PDA

View Full Version : The state of pro audio in Linux



studiodude
April 22nd, 2009, 04:53 PM
I´ve looked LONG and hard at looking at a switch to linux for my pro audio work and the thing just isnt ready yet in terms of the software or hardware support, its a long long way off infact, I have used audacity alonside Sony soundforge, and its good, useful even, but it aint Soundforge by a long way, but then again, its free and for that kind of money its an excellent piece of kit. - couple that with an extremely steep learning curve (can be - especially in the terminal window) and its just not worth the investment in time. I have decided (reluctantly) to stick with with windows (I chose that over Mac a lot of years ago and I have my own reasons for that, not getting into an argument over which is the better system, my windows system has made me a living for the best part of 20 years and I am happy with it.)

Linux for audio is for now at least not worth my investment in time, i have too much money invested in pro hardware that would need to be taken into consideration. For me and my current system its a case of "if it aint broke - don´t try to fix it",

I am intending to install a dual boot system and play with linux to see if I can contribute anything worthy to the cause though, using my experience as a musician/composer and engineer/producer and letting linux loose on my hardware, but this will be leisure time playime stuff for me. For paying jobs, Iḿ afraid Iĺl be booting into XP pro and the tried and tested system I have so far made my living using.

Stochastic
April 22nd, 2009, 06:49 PM
Moved to Community Cafe. The post had nothing to do with the original thread's subject.

swoll1980
April 22nd, 2009, 06:59 PM
I´ve looked LONG and hard at looking at a switch to linux for my pro audio work and the thing just isnt ready yet in terms of the software or hardware support, its a long long way off infact, I have used audacity alonside Sony soundforge, and its good, useful even, but it aint Soundforge by a long way, but then again, its free and for that kind of money its an excellent piece of kit. - couple that with an extremely steep learning curve (can be - especially in the terminal window) and its just not worth the investment in time. I have decided (reluctantly) to stick with with windows (I chose that over Mac a lot of years ago and I have my own reasons for that, not getting into an argument over which is the better system, my windows system has made me a living for the best part of 20 years and I am happy with it.)

Linux for audio is for now at least not worth my investment in time, i have too much money invested in pro hardware that would need to be taken into consideration. For me and my current system its a case of "if it aint broke - don´t try to fix it",

I am intending to install a dual boot system and play with linux to see if I can contribute anything worthy to the cause though, using my experience as a musician/composer and engineer/producer and letting linux loose on my hardware, but this will be leisure time playime stuff for me. For paying jobs, Iḿ afraid Iĺl be booting into XP pro and the tried and tested system I have so far made my living using.

You felt the need to explain this because...why?

Eisenwinter
April 22nd, 2009, 08:23 PM
You felt the need to explain this because...why?
+1.

Who cares? waste of space on the forum server.

monkeyKata
April 22nd, 2009, 08:24 PM
You felt the need to explain this because...why?

Well he probably posted this because he'd like to see it changed. Or at least to have other people's opinions on the matter. If you think linux isn't on par with mac or windows in terms of professional audio stability/production/whatever else, then maybe talking about it can help draw attention and ideas in an effort to do something about it.

I think it's good to talk about this. Part of the problem may simply be the lack of linux versions for a variety of popular programs (to my mind comes Ableton Live, Reason, Fruity Loops, Rane Serato Scratch Live...are there linux versions for any of these?) I often read that most linux programmers work on their projects in their spare time, which understandably might make it hard to compete with a company employing people to improve software, which is paid for, bringing in revenue to further pay employees and further help development, etc.

To Stochastic: I think the post has a lot to do with the topic title, at least in his eyes.
EDIT --> I just realized that you may have isolated this post from another thread...yeah?

And to the original poster: what other programs do or have you used on Linux for audio? What do you like, what downfalls do they have? What do you think ought to change?

CharmyBee
April 22nd, 2009, 08:32 PM
Editing audio with a 0.2 second delay is one of the worst things to do ever, regardless of what audio software you have to edit with. I really, really hope 9.04 fixes the delay issue.

Never mind the linux youth on #3 and #4. Elitism isn't welcome anywhere for anyone.

wsonar
April 22nd, 2009, 08:34 PM
I DJ electronic music

yes the lack of software all the pro's use can suck at times
Serato, Ableton...

like photoshop these are expensive programs and are for a reason
with serato you at least get an IO box but still you wouldn't want to run these through wine either

LMMS is good music creation software check it out download it you can make some good EDM with it

as far as live DJing software the only thing out there is MIXX and it obviously dosn't cut it compared to the software that comes with your IO box like serato, or traktor.

I would say your better off running these pro apps on a MAC to but I know your not here to here that I run them on PC aswell

but unless your going to learn to write code and come up with solutions to contribute then be patient and checkk these guys out

http://www.64studio.com/screenshots

Chemical Imbalance
April 22nd, 2009, 08:35 PM
Editing audio with a 0.2 second delay is one of the worst things to do ever, regardless of what audio software you have to edit with. I really, really hope 9.04 fixes the delay issue.

It doesn't fix it in Jaunty by default. I believe that's what the real-time kernel is for.

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=945964

CharmyBee
April 22nd, 2009, 08:37 PM
I believe that's what the real-time kernel is for.

Ah. Then I won't be able to accelerate the video then, if I go rt :( instant sound or fast video, can't have one without the other. (Never got fglrx working in rt)

swoll1980
April 22nd, 2009, 08:51 PM
Well he probably posted this because he'd like to see it changed. Or at least to have other people's opinions on the matter. If you think linux isn't on par with mac or windows in terms of professional audio stability/production/whatever else, then maybe talking about it can help draw attention and ideas in an effort to do something about it.



