Linux-audio-dev

linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org

3 participants
7520 discussions

[linux-audio-dev] Doing the soundcard manufacturer tango (long)

by Dave Phillips

Greetings: As I skim over the various messages regarding Marek's tribulations, first with RME, then with apparently the entire LA* community, I started thinking that there was some basic flaw in the whole thing. After some reflection, a few thoughts on the matter: Frankly, who gives a a flying fsck what gear you're using ? I'm *far* more interested in what you're doing with it than who makes it, whether it's "pro" audio gear, if it's the latest trend, or even if it's "The Future" (TM Disney Corp., I'm sure) of audio technology throughout the known universe. There seems to be this prevailing fear motif that somehow if we don't have firewire or whatever that we will somehow become disabled as musicians and kept forever from creating and recording good music. What a lot of horse hockey. Over and over again we see/hear artists who do their work on whatever's available, making it work because for them it has to work, they have no choice. Early rappers single-handedly revived a slew of vintage drum machines and synths, the Seattle punkers said "No thanks!" to the technical indulgences of the big-hair guitarists of the 80s, returning to the *song* as the logical focus of a rock band, and if I had to make the point further I'd bring up Conlon Nancarrow and Harry Partch. Geez, people, stop talking and start singing ! Where's "Marek's Blues" or "The RME Fight Song" ?? Come on, the talent's here, we know it is. And I've never heard a single "normal" listener say anything like "Wow, they really knew how to use [Pro Tools, Cubase, Ardour] on that song!". I think we're barking up the wrong tree. Maybe letters to manufacturers make a difference, but I'll bet one successful song will do more to attract manufacturers and users to Linux. Even touting numbers isn't nearly so effective an attention-getter as would be a single successful recording. And by "successful" I mean that it reaches tens or hundreds of thousands of people. Then during the interviews you can say "Ja, I used Linux, ya know, it's da bomb"... We're also still missing the potential in the academic scene. Professors and researchers also have pull, and if they can be convinced to use Linux in their audio labs, they can also bring pressure on manufacturers to provide them with drivers et cetera. Plus, a great deal of hardware work could probably be done at university level, they have the resources. The home recording market is another potentially powerful force. In other words, no change will come from the high end, because there's simply no incentive. Large studios have money for state-of-the-art equipment and software, they're all scrambling to stay ahead of the competition (because there isn't really very much of it) by having what the other guys don't, and there's just no reason for them to even take an interest in anything other than what they know or are told to know via Mix magazine. So, no market for Linux there, sorry, not at this moment in time. But the home studios and smaller scale pro studios are more budget-minded, ditto for academic studios. Lots of possibility there, lots of people, lots of potential pressure on manufacturers to stand up and notice the movement around them. But we won't reach them by writing messages on mail-lists, we'll reach them by showing them what can be done. It's often overlooked how incredibly conservative the whole industry really is. Innovative trends like Linux may be perceived more as disruptive than smoothly continuing "things as we've always known and liked them to be", especially to the higher-level professional studios. Mark, I'll buy you a case of Iron City Light if Digi ever decides to support Linux in any way. It's just not in their best interest to do so. They have created a locked-in market as completely as M$ has done, even moreso because of the narrow market base. They'll continue to eke out their innovations to keep them ahead of their competitors and they'll continue their so-far successful policy of keeping everything closed. I think it's important to note that such companies are not necessarily hostile to their user-base, they simply have the power to define that base and they'll do everything in their power to maintain the lock-in. It's how they're making their money now, it's been working for them for many years, and there seems to be no pressing reason for them to change. So, what to do ? Well, AudioScience has a developer who could perhaps persuade his company that there's a growing market for high-end pro-audio cards for Linux, and his company could literally corner the market for a while simply by providing either their own open-source drivers or by giving the specs to the community and letting the ALSA and OSS guys do the driver dance. There's already been some exchange, but perhaps a little more concerted community effort in that direction can help ? Ivica has been working on new ways to promote Linux audio software in academia, perhaps more people could work with him in a more directed fashion ? Like a mass-mailing of live Linux audio CDs to the heads of music tech departments around the world ? I'm sure there are a lot of ways to create inroads to academic studios. And we need to make more music with the gear we have. Y'know, I'm sure that all that virtual hot air blown over on the RME lists could be utterly dispelled by someone writing, recording, and posting a "Marek's Lament". I'll bet the cats at RME would be far more interested in hearing that one song than reading yet another dozen or so screeds. So get it on, folks. I'm tired of finding my LA* message boxes filled with diatribe and pointless blame, I want to hear some more *music*. Isn't that really why we're all here ? Best regards, dp PS: Much of this message should be read with a healthy dose of good humor, followed by a refreshing walk in the crisp morning air. Which is where I'm headed now...

