally got a clue that their entire desktop-consumer-
centric audio system was useless for pro-audio, but it is still the
case today that most Windows pro-audio work (for which JACK and Ardour
are generic equivalents) do NOT use the standard Windows sound stuff.
With ASIO, its not quite so trivial to do what you are describing.

> Under ALSA and Linux?
> I never did figure it out.
> It's a freaking mess.

This much is true. What are you doing to help fix it, or are you just
complaining?
 
>> Honestly, I have no clue as to what SS (and can't check right now),
>> whatever was installed when the OS was installed and detected it. It
>> worked properly right off the bat, so no reason to dig into it at
>> all.
>
> Please report back.
>

In the device manager I see several lines for ALSA....Capture Device, Control Device, MIDI Device, and 2
different Playback Devices, DAC2/ADC and DAC1 ALSA PLayback device.

And also DAC2/ADC OSS MIDI Device, OSS Control Device, and OSS PCM Device (times 3).
>>
>> I'm sure I'd be able to tell you if I had a major problem and had to
>> troubleshoot it, but all went smooth.
>
> Sure it did.
>
>>
>> The HW is a CreativeLabs ES1371 chipset, so I'm sure quite common.
>> Well, maybe not, it is a PCI card and not on-board.
>
>
> Uh huh.
>
>>
>> I didn't use Ardour much, just to check it out to see if it worked. I
>> didn't build a large project or anything, but it accepted tracks,
>> allowed editing, mixing, etc. I didn't try recording with it though.
>
> So, you really dont know much about it at all?

About Ardour, specifically in detail, no. About the use of non-linear video and audio editing on a PC, yes.
 
>>> Ardour seems like a decent OSS application, comparable to some of
>>> the commercial (not top-end though) Windows audio s/w just like it I
>>> have used.
>>
>> And yet you didn't record anything with it?
>>
>> Uh, ok.
>
> I was trying to be nice, but obviously he didn't get anything working
> with Ardour because you need Jack to get it going and he would have
> mentioned that.

Obviously nothing.

No, I didn't know Jack needed to be installed, but you know what, it is. I don't remember installing it
maybe it came down with Ardour from aptitude. I saw it in the Audio/Video menu after I installed Ardour
and was looking to start that. I started Jack, looked at it, saw what it was for, said to myself...'well the
audio works, so I'm not going to f with that'.

OK, next time I need to prove that something works on this system, I'll post the install log along with all of
it's dependencies and everything else even remotely related to it.

> IOW I set him up, but the other guy spilled the beans.

You set me up ?! That's funny.

> It's just another Linux advocate's "works for me" post, and not a very
> good one at all.

No, it's not a Linux advocate's post. Just a post. And just the truth.
 
DanS <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@r.o.a.d.r.u.n.n.e.r.com> writes:

>>>> Ardour seems like a decent OSS application, comparable to some of
>>>> the commercial (not top-end though) Windows audio s/w just like it I
>>>> have used.
>>>
>>> And yet you didn't record anything with it?
>>>
>>> Uh, ok.
>>
>> I was trying to be nice, but obviously he didn't get anything working
>> with Ardour because you need Jack to get it going and he would have
>> mentioned that.
>
> Obviously nothing.
>
> No, I didn't know Jack needed to be installed, but you know what, it is. I don't remember installing it
> maybe it came down with Ardour from aptitude. I saw it in the Audio/Video menu after I installed Ardour
> and was looking to start that. I started Jack, looked at it, saw what it was for, said to myself...'well the
> audio works, so I'm not going to f with that'.
>
> OK, next time I need to prove that something works on this system, I'll post the install log along with all of
> it's dependencies and everything else even remotely related to it.
>
>> IOW I set him up, but the other guy spilled the beans.
>
> You set me up ?! That's funny.
>
>> It's just another Linux advocate's "works for me" post, and not a very
>> good one at all.
>
> No, it's not a Linux advocate's post. Just a post. And just the truth.

Seriously, what did you use it for? You already said you didn't record
anything.

What HW and audio sources did you use?
 