Well that's all well. and good, but in the end, coming to a Linux forum, complaining about pro audio, then say your going back to "good old XP pro" doesn't really fix anything, or help fix anything. Does it? Surely this post isn't an epiphany, that's going to alter the future of Linux audio.

cmay
April 22nd, 2009, 08:55 PM
I DJ electronic music

yes the lack of software all the pro's use can suck at times
Serato, Ableton...

like photoshop these are expensive programs and are for a reason
with serato you at least get an IO box but still you wouldn't want to run these through wine either

LMMS is good music creation software check it out download it you can make some good EDM with it

as far as live DJing software the only thing out there is MIXX and it obviously dosn't cut it compared to the software that comes with your IO box like serato, or traktor.

I would say your better off running these pro apps on a MAC to but I know your not here to here that I run them on PC aswell

but unless your going to learn to write code and come up with solutions to contribute then be patient and checkk these guys out

http://www.64studio.com/screenshots

i switced to linux and after looking a year i found this distro. its some years ago and i still think its better than my cubase and sonar setup on windows. granted it could be looking even more pro but in the end the results is what matters and the time it takes to mouse around in windows just to set the mixer right is alreay done on this littel nice distro from live cd on a half hour.

i am never going to use windows for any thing again after i found 64studio.
and if i need to get a better platform for audio on pro level i would pick mac next time.

CharmyBee
April 22nd, 2009, 08:58 PM
Well that's all well. and good, but in the end, coming to a Linux forum, complaining about pro audio, then say your going back to "good old XP pro" doesn't really fix anything, or help fix anything. Does it? Surely this post isn't an epiphany, that's going to alter the future of Linux audio.


yeah well, let me know when you're paid to do professional sound work in a tight deadline where you don't even have time to muck around finding combinations of software, making patches, or getting rt kernel to work. If he has to use Windows for paid professional work then let him. I know i'm still using Windows, for gaming and sound editing.

swoll1980
April 22nd, 2009, 09:04 PM
yeah well, let me know when you're paid to do professional sound work in a tight deadline where you don't even have time to muck around finding combinations of software, making patches, or getting rt kernel to work. If he has to use Windows for paid professional work then let him. I know i'm still using Windows, for gaming and sound editing.

Never mind. You don't understand where I'm coming from. For some reason I don't go to Windows forums, complain about something, and than say I'm going back to Linux. I guess I'm funny that way. If I were him I would use Windows too, but I wouldn't feel the need to say "Linux needs to change because it's not for me"

monkeyKata
April 22nd, 2009, 09:04 PM
Well that's all well. and good, but in the end, coming to a Linux forum, complaining about pro audio, then say your going back to "good old XP pro" doesn't really fix anything, or help fix anything. Does it? Surely this post isn't an epiphany, that's going to alter the future of Linux audio.

Ok. I didn't read it as just a complaint. And maybe Linux is sort of known as lacking in this area (I'm just guessing) and then bringing it up makes one a bit like "yeah, so what else is new?"

But talking does help... already in this post I found out about a couple programs and an audio-based distro.

Bölvağur
April 22nd, 2009, 09:55 PM
I am intending to install a dual boot system and play with linux to see if I can contribute anything worthy to the cause though, using my experience as a musician/composer and engineer/producer

[-o<

That is the spirit we all should share with you.

Icehuck
April 22nd, 2009, 09:58 PM
Never mind. You don't understand where I'm coming from. For some reason I don't go to Windows forums, complain about something, and than say I'm going back to Linux. I guess I'm funny that way. If I were him I would use Windows too, but I wouldn't feel the need to say "Linux needs to change because it's not for me"

It's valid feedback and criticism for Ubuntu. This should have probably gone to feedback and testimonials.

studiodude
April 22nd, 2009, 10:39 PM
You felt the need to explain this because...why?

Because, like the poster above me in the original thread said.........if you are looking to play with the software go ahead and play with linux, but if your job depends on it, it may save you a whole month of trying to configure a bunch of hardware to find its still just not up to the job....yet....

As for being a waste of server space, my comments were at least about audio software and the real life application of and not just some pathetic waste of text like _

"Who cares? waste of space on the forum server."

Which is actually more of a waste of space on the forum server????

Of course I would like to see the situation change regarding audio and linux, being compelled to use software like its author wants me to use it is not what any creative person wants - and macros just are not enough. Music is only a mathematical process in the writing down of it on paper, if we strived for only electronically produced mathematically perfect renditions of music then we could have stopped making real instruments back in the 80s when sequencing and quantizing of music became reachable to the masses.

Now that recording media has turned mainly digital and hard disk based, the ability to capture more music and video has reached more people, and the distribution of it to a wider audience very easy to do.

Windows isn't the best for audio creation for many reasons, apart from price, security, etc etc. but it is supported - as are a long list of hardware tools for it. Linux is a baby by comparison in this respect but, to me, a much more desirable philosophy surrounds it than the somewhat "closed" and proprietary Mac and PC even given the extremely powerful systems available on those systems.

Having a customizable flexible system is much more of a draw, having software that is worked on daily, contributed to by real life musicians and users of the software, and updated regularly and available to the end user has to ultimately provide a more practical user driven interface. To have the ability to contribute in some small way and have the thing do what you want it to do..... This to me is the draw of Linux and my desire to try to make myself part of it.

