[LAU] 64studio, FFADO, no luck

[Ken Restivo]

On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 09:41:23PM +0100, Arnold Krille wrote:
> On Tuesday 17 February 2009 21:06:29 Anders Dahnielson wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 20:39, Arnold Krille <arnold at arnoldarts.de> wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 17 February 2009 20:30:53 Ken Restivo wrote:
> > > > OK well that throws a monkey wrench into my plan to convert the studio
> > > from
> > > > Mac/ProTools to Linux/Ardour. Damn.
> > > Maybe you can start by convincing them about Mac/Ardour?
> > > I don't really understand why mac-users (especially if they paid premium
> > > money
> > > for hardware) should switch to Linux where half their hardware isn't
> > > supported... Shouldn't ardour (through jackd/portaudio) play perfectly
> > > one the
> > > digi-stuff?
> > Yes. but I think you answered the question yourself in the last sentence.
> 
> I did? I didn't say "Make them buy overpriced proprietary stuff to use it with 
> free software", I said "If they already happen to have the bad proprietary 
> stuff, why try to convince them off the full free ensemble where they have to 
> spend more money on new hardware if they could just do a smooth transition by 
> switching one component at a time?" Applies both for Mac/ProTool and 
> Mac/Motu...
> 
> Or is the digi-stuff not usable with apples' portaudio?
> 

This particular Digi gear is already visible in JACK on a Mac. I suppose this is because there is a Mac CoreAudio driver for it, and presumably JACK sits on top of that, and thus can see it.

I have not tried running the Digi gear with with Ardour on a Mac, because this particular Mac was too old and fragile to add all the X11 crap I'd need in order to get Ardour to run on it. But I don't see why it wouldn't work.

So, to answer your question, someone who has an investment in a Mac and Digi gear can probably run Ardour, and thus leverage their investment in the Digi gear.

In my particular situation, I was trying to create a Linux convert. But I guess that's not in the cards right now.

-ken