Re: Red Hat Developer's Update on PulseAudio, Fedora Live CDs Interview

dawhead <google@equalarea.com> writes:

> On Apr 11, 12:11 am, Moshe Goldfarb <brick.n.st...@gmail.com> wrote:>
>> I subscribed to ALSA list once to attempt to get information as to how
>> ALSA/Jack/dmix/etc all work and interact together.
>>
>> All I got was highly confused.
>>
>> I have a Delta 1010 which has 10 inputs and 10 outputs.
>> Under Windows assigning signals to any in/out is one click.
>
> 1 click and 100msec of latency. Which is why pro-audio and music-
> producing users unders Windows don't generally use the Windows sound
> system but instead use ASIO drivers. This has changed somewhat in
> Vista, where MS finally got a clue that their entire desktop-consumer-
> centric audio system was useless for pro-audio, but it is still the
> case today that most Windows pro-audio work (for which JACK and Ardour
> are generic equivalents) do NOT use the standard Windows sound stuff.
> With ASIO, its not quite so trivial to do what you are describing.
>
>> Under ALSA and Linux?
>> I never did figure it out.
>> It's a freaking mess.
>
> This much is true. What are you doing to help fix it, or are you just
> complaining?

Complaining is one step. "Me too'ing" is not.

Personally I have fed bugs back and by rattling a few cages the "works
for me" changes to "oh, you need to patch this and this" and "compile
that and that". There are too many people telling lies about the usage
and quality of a lot of OSS. My dabbling with sound recently convinced
me of that. People in COLA who say "it just works for me" soon disappear
when I ask them to test a system sound, play a radio stream using
mplayer and run a totem movie at the same time and see if audio mixes
properly. Invariably "meets their needs" means one source at any one
time.

Ihave tried on 3 seperate time snow to ONLY use Alsa. No go. At the very
least I could not get system sounds working without pulseaudio installed
(drop in replacement for esound/esd). People keep mentioning "dmix" but
I'll be damned if I can see how that is supposed to work from the
20000000 How Tos out there which are all different and apparently
"randomly" generated.

--
BOY is Microsoft doomed! LOL!
comp.os.linux.advocacy - where they put the lunacy in advocacy
 
Hadron <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote in
news:ftnpkm$ntj$2@registered.motzarella.org:

> DanS <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@r.o.a.d.r.u.n.n.e.r.com> writes:
>
>>>>> Ardour seems like a decent OSS application, comparable to some of
>>>>> the commercial (not top-end though) Windows audio s/w just like it
>>>>> I have used.
>>>>
>>>> And yet you didn't record anything with it?
>>>>
>>>> Uh, ok.
>>>
>>> I was trying to be nice, but obviously he didn't get anything
>>> working with Ardour because you need Jack to get it going and he
>>> would have mentioned that.
>>
>> Obviously nothing.
>>
>> No, I didn't know Jack needed to be installed, but you know what, it
>> is. I don't remember installing it maybe it came down with Ardour
>> from aptitude. I saw it in the Audio/Video menu after I installed
>> Ardour and was looking to start that. I started Jack, looked at it,
>> saw what it was for, said to myself...'well the audio works, so I'm
>> not going to f with that'.
>>
>> OK, next time I need to prove that something works on this system,
>> I'll post the install log along with all of it's dependencies and
>> everything else even remotely related to it.
>>
>>> IOW I set him up, but the other guy spilled the beans.
>>
>> You set me up ?! That's funny.
>>
>>> It's just another Linux advocate's "works for me" post, and not a
>>> very good one at all.
>>
>> No, it's not a Linux advocate's post. Just a post. And just the
>> truth.
>
> Seriously, what did you use it for? You already said you didn't record
> anything.
>
> What HW and audio sources did you use?

The hardware was described in an earlier post from this morning.

And yes, I didn't record anything _directly_ in Ardour, which means I had
existing audio files that I had 'imported' into Ardour to check out it's
mixing and editing capabilities.
 