Having to wait 6 months or more for minor bug fixes and version increments - allowing software houses to put it in a new box, charge you the same again for the same system with a few added extras is frankly a turn off, and at times the lack of backwards compatibility issues make having backups of projects only a couple of years old unusable.

Spending 600 quid for a set of plug-ins for version 3 of xxxxx (that cost incidentally 700 quid to start with) that need a special (3rd party until an official patch becomes available) wrapper to run in version 4 that you have to pay 400 quid extra for the upgrade for, is NOT my idea of a fair deal.

The amount of things that need doing to a windows system to get it to run my music software smoothly is a very long list of registry changes, tweaks and workarounds that are basically the norm for anyone relatively accomplished in linux and when you have a decent understanding of the kernal and can actually have a hand in knocking out your own version well, it doesn´t bare thinking about. Also, what makes a PC (at least) useful as an audio tool renders the machine weaker in other areas and as such is a pain in the butt should you be on a budget. There are ways around it of course, but its still bloody windows.....

Of course no linux fan needs to know any of this, thats why we are here. But it has to be said, some things in linux just dont work as well yet, or cost too much in time, trial and error, and education to get working, especially if its your living. I applaud all those involved in trying to make it happen.

I dont know why some of you flamed me for having an opinion about my real life working situation - a system that I would love to be able to port directly over to linux or at least have a minor hand in its move over. I hate booting into windows for my working life, I love playing in linux and every new day I use it, I feel the desire to find a way to spend all my working time in it. For the moment I cant. Nor can I advocate its use or sing its praises to any other pro musician because its just not there yet and as musicians are apt to paying a lot of money for their instruments and tools of the trade, maybe it never will be in the open source sense.....

I may have strayed off the original posts subject, and for that i apologize - I was actually just reinforcing an point made by an earlier poster and if I wasted your time I am also sorry, but why bother answering in the way you did - isn't that just a further waste of time?

At least I am trying to learn to use the system, trying to compile and install software the hard way in an effort to understand the processes, getting stuck in and making a thousand mistakes on the command line and reading through pages of code and trying to understand it all in the hope that one day I may contribute to the thing in a positive way - and while I don't know enough yet about programming, I know I have a lot to offer from extensive and real life usage of the very expensive alternatives on other platforms and a lot of high end pro audio hardware that will serve as a decent test bed for all of us to maybe benefit from one day.

The one line sarcastic and caustic posts really are not helpful in any way so why bother. If anything I have said forces sensible and contextual debate then bring it on.....we dont want to waste valuable forum server space in a flame war about nothing after all, do we?

Thank you admin for redirecting me and allowing a thread of my own instead of binning me.

Bölvağur
April 23rd, 2009, 01:21 AM
The one line sarcastic and caustic posts really are not helpful in any way so why bother.

Hope it wasnt me and icehuck.

I too have troubles recording whole songs in ubuntu. Similar to your problems in a way.
So far I have only done recordings of riffs and audio tests but have recorded in windy. So that means I have only recorded 1 song past 2 years :(

There are many guitar players here on the forum and probably every single one of them will understand you.

The problem people in the beginning of the thread that failed to understand the relevance of the topic to ubuntu's betterment, is just because they read between the lines and saw "Im going back to windows" as there are way too often that kind of threads get created as well as flame baits.

but as I said, you are what all linux users should do, want to help out very badly. linux isnt free, we have to develop it and support the community.

hanzomon4
April 23rd, 2009, 03:09 AM
What problems are you guys having? Maybe I've been using Ubuntu long enough to not see installing the rt kernel as a problem, but I think Linux is now pretty good for audio. With Ardour, Jack, Jokosher, Jamin, JackRack, PD, Hydrogen, and Seq24 I have all that I need.

I dualboot on a macbook pro and have some professional sound apps through my school. They're great but, besides a little polish, I think I can do everything I need in Linux. Granted I do sound art/ Experimental music so my needs may be different then someone recording a pop album. I guess I'm in a situation that allows me to adopt a new tool chain, I'm not so set in "a way" of doing things. That's not a criticism by the way.

sloggerkhan
April 23rd, 2009, 03:12 AM
I´ve looked LONG and hard at looking at a switch to linux for my pro audio work and the thing just isnt ready yet in terms of the software or hardware support, its a long long way off infact, I have used audacity alonside Sony soundforge, and its good, useful even, but it aint Soundforge by a long way, but then again, its free and for that kind of money its an excellent piece of kit. - couple that with an extremely steep learning curve (can be - especially in the terminal window) and its just not worth the investment in time. I have decided (reluctantly) to stick with with windows (I chose that over Mac a lot of years ago and I have my own reasons for that, not getting into an argument over which is the better system, my windows system has made me a living for the best part of 20 years and I am happy with it.)

Linux for audio is for now at least not worth my investment in time, i have too much money invested in pro hardware that would need to be taken into consideration. For me and my current system its a case of "if it aint broke - don´t try to fix it",

I am intending to install a dual boot system and play with linux to see if I can contribute anything worthy to the cause though, using my experience as a musician/composer and engineer/producer and letting linux loose on my hardware, but this will be leisure time playime stuff for me. For paying jobs, Iḿ afraid Iĺl be booting into XP pro and the tried and tested system I have so far made my living using.

If you do pro audio work, forget audacity and try ardour (http://ardour.org/) with a realtime kernel and jack.

Otherwise you haven't been seriously considering your options.

Icehuck
April 23rd, 2009, 03:16 AM
If you do pro audio work, forget audacity and try ardour (http://ardour.org/) with a realtime kernel and jack.

