[linux-audio-user] Rewrite sfxload for native ALSA

Robert Jonsson robert.jonsson at dataductus.se
Thu Dec 4 02:42:55 EST 2003


LinuxMedia wrote:
>>> I don't know... maybe I'm always thinking in terms of being able to set
>>> up "audio studios" for other People. The irony is that I haven't set up
>>> one computer for a friend yet (I've offered though).
>> I feel very much the same and would love to see some sort of
>> "reference" system evolve where out of all the fine apps that
>> are becoming highly usable, by mere mortals, that some guide as to 
>> which ones are most suitable would really help new users. 
> I've been working with Linux/Audio for about 4 years and I am still 
> working out the "complete" studio. And it's always in My mind that it 
> will be the "template" for other studios. I've gone a long way by 
> avoiding a lot of "middle men" by using MuSE which allows both Audio and 
> Midi to be synced. This also eliminates the need to deal with the snags 
> (and extra work) that Jack introduces (even though i really respect what 
> Jack does).
> I hit another delay because the new version of MuSE requires so many 
> upgrades to my system 

It does? I didn't know the requirements had changed so much?
Or are you talking about the other MuSE ?
If you are talking about (and I believe you are) lmuse.sf.net then it 
should be spelled MusE. Tragically there is another project in the linux 
  audio arena (related to streaming I think) that is named MuSE.

> that I just ordered SuSE 9.0 instead of trying to 
> find all these files. 

This is probably a good upgrade anyway. I find that refreshing your 
system once in a while helps keep track of things, not to mention new 
features of distribution.

Anyways, If I find that the new version of MuSE
> will *record* audio then I've eliminated *yet* another "middle man".

I welcome you to the lmuse user-mailinglist for further discussions (if 
you are not there already). Recording in MusE has been working for 
months if not years. I use it all the time.

> Obvious, I believe in keeping it simple. I've managed to get it down to 
> just a couple of easy to use (and effective) programs. Now there's less 
> "stuff" to install, maintain, upgrade, learn, master. I included the 
> term "master" because look how complex *every* program is, and how much 
> time one *could* put in *any* one of these programs. Keep in mind that 
> as soon as You learn one, there's (usually) an upgrade and then new 
> features to install/set-up/learn. And if I'm really going to be able to 
> contribute to the Linux/Audio community (by setting up computers for 
> People), then it would be too much to be doing this with a lot of 
> programs. And I've spent a lot of time testing programs until I came to 
> choose what I've choosen.
> Well, so far, I have it down to ecasound, MuSE, Timidity and Smurf 
> (sound font edior). I probly missed a few. But these are the main ones. 
> And as much as I *love* ecasound, if MuSE can record a "live" track, 
> then I will be down to 3 main programs that are (to Me) a "complete 
> studio" (I still say ecasound and Jack are great programs though).

Just for the record, muse is due for a release soon, the last in the 0.6 
series, after that 0.7 will follow (when it's ready), 0.7 will require 
Jack so you will have to get used to installing Jack I guess ;).

>> My thoughts are to try and create a reasonable piece of music
>> that *I* find listenable and not too embarrasing, mainly so there
>> are no copyright issues, and create some oggs then write up
>> (heh, sure pal) a HOWTO and how I created the end result (that
>> will never be "ended" because it could always be reused and
>> re-released as another version).
> If You're referring to explaining the software and tecniques You used, 
> I've kind of resigned Myself to adding what I can (when I can) on this 
> list (and other places). But I guess I wont ever really be able to 
> contribute *completly* until I'm actually setting up (and possibly 
> maintaining) systems for People. Unfortunatly, I'm more "creative 
> minded" than I am "technical minded" so I will choose hardware that 
> works and that will be the "template". This way, I could use "dd" to 
> create an exact copy of My drive, put it in the same hardware as I have 
> then the rest of the time can be spent on teaching People how to use the 
> software. I was working with a (hardware) guy a few towns over but He 
> moved away.
> Actually, there's much more to it than the above stuff. Of course, 
> there's the ongoing building of soundfonts and the extra stuff like 
> that. In fact, there's a lot of things like that I'm doing in along with 
> the above to keep inproving the situation. But aren't we all (-:
> Rocco

More information about the Linux-audio-user mailing list