[LAU] Fluidsynth versus Qsynth, .sf2 versus .gig

Rui Nuno Capela rncbc at rncbc.org
Thu Sep 17 13:53:07 EDT 2009


On Thu, September 17, 2009 12:14, Viktor Mastoridis wrote:
> I keep on getting Xruns when trying to work with soundfonts on rosegarden
> or muse, especially if I combine several sf2 banks with several audio
> tracks (on Ardour, prior to use plugins). So far, I was running them
> through Qsynth, but I read on the net that the combination of Qsynth,
> Rosegarden/Muse and Ardour is regarded as not so stable?
> 

what is non-stable about it?

qsynth _is_ fluidsynth with a gui. it has no difference regarding audio
(jack) real-time performance whatsoever. both applications do use the
very same synth engine (libfluidsynth). however you can have more than
one synth engine with qsynth, a trick only possible with several
instances of fluidsynth (cli).

> 
> Thus, if you don't mind sharing your experience, I will be thankful.
> 
> 
> What is the best way that you use Soundfont banks in Linux?
> 

afaics, there's fluidsynth/qsynth and timidity++. you choose which is
best ;)

> 
> By 'best', I mean the most stable way, without X-runs and listing/access
> to all the banks and instruments in a soundfont.
> 

i guess either fluidsynth or qsynth fits the bill ;)


> Is running fluidsynth from a command line a better alternative then
> qsynth and why? (fluidsynth command line: how does one create a midi input
> and audio output port for each sf2 bank?)
> 

as said, you can run several fluidsynth instances each with its own
soundfont loaded. you must take care of distinct fluidsynth alsa/jack
client names though, there's command line options for just that. again,
with qsynth you achieve the same with easier gui setup.


> 
> Can you please tell me your experience in buying professional .gig or
> .sf2 sounds? Strings, pianos, accordeons especially.
> Sites, prices, quality?
> 
> What is better for profesional results: .sf2 or .gig?
> 

linuxsampler is best and _the_ one for .gig's, which depending on the
sample library and vendor, it's technically superior and several notches
above soundfont specification, be it in terms of multi-sample layering,
dimension and articulation. also, linuxsampler's resource management is
state-of-the-art, letting you play way bigger (and definitively
professional) sample libraries than fluidsynth/qsynth, which in fact
needs to load and lock all soundfonts _completely_ in ram, so you know
the drill ;)

cheers
-- 
rncbc aka Rui Nuno Capela
rncbc at rncbc.org



More information about the Linux-audio-user mailing list