Otherwise you haven't been seriously considering your options.

Or he is a new Linux user who doesn't know about all the options available? However; Linux is still known to have crappy audio support and your mileage may vary. We don't fix audio(alsa,oss) but we put do put band-aids on it(Pulse Audio).

studiodude
April 23rd, 2009, 04:35 AM
I'm not so set in "a way" of doing things. That's not a criticism by the way.

no criticism taken. There are many things to consider in making a working system viable. my ******* package is one piece of software that allows me to import audio and video in many different formats, and to allow me to render the output of the end result in a variety of formats. this can be a print out of the individual parts in score notation for reading by live musicians, sub-group mixes for mastering houses, finished 96/32 rendered files in a number of formats be it hi res- for CD, or lo res- for web, etc etc etc, it is also a pro sampler, many different kinds of synthesizers, a host of effects and processors and it all runs smoothly on a decent spec laptop with just one piece of hardware attatched for inputing and outputting various signals.
the system is also generally quite easy to understand for someone coming from a different package and conforms to the expected standards of broacast wave formats.......this comes at a price. the system is worth a lot of money in software alone.

All of this works fine on top of Windows, which takes up what it takes up, but even trimmed for music its bloated and unless u know what all the services and stuff do, can be a very hit and miss affair to set up - with linux, you kind of expect this.
I have to keep some kind of antivirus somewhere even if not on the studio machine for when people bring media to the studio and i scan it before letting it loose on my system - maybe wouldnt be such an issue in linux.

I have to have a tonne of windows stuff going on at the same time, even after trimming the installation is still hefty - linux could be compiled in a much more logical way iḿ sure, and the ubuntu studio version is the crux of this, as far as i understand.

Iḿ still new to all of this, so I cant speak of how the lack of need to defrag affects performance, but in windows, its a must to keep the recording disk cleaned up and defragged, this takes time and is a chore that isnt a particularly inspiring way to start a creative process.

Having one main program to create music is fine, it works, is expensive but is a little restrictive in that you are having to use that programes methods to acheive certain results which may not actually be that intuitive, there may be a better way in another package, but then you have two major software packages sat on top of a big bloated OS.

well, here is how i see the perfect linux music creation system - the operating system is the core that is tuned to attain the best in terms of timing and performance from the cpu and hardware. It is the operating system that is the engine on which sits the various software modules that can be interchangeable to enable the user to have his or her preference in terms of what package they prefer for a certain task.

Its hard to explain but heres a real world example - say you want peak performance in mastering a track for CD using cpu heavy convolution reverbs and effects, well, you boot a modified optimized kernal allowing the cpu as much headroom as possible to run the various modules you need, and you only load the modules you need, no more no less. In windows or mac cubase for example, You have a template inside of Cubase to start you off on this, BUT you still have to load ALL of an optimised windows and ALL of an un optimised cubase just in order to open this template before the audio is imported into it and the effects loaded into memory. In this instance its not such a job for a decent spec. system, but to me linux means that its never an issue, what ever the job. Why do I have to load all of windows for a start, with all the crap that comes with it even after trimming, then load cubase and have all of THOSE functions sat there, score editing - midi editors - when all i want is the BEST quality EQ, Compression, and reverbs for my mastering session. I COULD buy a mastering suite software package without the score editing in it,, but i already paid a grand for cubase, another for plugins, another for samplers, another for a few decent synths, -

I AM considering the features of ardour, but that appears to me so far to be a full featured audio software package that sits on an optimised linux, Close to what i am suggesting, but more like the "cubase on windows" model.. I am suggesting a move away from all in one packages in order to have specialised modules/kernals that would go to make a customised suite of integrated tools like cubase or Ardour when combined. whats the point in having score editing if you are NEVER going to use it, but at the same time, what a shame not to have a score editing module available for those that would use it, and if you do make one - make it fully featured, just dont force it on everyone.

These are just suggestions for discussion you must understand, an idea of what i would consider a forward leap in optimizing the power of modern systems using a highly customisable OS like linux at the core. In no way am i suggesting THIS IS WHATS NEEDED AND I WANT IT NOW AND FOR FREE........... its just that using cubase and logic is like using MS word for editing simple text file sometimes, like driving a supercar round london at 5mph. theres nothing wrong with any of it, it works, it gets you there, but it could be done differently alowing more creative control and customisation without 600 menu items that will be used once a month if you are lucky - and linux seems logical vehicle to make it so. Hey, once there were NO computers - now look where we are....ideas cost nothing to have....

thisllub
April 23rd, 2009, 06:12 AM
If you do pro audio work, forget audacity and try ardour (http://ardour.org/) with a realtime kernel and jack.

Otherwise you haven't been seriously considering your options.

I have tried Ardour.
With 64Studio and UbuntuStudio, even compiled from CVS.

I thought that with SAE backing them it might have a shot at being a solid multi tracker.
Unfortunately it is still a long way behind the Windows / Mac programs.
I have found the only sure way to get it to run smoothly is to reboot and reboot again after your session.


When you pay a lot of money for gear spending a bit more on software isn't such a big deal.

What would be great is if a MAC based app was ported to Linux, even with a custom distro, even if it was commercial.

Real time kernels have their own shortcomings that make them unsuitable as work machines e.g. Virtualisation doesn't work.

Audio computers should have one purpose only.
If that means a MAC or Windows for now then so be it.

However computer audio has come a long way since my Sequential Circuits midi sequencer on the Commodore 64.