DanS <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@a.d.e.l.p.h.i.a.n.e.t> writes:

> Hadron <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote in
> news:ftnpkm$ntj$2@registered.motzarella.org:
>
>> DanS <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@r.o.a.d.r.u.n.n.e.r.com> writes:
>>
>>>>>> Ardour seems like a decent OSS application, comparable to some of
>>>>>> the commercial (not top-end though) Windows audio s/w just like it
>>>>>> I have used.
>>>>>
>>>>> And yet you didn't record anything with it?
>>>>>
>>>>> Uh, ok.
>>>>
>>>> I was trying to be nice, but obviously he didn't get anything
>>>> working with Ardour because you need Jack to get it going and he
>>>> would have mentioned that.
>>>
>>> Obviously nothing.
>>>
>>> No, I didn't know Jack needed to be installed, but you know what, it
>>> is. I don't remember installing it maybe it came down with Ardour
>>> from aptitude. I saw it in the Audio/Video menu after I installed
>>> Ardour and was looking to start that. I started Jack, looked at it,
>>> saw what it was for, said to myself...'well the audio works, so I'm
>>> not going to f with that'.
>>>
>>> OK, next time I need to prove that something works on this system,
>>> I'll post the install log along with all of it's dependencies and
>>> everything else even remotely related to it.
>>>
>>>> IOW I set him up, but the other guy spilled the beans.
>>>
>>> You set me up ?! That's funny.
>>>
>>>> It's just another Linux advocate's "works for me" post, and not a
>>>> very good one at all.
>>>
>>> No, it's not a Linux advocate's post. Just a post. And just the
>>> truth.
>>
>> Seriously, what did you use it for? You already said you didn't record
>> anything.
>>
>> What HW and audio sources did you use?
>
> The hardware was described in an earlier post from this morning.
>
> And yes, I didn't record anything _directly_ in Ardour, which means I had
> existing audio files that I had 'imported' into Ardour to check out it's
> mixing and editing capabilities.

So you didn't use multi source at all? Look, admit it for you're making
things up or dont know what Ardour is for.
 
Hadron <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote in
news:ftnsui$ntj$8@registered.motzarella.org:

> DanS <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@a.d.e.l.p.h.i.a.n.e.t> writes:
>
>> Hadron <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote in
>> news:ftnpkm$ntj$2@registered.motzarella.org:
>>
>>> DanS <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@r.o.a.d.r.u.n.n.e.r.com> writes:
>>>
>>>>>>> Ardour seems like a decent OSS application, comparable to some
>>>>>>> of the commercial (not top-end though) Windows audio s/w just
>>>>>>> like it I have used.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And yet you didn't record anything with it?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Uh, ok.
>>>>>
>>>>> I was trying to be nice, but obviously he didn't get anything
>>>>> working with Ardour because you need Jack to get it going and he
>>>>> would have mentioned that.
>>>>
>>>> Obviously nothing.
>>>>
>>>> No, I didn't know Jack needed to be installed, but you know what,
>>>> it is. I don't remember installing it maybe it came down with
>>>> Ardour from aptitude. I saw it in the Audio/Video menu after I
>>>> installed Ardour and was looking to start that. I started Jack,
>>>> looked at it, saw what it was for, said to myself...'well the audio
>>>> works, so I'm not going to f with that'.
>>>>
>>>> OK, next time I need to prove that something works on this system,
>>>> I'll post the install log along with all of it's dependencies and
>>>> everything else even remotely related to it.
>>>>
>>>>> IOW I set him up, but the other guy spilled the beans.
>>>>
>>>> You set me up ?! That's funny.
>>>>
>>>>> It's just another Linux advocate's "works for me" post, and not a
>>>>> very good one at all.
>>>>
>>>> No, it's not a Linux advocate's post. Just a post. And just the
>>>> truth.
>>>
>>> Seriously, what did you use it for? You already said you didn't
>>> record anything.
>>>
>>> What HW and audio sources did you use?
>>
>> The hardware was described in an earlier post from this morning.
>>
>> And yes, I didn't record anything _directly_ in Ardour, which means I
>> had existing audio files that I had 'imported' into Ardour to check
>> out it's mixing and editing capabilities.
>
> So you didn't use multi source at all? Look, admit it for you're
> making things up or dont know what Ardour is for.

