[LAU] [RFC] A “poor man’s”, yet professional level studio setup

[lacuna_ at gmx.net]

In my research on Linux audio laptop with high channel count, I decided to use a desktop with a RME HDSPe card.

The only ways I can see, how it might be possible to get many hq i/o channels on a laptop:
 
- The closed AVB-driver.
- Older firmware version of Motu AVB is running at up to 48k.
- Firewire, but Firewire is dead.
- RME Madiface with missing Express Card slot on today's laptops.
- Maybee a tunnel through Thunderbold with a Sonnet Echo Express (this works with Macbooks, but does Linux and Thunderbold?)
- DiGiCo UB Madi up to 48k.
- Using a desktop or RaspberryPi-like single board computer only for it's PCIe slot with RME cards and establishing an ethernet connection towards the laptop with Jack2 or Netjack or Zita-njbridge, plus some wordclock maybe. This adds some latency but might be cool for work on / off the studio. 
 
 
In terms of 'contemporary' professional studio standards, this software is missing:
 
- Linear phase equalizer
- Melodyne
- MaxxBass / Rennaisance Bass
- Automatic phase alignment plugin
- Realistic state-of-the-art algorithmic reverb (such as Bricasti, Exponential Audio, TC Electronics)
 
Please correct me, if I'm wrong.
 
For some tasks you'd have to choose alternatives, such as
MuseScore instead of Sibelius

I would add
Ardour, Reaper, Renoise, U-He, Dexed, VCV-Rack, Pure Data, Iannix
to the list, - althought not all are open source or free.
 
Some might be more or less important for Pop or multi-mic Classical recordings.
 



In video postprocessing Linux can't compete with other distros, as far as I am aware of.
Add FFmpeg, Unity and Blender.


 
 
 

 

On February 22, 2021 10:15:38 PM HST, Lorenzo Sutton <lorenzofsutton at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 22/02/21 19:37, Paul Davis wrote:
>
> In relation to the Francesco's original post:
>
> One other aspect would be: why such a focus on a network for audio and
> not audio cables and some hardware (mixer(s), monitors, etc.). I
> understand network for control (e.g. having a mobile device
> controlling
> play/stop/ transport / record of the DAW), but for audio why not just
> use (balanced!) cables and stuff? If as I understand this would be a
> relatively small studio (e.g. 2-3 adjacent rooms).
>
> Finally, one thing to keep in mind would be compatibility
> (interoperability to use a more fancy word), with the 'outside' world:
> while wanting to do a 'FLOSS studio' is commendable, you will
> inevitably
> have to send stuff around, so software which is able e.g. to stem
> export, or use decently supported formats (MusicXML for scores?), etc.
> (I was surprised to learn from one of the people at the studio during
> the scoring that they didn't want a FLAC file I sent them because it
> 'wouldn't work on a Mac' and only AIFF.. but that's another story).
>
> Lorenzo

Well, nothing's more compatible inside a studio than audio cables. :)

Odd about FLAC and Macs. Macs support FLAC for playback. What DAW were they using on Mac?



---
David W. Jones
gnome at hawaii.rr.com
authenticity, honesty, community
http://dancingtreefrog.com

Sent from my Android device with F/LOSS K-9 Mail.
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user at lists.linuxaudio.org
https://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user[https://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user]