Hardware improvements will see audio work better and Linux will catch up.

studiodude
April 23rd, 2009, 09:31 AM
When you pay a lot of money for gear spending a bit more on software isn't such a big deal.

What would be great is if a MAC based app was ported to Linux, even with a custom distro, even if it was commercial.


Absolutely............ make it the modular system of my dreams and last rambling post and my wallet is already out - just keep it open enough for real customer feedback and improvement.

toupeiro
April 23rd, 2009, 10:01 AM
Very informative posts, Studiodude. I have a good friend/co-worker of mine who also has a studio in his house and actively plays and records. He and I have talked several times about taking a weekend with ubuntu studio and trying to get it working to see if it could replace Pro Tools and some of the other applications he has. He knows more about the hardware, I've done a pretty exhaustive search on available applications. Ardour, Rosegarden, etc etc..

Thanks for your feedback with regard to your experiences with ubuntu and Pro Audio.

-T.

zenithdave
April 23rd, 2009, 10:24 AM
As far as i can read up some did attempt to make an ASIO driver for Ubuntu but the maker of the SDK (steinberg) got heavy and the project was abandoned, correct me if i am wrong i am an imbecile :lolflag:

The only reason i keep windows is for running fruity loops and reason. Imho there is nothing to touch ASIO drivers and windows music apps yet.

Good thread, needs discussing :D

nandemonai
April 23rd, 2009, 11:04 AM
It's true.

Professional audio on Linux blows. Mainly due to hardware issues.

With so many people having issues simply being able to get audio out to even work with their chipsets, what does that say about using it in a production environment?

MIDI implementation is pretty good, I'll give it that. But as far as using Linux in a professional audio studio? No way.

Apple all the way in that regard. At least for now.

voxman69
April 23rd, 2009, 11:58 AM
This one has gotten lots of great reviews and thumbs-up:
http://www.energy-xt.com/

* Sequencer with multi-track audio recording
* Built-in synthesizer/sampler, drum-track and multi effect processor
* Pro editing features
* Works on all operating systems
* No loading time
* Runs from a memorystick


It's not free, but very affordable compared to all the other software mentioned earlier in this thread. 59 euros.

This does of course not solve the hardware issues one might have...

studiodude
April 23rd, 2009, 12:11 PM
It's true.

Professional audio on Linux blows. Mainly due to hardware issues.

With so many people having issues simply being able to get audio out to even work with their chipsets, what does that say about using it in a production environment?


Thats right of course, and a year ago i pulled out of linux for a while after two months trying to get my wifi working, but something drew me back, and I think its the excitement of the chance to create something. Its like a lump of clay, at the moment its nothing, but it could be used for anything we want if the ideas at ground level actually influence the thing and sparks off a flurry of other ideas. To have ANYTHING at all of the quality of this OS, is remarkable given that it took me, the end user 10 mins to download, 20 mins to install, a week to configure and fall in love with and cost me NOTHING but time and sparked a wave of thoughts and "what ifs?" I personally dont care that its not ready now, in fact thats part of the draw, the challenge to create something.

A GUI OS came from a command line OS the same as Windows came from dos, but this one is alive and asking to be given a chance at learning its street smarts from those on the street, backpacking round the world, not sent away to boarding school to be returned with the required qualiications and spending the next 40 years behind a desk with the odd week in Spain for a treat.

zenithdave
April 23rd, 2009, 12:15 PM
This one has gotten lots of great reviews and thumbs-up:
http://www.energy-xt.com/

* Sequencer with multi-track audio recording
* Built-in synthesizer/sampler, drum-track and multi effect processor
* Pro editing features
* Works on all operating systems
* No loading time
* Runs from a memorystick




It's not free, but very affordable compared to all the other software mentioned earlier in this thread. 59 euros.

This does of course not solve the hardware issues one might have...

Looks good, Linux version requires JackAudio :rolleyes: has ANYONE EVER got this to work? And it supports standard VST :D that's progress

hanzomon4
April 23rd, 2009, 01:28 PM
I'll just pipe in a say that no disavantage exist for the realtime kernel. I've used an rt-kernel for my everyday computing including running virtual machines in Vbox and with working 3d drivers. Perhaps it's a setup issue.

daverich
April 23rd, 2009, 01:30 PM
Looks good, Linux version requires JackAudio :rolleyes: has ANYONE EVER got this to work? And it supports standard VST :D that's progress

Yup,

Jack works great here.

I use it with Wineasio to run Reaper (yes with vst plugins and all)

Kind regards

Dave Rich

zenithdave
April 23rd, 2009, 01:36 PM
Yup,

Jack works great here.

I use it with Wineasio to run Reaper (yes with vst plugins and all)

Kind regards

Dave Rich

:guitar: what kind of Latency are you getting ?

studiodude
April 23rd, 2009, 03:09 PM
Yup,

Jack works great here.

I use it with Wineasio to run Reaper (yes with vst plugins and all)



Definatly gonna get the dual boot system running on the studio latop and do some experimenting and report back - gimme a week or so to finish the project iḿ on, do the back ups and get the install sorted and weĺl see how asio in wine handles 8 or more inputs at once - which is a basic requirement for me. Will be an interesting few weeks to come. I would LOVE to ditch windows, Iḿ so fed up of it.

joeinbend
April 23rd, 2009, 09:33 PM
Hi all,
This topic is very interesting to me. I am putting together a test workstation for studio recording, and so far 64 Studio looks the most promising. I'm wondering what others have done in the realm of the interface between PC hardware and multichannel mixer boards.