What I am admitting to is that I installed Ardour, and with the default
install, it appeared to work properly with everything I tested, which I
described to you, including the HW and SS installed. That is what I said,
nothing more, nothing less.

I am making nothing up and I do know Ardour is for. I have given you no
other reason to suspect anything different other than the fact that it
seems to install and work easily.
 
DanS <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@a.d.e.l.p.h.i.a.n.e.t> writes:

> Hadron <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote in
> news:ftnsui$ntj$8@registered.motzarella.org:
>
>> DanS <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@a.d.e.l.p.h.i.a.n.e.t> writes:
>>
>>> Hadron <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote in
>>> news:ftnpkm$ntj$2@registered.motzarella.org:
>>>
>>>> DanS <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@r.o.a.d.r.u.n.n.e.r.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ardour seems like a decent OSS application, comparable to some
>>>>>>>> of the commercial (not top-end though) Windows audio s/w just
>>>>>>>> like it I have used.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And yet you didn't record anything with it?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Uh, ok.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I was trying to be nice, but obviously he didn't get anything
>>>>>> working with Ardour because you need Jack to get it going and he
>>>>>> would have mentioned that.
>>>>>
>>>>> Obviously nothing.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, I didn't know Jack needed to be installed, but you know what,
>>>>> it is. I don't remember installing it maybe it came down with
>>>>> Ardour from aptitude. I saw it in the Audio/Video menu after I
>>>>> installed Ardour and was looking to start that. I started Jack,
>>>>> looked at it, saw what it was for, said to myself...'well the audio
>>>>> works, so I'm not going to f with that'.
>>>>>
>>>>> OK, next time I need to prove that something works on this system,
>>>>> I'll post the install log along with all of it's dependencies and
>>>>> everything else even remotely related to it.
>>>>>
>>>>>> IOW I set him up, but the other guy spilled the beans.
>>>>>
>>>>> You set me up ?! That's funny.
>>>>>
>>>>>> It's just another Linux advocate's "works for me" post, and not a
>>>>>> very good one at all.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, it's not a Linux advocate's post. Just a post. And just the
>>>>> truth.
>>>>
>>>> Seriously, what did you use it for? You already said you didn't
>>>> record anything.
>>>>
>>>> What HW and audio sources did you use?
>>>
>>> The hardware was described in an earlier post from this morning.
>>>
>>> And yes, I didn't record anything _directly_ in Ardour, which means I
>>> had existing audio files that I had 'imported' into Ardour to check
>>> out it's mixing and editing capabilities.
>>
>> So you didn't use multi source at all? Look, admit it for you're
>> making things up or dont know what Ardour is for.
>
> What I am admitting to is that I installed Ardour, and with the default
> install, it appeared to work properly with everything I tested, which I
> described to you, including the HW and SS installed. That is what I said,
> nothing more, nothing less.
>
> I am making nothing up and I do know Ardour is for. I have given you no
> other reason to suspect anything different other than the fact that it
> seems to install and work easily.

But by your own admission you havent actually used it for anything that
it was designed for - namely low latency mixing for separate audio
sources.


In other words your "me too" was pointless.

Sorry DanS, I'm sure you meant well, but really.
 
Hadron <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote in
news:fto2g1$97m$2@registered.motzarella.org:

> DanS <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@a.d.e.l.p.h.i.a.n.e.t> writes:
>
>> Hadron <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote in
>> news:ftnsui$ntj$8@registered.motzarella.org:
>>
>>> DanS <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@a.d.e.l.p.h.i.a.n.e.t> writes:
>>>
>>>> Hadron <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote in
>>>> news:ftnpkm$ntj$2@registered.motzarella.org:
>>>>
>>>>> DanS <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@r.o.a.d.r.u.n.n.e.r.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Ardour seems like a decent OSS application, comparable to some
>>>>>>>>> of the commercial (not top-end though) Windows audio s/w just
>>>>>>>>> like it I have used.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And yet you didn't record anything with it?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Uh, ok.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I was trying to be nice, but obviously he didn't get anything
>>>>>>> working with Ardour because you need Jack to get it going and he
>>>>>>> would have mentioned that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Obviously nothing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, I didn't know Jack needed to be installed, but you know what,
>>>>>> it is. I don't remember installing it maybe it came down with
>>>>>> Ardour from aptitude. I saw it in the Audio/Video menu after I
>>>>>> installed Ardour and was looking to start that. I started Jack,
>>>>>> looked at it, saw what it was for, said to myself...'well the
>>>>>> audio works, so I'm not going to f with that'.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> OK, next time I need to prove that something works on this
>>>>>> system, I'll post the install log along with all of it's
>>>>>> dependencies and everything else even remotely related to it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> IOW I set him up, but the other guy spilled the beans.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You set me up ?! That's funny.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's just another Linux advocate's "works for me" post, and not
>>>>>>> a very good one at all.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, it's not a Linux advocate's post. Just a post. And just the
>>>>>> truth.
>>>>>
>>>>> Seriously, what did you use it for? You already said you didn't
>>>>> record anything.
>>>>>
>>>>> What HW and audio sources did you use?
>>>>
>>>> The hardware was described in an earlier post from this morning.
>>>>
>>>> And yes, I didn't record anything _directly_ in Ardour, which means
>>>> I had existing audio files that I had 'imported' into Ardour to
>>>> check out it's mixing and editing capabilities.
>>>
>>> So you didn't use multi source at all? Look, admit it for you're
>>> making things up or dont know what Ardour is for.
>>
>> What I am admitting to is that I installed Ardour, and with the
>> default install, it appeared to work properly with everything I
>> tested, which I described to you, including the HW and SS installed.
>> That is what I said, nothing more, nothing less.
>>
>> I am making nothing up and I do know Ardour is for. I have given you
>> no other reason to suspect anything different other than the fact
>> that it seems to install and work easily.
>
> But by your own admission you havent actually used it for anything
> that it was designed for - namely low latency mixing for separate
> audio sources.

For a minute there, I thought you were different from GoldFart.

But I was wrong.

> In other words your "me too" was pointless.

What is pointless is talking to you...or GoldFart...or Frank. In typical
(anyOS)-tard fashion, you will continue to pick apart anything I say and
come up with some _other_ reason as to why I'm wrong, and if I disprove
that, you will just come up with some new miniscule detail to dispute.

I could do all of this with you physically in the room and watching
everything happen and you _still_ wouldn't believe it.

I'm doing nothing but wasting my time, so, I'm done with you.
 
Re: Red Hat Developer's Update on PulseAudio, Fedora Live CDs Interview

On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 04:08:55 -0700 (PDT), dawhead wrote:

> On Apr 11, 12:11 am, Moshe Goldfarb <brick.n.st...@gmail.com> wrote:>
>> I subscribed to ALSA list once to attempt to get information as to how
>> ALSA/Jack/dmix/etc all work and interact together.
>>
>> All I got was highly confused.
>>
>> I have a Delta 1010 which has 10 inputs and 10 outputs.
>> Under Windows assigning signals to any in/out is one click.
>
> 1 click and 100msec of latency. Which is why pro-audio and music-
> producing users unders Windows don't generally use the Windows sound
> system but instead use ASIO drivers.

Exactly....

Like I said, 1 click and 2.3msec latency.

What drivers do you think I am using?

BTW I can also use WDM drivers and get the same latency.
Both are installed with the soundcard BTW.

Oh yes, I *am* a professional



> This has changed somewhat in
> Vista, where MS finally got a clue that their entire desktop-consumer-
> centric audio system was useless for pro-audio, but it is still the
> case today that most Windows pro-audio work (for which JACK and Ardour
> are generic equivalents) do NOT use the standard Windows sound stuff.
> With ASIO, its not quite so trivial to do what you are describing.

Vista is borked for professional sound and DAW work.
As for XP, it's trivial.
You slide a slider to the latency you want.

How much easier do you want it?



>> Under ALSA and Linux?
>> I never did figure it out.
>> It's a freaking mess.
>
> This much is true. What are you doing to help fix it, or are you just
> complaining?