-> The most basic method would be to 'nix the whole physical mixing board, and just use a boatload of analog in/outs via PCI cards, and to software control of all in/outs. In this scenario, what PCI cards have you used with success?

-> A more advanced and more professional approach would be to have I/O on the PC, connected to a multi-channel hardware mixer, which actually controls the software. Has anyone gone down this path before, and if so I'd be interested in what hardware was used.

studiodude
April 23rd, 2009, 11:47 PM
I have done both these things in windows, which doesnt help you I know, but i was very succesful getting 3 M-audio 24/96 pic cards in the same box, and functioning without conflict. they are quite high spec cards and you can get em quite cheap now, plus they might have a bit of history compared to something more cutting edge as far as Linux is concerned, though this is pure conjecture on my part as Iḿ still new ish to linux and the audio side of it certainly...............

If you can get something like an EMU 0404 card talking, i think they have an 8 channel adat optical out which you could light pipe and midi to something like a behringer dx3216 for automated faders via midi that SHOULD be useful as a kind of worksurface for something like Ardour, - this might be only available on the 1212, but again, cheap enough cards these days.

will be interested to see how you get on.

;-) M

thisllub
April 24th, 2009, 02:53 AM
I'll just pipe in a say that no disavantage exist for the realtime kernel. I've used an rt-kernel for my everyday computing including running virtual machines in Vbox and with working 3d drivers. Perhaps it's a setup issue.

Interesting.
No distro with a real time kernel has ever allowed me to run VirtualBox.

One tip for those that want Jack running is to use a *Box environment like OpenBox.

Kde (and I assume gnome) try and use the audio system.
Once it is initialised the Jack session never seems to work as well.
Up and running I have managed to sync Ardour to Hydrogen and Rosegarden but a few crashes later and you are up for another reboot.

Finally for the Windows shy (and isn't that most of us) as long as you don't connect Windows to a network it is fine.

Johnsie
April 24th, 2009, 04:22 AM
I agree with the original poster. Linux sucks for professional sound and video stuff. Sure there are some 'alternatives' out there but they don't really match the quality that most people in the industry require. Most sound/video experts are perfectionists and need high quality stuff to work with. The problem with Linux is that there is not enough investment in this and other types of software for Linux. The companies who make proprietry software make alot of money from their products but with Linux there is simply not enough cash or incentive available to companies. Why would I write software and give it away for free when I can make a tonne of money and feed my family by selling it? Software companies don't release for Linux because Windows users make a bigger proportion of the market share and most people who work with multimedia know that Macs are pretty good at this stuff.

pyrael
August 8th, 2009, 05:39 AM
You know, I realize there are problems in linux (and I am not disagreeing with anyone here) - I'm actually having problems getting a new firewire interface working, however I think you (as in one whom wishes to use the platform) need to stop thinking "inside the window" :tongue:

I have been a linux user for going on eight years now. I actually started being interested in computers solely for the use of Pro Audio programs. I am 100% self educated with PCs, Software etc.. reading countless books, forums and the like. My very first recording rig was a dinky little eMachines E-Tower 400 with a Soundblaster and Cakwalk ProAudio9, and a Radio Shack Dynamic Mic. (go ahead, puke now)

I found out about linux and how much more "free" it was from a "computer geek" friend who was ecstatic about it. I tried it (Mandrake 8) and was really diggin' it, even though 90% of the games wouldn't run on my crappy onboard video. I actually remember the day I FINALLY got my freaking PCI 56k WinModem to work with the 2.4 kernel, yeah, had to compile the module yourself back then and even then, it was trail and error to get the generic module to work for your hardware. Those were the days.

Anyways, the point is this. I understand where the original poster is coming from. If I had been in a Pro environment back then I would have scrapped linux and stuck with the sure thing. After all, if you can't work, there's no time to play is there?

I would like to mention though that even last year I was 100% capable of recording full songs in linux, using the rt kernel, Ardour, Hydrogen (love that thing) and even some ******* stuff piped in from wine. As a matter of fact, even though it's IMO not market ready as far as the performance goes, I think the Mixing and recording (24/96 16 channels) wasn't too shabby.

If you're having problems getting thing "right" within linux, then stick with what is guaranteed, but I hope my testimonial here reinforces some optimism in the current status of Linux Pro Audio and the possibility of it do "The Job".

I hope it's acceptable to post a link here, if not I fully understand

Here's a single from my studio, mastered out of house:
http://soundclick.com/share?songid=7048886

hanzomon4
August 8th, 2009, 09:09 AM
I just started back making music after a small trip through photo land and linux is a great platform for audio. The tools are there. Besides the jack suit of apps, hydrogen, pd, csound, ardour, and joksher you also have lmms. I just found out about lmms and it's amazing for making electronic music.

The only thing that matters now is getting hardware that works. I think it's much cheaper to spend the time finding good compatible hardware then buying a mac and audio apps. If you're already use to the mac audio tool chain it may be hard to switch to another platform. But if you're like me and just starting out linux is a great choice. All that noise about protools being the industry standard doesn't really apply. I've used protools and it's not magic. If you have good production techniques you can make kickass recordings on tape, linux, protools... whatever

Tipped OuT
August 8th, 2009, 09:28 AM
You felt the need to explain this because...why?

Looks like someone is upset for reading negative criticism about the operating system they use. :P

Anyways... If we all just ignore the flaws in Linux, then it will never be fixed. If we acknowledge the flaws, we have a better chance at fixing them.

hanzomon4
August 8th, 2009, 09:34 AM
looks like someone is upset for reading negative criticism about the operating system they use. :p

anyways... If we all just ignore the flaws in linux, then it will never be fixed. If we acknowledge the flaws, we have a better chance at fixing them.

+1

pyrael
October 22nd, 2009, 02:33 PM
The only thing that matters now is getting hardware that works. I think it's much cheaper to spend the time finding good compatible hardware then buying a mac and audio apps. If you're already use to the mac audio tool chain it may be hard to switch to another platform. But if you're like me and just starting out linux is a great choice. All that noise about protools being the industry standard doesn't really apply. I've used protools and it's not magic. If you have good production techniques you can make kickass recordings on tape, linux, protools... whatever

I have to 100% agree with you. Hardware..... well, so far just do ALOT of research before you commit to buy. I made the mistake of buying a software controlled firewire interface. Now in order to record with it, I have to boot into XP, set the levels, and then switch back to ubuntu studio to record all because PreSonus want's to be Billy's "BFF" :mad:.

Every Pro engineer I have talked to has told me almost the same thing. ProTools is great because the harware is ALWAYS supported (well duh!). But as far as DAW goes, Take any peice of hardware that will work with your Favorite DAW, set up a source infront of a mic, and record. Do the same with any of them, they'll all sound the same. It's what the user is comfortable with. I personally like Ardour. Even if I have to switch back and forth to record with it, It's worth it to me because I feel most at home there.

Groucho Marxist
October 22nd, 2009, 07:41 PM
I have to 100% agree with you. Hardware..... well, so far just do ALOT of research before you commit to buy. I made the mistake of buying a software controlled firewire interface. Now in order to record with it, I have to boot into XP, set the levels, and then switch back to ubuntu studio to record all because PreSonus want's to be Billy's "BFF" :mad:.

Every Pro engineer I have talked to has told me almost the same thing. ProTools is great because the harware is ALWAYS supported (well duh!). But as far as DAW goes, Take any peice of hardware that will work with your Favorite DAW, set up a source infront of a mic, and record. Do the same with any of them, they'll all sound the same. It's what the user is comfortable with. I personally like Ardour. Even if I have to switch back and forth to record with it, It's worth it to me because I feel most at home there.

I'm glad to have found this topic here on UF. I'm a radio broadcaster who enjoys using Adobe Audition in Windows for professional work, while low-key consumer/prosumer projects are handled just fine in Audacity. Does anyone here know of any professional Linux audio production software that will work in the 64-bit Ubuntu distro? If not, will Adobe Audition 3.0 work under a 64-bit Windows XP Dual Boot when the software is designed for a 32-bit Win/Mac OS?

sloggerkhan
October 23rd, 2009, 12:10 AM
Ardour is probably the closest to what you want. Use maybe on ubuntu studio with a realtime kernel? http://ardour.org/

kayosiii
October 24th, 2009, 05:14 AM
Interesting.
No distro with a real time kernel has ever allowed me to run VirtualBox.

One tip for those that want Jack running is to use a *Box environment like OpenBox.

Kde (and I assume gnome) try and use the audio system.
Once it is initialised the Jack session never seems to work as well.
Up and running I have managed to sync Ardour to Hydrogen and Rosegarden but a few crashes later and you are up for another reboot.

Finally for the Windows shy (and isn't that most of us) as long as you don't connect Windows to a network it is fine.

I am probably the only one here trying to do pro-audio on kde 4 but actually it works quite well. Kde does all its audio through libxine by default which can be run on top of jack (on ubuntu you will need to recompile libxine with jack support - or use the new ppa for such things).

If you are already invested in mac or windows based setup and already outlaid for hardware and software it's hard to come up with a compelling reason to switch. You will immediately be hit by what you can't do that you can in your old setup - sometimes it will be that things are done differently sometimes it will be that you simply don't have that capability on linux. If on the other hand you are comming from nothing then you gain a *lot* of capability for almost no outlay.

I built my linux audio rig at a time when I had almost no income and I purchased my hardware with linux usage in mind. Over the years pieces of hardware that haven't worked so well have been sold off or given away.

With Mac you are buying a controled hardware platform. With Windows you have all manufacurers targeting your product. If they fail with windows support it is the hardware manufacturers fault.
With Linux you have neither of these luxuries... expecting it to work with whatever random hardware configuration you have is somewhat nieve. What makes matters worse is that there is very little labeling to say that a product will work with Linux or not.

These are my current findings ( i usually build my computers from scratch)
1) I am using a gigabyte mainboard - mainly because their onboard firewire is texas instruments.
2) For wireless I am using ralink chipsets - these have open source drivers and these days work right out of the box.
3) 3D graphics are a big part of my day job and the only manufacturer with its **** sufficiently together on linux is nVidia. If I didn't specifically need 3d I would look at some of the better intel graphics chipsets - The one on my netbook performs fine for basic usage.
4) There are a quite a few Audio interfaces that work well with Linux but a lot more that don't... I have a firepod and a firebox if I were doing things over I would probably look at focusrites stuff or perhaps maudio. The firebox is usuable except because I can't access the internal mixer I need to use an external preamp on the back two channels and the firepod is completely usable.

bad_cables
February 10th, 2010, 07:20 PM
i like chibitracker ;)

that is "pro"

someone needs to protest Adobe, because they are supposedly against microsoft, but they won't release their software for Linux. i would definitely purchase a version of AA3 if they released it native for Ubuntu.

bad_cables
February 10th, 2010, 07:30 PM
Adobe Corp. Office

408-536-6000


call and let them know that you know that want Audition for Ubuntu.

markbuntu
February 10th, 2010, 10:05 PM
Here's some linux audio gear

http://www.linuxservers.us/a340566-indamixx-linux-portable-pro-audio-computer.cfm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrison_Audio_Consoles

Johnsie
February 10th, 2010, 11:46 PM
The OP has a point. Audio editting and the available of high quality audio software and equipment for Ubuntu totally sucks.