I was on the ALSA mailing list for a couple of years.
They are freaks who are mostly programmers and not musicians, at least not
professional musicians.

They have no clue about user friendliness, how to write proper
documentation and so forth.

You ask a question like how can I use all 10 of my inputs and outputs and
you get responses like "did you compile ALSA with dmix capability" ? and
stuff like that.

It's a freaking mess.

At the time, thank God for the Morton kernel or nothing would have worked.

Come to think of it, nothing much has changed.


--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
 
Re: [News] Red Hat Developer's Update on PulseAudio, Fedora LiveCDs Interview

On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 18:09:32 +0200, Hadron wrote:

> DanS <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@a.d.e.l.p.h.i.a.n.e.t> writes:
>
>> Hadron <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote in
>> news:ftnsui$ntj$8@registered.motzarella.org:
>>
>>> DanS <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@a.d.e.l.p.h.i.a.n.e.t> writes:
>>>
>>>> Hadron <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote in
>>>> news:ftnpkm$ntj$2@registered.motzarella.org:
>>>>
>>>>> DanS <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@r.o.a.d.r.u.n.n.e.r.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Ardour seems like a decent OSS application, comparable to some
>>>>>>>>> of the commercial (not top-end though) Windows audio s/w just
>>>>>>>>> like it I have used.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And yet you didn't record anything with it?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Uh, ok.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I was trying to be nice, but obviously he didn't get anything
>>>>>>> working with Ardour because you need Jack to get it going and he
>>>>>>> would have mentioned that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Obviously nothing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, I didn't know Jack needed to be installed, but you know what,
>>>>>> it is. I don't remember installing it maybe it came down with
>>>>>> Ardour from aptitude. I saw it in the Audio/Video menu after I
>>>>>> installed Ardour and was looking to start that. I started Jack,
>>>>>> looked at it, saw what it was for, said to myself...'well the audio
>>>>>> works, so I'm not going to f with that'.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> OK, next time I need to prove that something works on this system,
>>>>>> I'll post the install log along with all of it's dependencies and
>>>>>> everything else even remotely related to it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> IOW I set him up, but the other guy spilled the beans.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You set me up ?! That's funny.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's just another Linux advocate's "works for me" post, and not a
>>>>>>> very good one at all.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, it's not a Linux advocate's post. Just a post. And just the
>>>>>> truth.
>>>>>
>>>>> Seriously, what did you use it for? You already said you didn't
>>>>> record anything.
>>>>>
>>>>> What HW and audio sources did you use?
>>>>
>>>> The hardware was described in an earlier post from this morning.
>>>>
>>>> And yes, I didn't record anything _directly_ in Ardour, which means I
>>>> had existing audio files that I had 'imported' into Ardour to check
>>>> out it's mixing and editing capabilities.
>>>
>>> So you didn't use multi source at all? Look, admit it for you're
>>> making things up or dont know what Ardour is for.
>>
>> What I am admitting to is that I installed Ardour, and with the default
>> install, it appeared to work properly with everything I tested, which I
>> described to you, including the HW and SS installed. That is what I
>> said, nothing more, nothing less.
>>
>> I am making nothing up and I do know Ardour is for. I have given you no
>> other reason to suspect anything different other than the fact that it
>> seems to install and work easily.
>
> But by your own admission you havent actually used it for anything that
> it was designed for - namely low latency mixing for separate audio
> sources.

http://ardour.org/
"Ardour is a digital audio workstation. You can use it to record, edit
and mix multi-track audio. You can produce your own CDs, mix video
soundtracks, or just experiment with new ideas about music and
sound.Ardour capabilities include: multichannel recording, non-
destructive editing with unlimited undo/redo, full automation support, a
powerful mixer, unlimited tracks/busses/plugins, timecode
synchronization, and hardware control from surfaces like the Mackie
Control Universal."

It sounds to me like he used Ardour for things it was designed for.

>
>
> In other words your "me too" was pointless.
>
> Sorry DanS, I'm sure you meant well, but really.