I use Ubuntu for surfing the web and sometimes editing text files.. If you want to do more than that then it's better to just fork out a little and get some good software. The free 'equivalents' are not always equivalent. Yeah, you can read a bunch of tutorials and spend hours of your time looking for workarounds, but there comes a time when you'll realise it's easier to stop trying to make your Linux desktop like Windows, and just use Windows.

markbuntu
February 11th, 2010, 01:03 AM
Over the holidays I was talking to a friend of mine who produces and DJs in NYC and he was telling me that he was tired of paying money for music production software that would not do what he wants and then paying again when the features he did want came out in the next version. He figures he has spent many $1000s and thousands of hours over the years. I told him about free software and aimed him at ardour and he checked it out. The thing that got him, unlimited tracks. He is deep into ardour and hydrogen and rosegarden right now and has sent them all money. The way he sees it is that these are people worth spending his money on and giving it to them will get real progress.

He is a person who is not afraid of taking the time to learn new things. He went to school to learn audio production, he is a professional. He has engaged himself with the developers.

You can spend $1000s for pro tools and reason and ableton and all the add ons and plug ins and spend months learning how to use it and then you can try linux which is entirely different and be dissappointed and complain because it is not exactly like pro tools or renoise or ableton and you can't figure it out in an hour, or a day, or a week. How long did it take you to learn those other tools?

It is all about your expectations. If you expect it to be just like windows you should not even try. If you cannot accept that your months of effort learning those other tools is not worth much in a new environment then give it up. If you, like my friend, can see that it is the goal that is important and that learning new things and abandoning old ways is part of the process then you may find some satisfaction in taking the time to learn the tools that are available in linux.

switch10
February 11th, 2010, 02:23 AM
I am quite happy recording with Ardour. I have not experienced any delay/latency issues that some earlier posters reported. I am using the real time kernel though, and if you are recording music why wouldn't you use the realtime kernel. Thats what it is for.

All of my hardware is supported as well. I have an alesis multimix, and some generic brand midi keyboard. They both work great without having to install drivers of any kind.

couldn't be happier.

Dave

oh yeah, you can hear my bluegrass band here: http://whiskeyshivers.com/

All recorded with ardour, and my laptop. Our setup could have been better. Vocal mics taped to the ceiling :) But it works.

hazysonic
August 17th, 2010, 06:35 AM
+1 for the original poster's thoughts---definitely relevant and something the linux community should be paying attention to.

If we all want linux to maintain a very tiny percentage of the OS share, then we should continue responding to these type of comments by saying the poster probably didn't try hard enough, should have followed the instructions at [insert link to lengthy post in forums involving terminal commands which will be greek to whoever is asking the question], or by arguing that Gimp really is just as good as photoshop or Ardour is just as powerful as protools.

Or.... We could realize that it's not something to take personal, and that linux would potentially be a much more viable option if we could make intuitive interface design and ease of use/install a higher priority for these types of programs.

splicerr
August 17th, 2010, 06:56 AM
Or.... We could realize that it's not something to take personal, and that linux would potentially be a much more viable option if we could make intuitive interface design and ease of use/install a higher priority for these types of programs.

Cool. When exactly do you start?

Austin25
August 20th, 2010, 06:10 AM
Have you tried Jack, ZynAddSubFX, and Audacity?

Zorgoth
August 20th, 2010, 12:27 PM
I sort of doubt that applications like image/audio/video are going to be up to par in Linux before more of the big software vendors produce Linux versions.

Video/audio strike me as harder because oftentimes there the sole purpose of the computer is to run one application, and if you need a workstation-class computer of a thousand dollar application, not buying the OS it runs best on is a hard sell.

I have been doing scientific programming and despite the existence of many open source computer algebra/numerical processing systems, I would probably still be forced into Windows if Matlab did not have a Linux version, because that is the industry standard and the code I am given to work with is written for Matlab. Fortunately Matlab does have a Linux version as the advantages of Linux for this kind of work are very clear and many people use it (particularly since Linux is often a way to escape all the nanny software companies put on Windows machines). With applications like video/audio you need a large base of people who will not buy a product without Linux support, which basically means a competitor with a good Linux version...

Personally, if I had the luxury of deciding where money was spent in Linux, professional media work would be a very major target because it seems for one thing like behind gaming, applications like Photoshop are the number one reason you hear that people are sticking with Windows.

One thing that might help a lot would be a strong hardware vendor that could put pressure on hardware manufacturers to produce better drivers...

benjod
October 21st, 2010, 12:26 AM
The thread is titled 'The state of pro audio in Linux'. This information is useful to people who want to know about the state of pro audio on Linux. I found this information useful. Thanks.

To be honest I don't think Ubuntu will ever compete with Mac/Windows in audio production. Too many hardware compatibility issues.

pwnst*r
October 21st, 2010, 12:48 AM
The thread is titled 'The state of pro audio in Linux'. This information is useful to people who want to know about the state of pro audio on Linux.

Glad you pointed that out.