--
Rick
 
Re: [News] Red Hat Developer's Update on PulseAudio, Fedora LiveCDs Interview

Rick wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 18:09:32 +0200, Hadron wrote:
>
>> DanS <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@a.d.e.l.p.h.i.a.n.e.t> writes:
>>
>>> Hadron <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote in
>>> news:ftnsui$ntj$8@registered.motzarella.org:
>>>
>>>> DanS <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@a.d.e.l.p.h.i.a.n.e.t> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> Hadron <hadronquark@googlemail.com> wrote in
>>>>> news:ftnpkm$ntj$2@registered.motzarella.org:
>>>>>
>>>>>> DanS <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@r.o.a.d.r.u.n.n.e.r.com> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Ardour seems like a decent OSS application, comparable to some
>>>>>>>>>> of the commercial (not top-end though) Windows audio s/w just
>>>>>>>>>> like it I have used.
>>>>>>>>> And yet you didn't record anything with it?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Uh, ok.
>>>>>>>> I was trying to be nice, but obviously he didn't get anything
>>>>>>>> working with Ardour because you need Jack to get it going and he
>>>>>>>> would have mentioned that.
>>>>>>> Obviously nothing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No, I didn't know Jack needed to be installed, but you know what,
>>>>>>> it is. I don't remember installing it maybe it came down with
>>>>>>> Ardour from aptitude. I saw it in the Audio/Video menu after I
>>>>>>> installed Ardour and was looking to start that. I started Jack,
>>>>>>> looked at it, saw what it was for, said to myself...'well the audio
>>>>>>> works, so I'm not going to f with that'.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> OK, next time I need to prove that something works on this system,
>>>>>>> I'll post the install log along with all of it's dependencies and
>>>>>>> everything else even remotely related to it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> IOW I set him up, but the other guy spilled the beans.
>>>>>>> You set me up ?! That's funny.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It's just another Linux advocate's "works for me" post, and not a
>>>>>>>> very good one at all.
>>>>>>> No, it's not a Linux advocate's post. Just a post. And just the
>>>>>>> truth.
>>>>>> Seriously, what did you use it for? You already said you didn't
>>>>>> record anything.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What HW and audio sources did you use?
>>>>> The hardware was described in an earlier post from this morning.
>>>>>
>>>>> And yes, I didn't record anything _directly_ in Ardour, which means I
>>>>> had existing audio files that I had 'imported' into Ardour to check
>>>>> out it's mixing and editing capabilities.
>>>> So you didn't use multi source at all? Look, admit it for you're
>>>> making things up or dont know what Ardour is for.
>>> What I am admitting to is that I installed Ardour, and with the default
>>> install, it appeared to work properly with everything I tested, which I
>>> described to you, including the HW and SS installed. That is what I
>>> said, nothing more, nothing less.
>>>
>>> I am making nothing up and I do know Ardour is for. I have given you no
>>> other reason to suspect anything different other than the fact that it
>>> seems to install and work easily.
>> But by your own admission you havent actually used it for anything that
>> it was designed for - namely low latency mixing for separate audio
>> sources.
>
> http://ardour.org/
> "Ardour is a digital audio workstation. You can use it to record, edit
> and mix multi-track audio. You can produce your own CDs, mix video
> soundtracks, or just experiment with new ideas about music and
> sound.Ardour capabilities include: multichannel recording, non-
> destructive editing with unlimited undo/redo, full automation support, a
> powerful mixer, unlimited tracks/busses/plugins, timecode
> synchronization, and hardware control from surfaces like the Mackie
> Control Universal."
>
> It sounds to me like he used Ardour for things it was designed for.
>
>>
>> In other words your "me too" was pointless.
>>
>> Sorry DanS, I'm sure you meant well, but really.
>
>
>
>
>


You really need to ignore the likes of Hardon. He hates to hear that
anything Linux just works. If you say it does you are a liar in his eyes.
caver1
 
>Moshe Goldfarb
>Actually I think of Jack as more of a tool to connect various pieces of the
>audio software and hardware together at very low latency's.
>For example piping the output of one program into another one.

ALSA does that for MIDI. It can do it for audio too, but is more complicated to
setup than JACK because you have to edit an ALSA config file.
 
Back
Top