21 years

Re: Behringer [was Re: [linux-audio-user] Re: [linux-audio-dev] RME is no more]

by Marek Peteraj

On Sun, 2004-11-28 at 13:35, R Parker wrote: > --- Marek Peteraj <marpet(a)naex.sk> wrote: > > > On Sat, 2004-11-27 at 23:21, Lee Revell wrote: > > > On Sat, 2004-11-27 at 16:22 -0600, Jan Depner > > wrote: > > > > Man, I've been waiting all day for someone to > > say this. Personally, > > > > open source is not a religion for me so a closed > > source driver would be > > > > fine and dandy. Let the flames commence - now > > where did I put my > > > > asbestos underwear? > > > > > > Eh, it's a slow day, I'm bored. But I mean it > > 100%. Flame away... > > > > > > So, the next question is, what would it take to > > make a closed source > > > driver happen? They should start the bidding on > > alsa-devel at "one free > > > FireFace"... > > > > Lee and Jan, > > > > i talk to you as an owner of fireface. :) > > > > I really like the philosophy of not letting any > > closed source drivers > > into the kernel. In the end i only saw people upset > > because their XY > > nvidia or ATI driver wasn't working. Besides they'd > > need to provide it > > themselves, which means a lot more money than just > > handing out > > documentation or perhaps one free unit. > > > > My point of view - either open source alsa driver, > > or i'll just sell > > that unit. And now that they have accused me of > > causing damage to RME > > specifically because of this thread, i can only say, > > i'll stay away from > > any of their products. Speaking of damage, i'd like > > to see a slashdot > > story about this so that 30.000 people can judge for > > themselves. :) > > I really hope you don't do that. My intention wasn't to post that on /. at least not now. I was thinking out loud. Of course, in case we did a market survey it would definitely be needed. > RME has provided > "Pro" grade audio hardware when Linux Audio needed it > in order to become a legitimate alternative to > proprietary solutions. Not really. It was Paul, Thomas, and one other guy(don't remember the name) who did. Remember it was almost no investment from RME's side. They got a lot of units sold in return and built a very good reputation based on that fact and this went beyond the linux audio world i believe. > I hope you consider how much > work has gone into Linux Audio But that's what i'm talking about. So much effort, oustanding technologies(although i know the authors won't admit ;) and they(hw manufacturers) don't care! > and how difficult it is > to develop that type of business relationship. There is no relationship. The only real manufacturer from the POV of linux audio is audioscience(.com), which unfortunately does only broadcast hw. They do ALSA drivers, provide support and invest their time and money in doing so. They deserve highest respect for that considering the current situation. That's how it should be. And this is what we should fight for. > > Whether you are in the right or wrong, is it > inconcievable for you to act for the interests of many > people by selling the unit and getting something else? Not sure i understand. I'm about to sell my fireface copy as i declared previously. Of course if there's any way i could help out other people here in keeping the unit, i'm prepared to do so. Marek

21 years

[linux-audio-dev] [ann] caps 0.2.0

by Tim Goetze

The CAPS Audio Plugin Suite reincarnates as caps 0.2.0. * By popular demand, a 'true stereo' version of the Plate reverb plugin makes its appearance in this edition, so the numerous original Plate fans can get their favourite thing to play nice with hosts having trouble dealing with mono-in, stereo-out effects. * Both versions of the Plate reverb sport revised 'bandwidth' and 'damping' knobs. The 'log' hint set on the damping control caused the unit to be virtually useless on hosts having trouble handling the hint combined with the range of the parameter. The revised code eliminates this hint and maps the now linear parameter directly to the respective filter cutoff, at an extra cost of about 200 processor cycles per audio cycle. * The Preamp plugins as well as the Amp units in this edition feature Renormal Technology (!tm), so ab-normal CPU usage due to de-normals in hosts choosing to route perfectly silent audio through these plugins should be a thing of the past. * The all-new AmpIV plugin features complete tube amplifier circuit emulation including a 4-band tone control set. Get your copy before they are all gone: http://quitte.de/dsp/caps.html http://quitte.de/dsp/caps.html#Download Please forward as you see fit. Cheers, Tim

21 years

[linux-audio-dev] Re: Been to the movies lately, FreeBob?

by Daniel Wagner

> > For the record: Pieter Palmers has written (in a tremendous effort) a > > large part of AV/C descriptors parser. This part is still not > > completed and needs some clean up, though a great job! Meanwhile, I > > have been working on the basic framework (design and implementation). > > Ok, would this make a good addition to libavc1394? Pieter Palmers and Girish Wadhwani are planing/wokring to incorporate the generic parts of the parser into libavc1394. > Yeah, I read about these proprietary protocols from links off your blog, > but I can't help but believe they are probably just some variant of the > IEC 61883 AMDTP protocol and can be likely figured out -- at least for > the core functionality. However, I do not have a device to know for > sure. Probably special register addresses and value formats are used for > proprietary controls - not so easy to figure out. For the time being, we will concentrate on the devices which are standard complient. The M-Audio device will be considered later. daniel

21 years

[linux-audio-dev] can-t access LAC 2004 recordings

by Julien Claassen

Hi! When I try to enter the upload directory (or subdirs), I get a 403. I used the link on the website and tried it directly by accessing: http://linuxaudiodev.org/contrib/zkm_meeting_2004/ or http://linuxaudiodev.org/contrib/zkm_meeting_2004/recordings Any idea, why this is happening? Kindest regards Julien -------- Music was my first love and it will be my last (John Miles) ======== FIND MY WEB-PROJECT AT: ======== http://ltsb.sourceforge.net - the Linux TextBased Studio guide

21 years

[linux-audio-dev] Been to the movies lately, FreeBob?

by Jan Weil

Greetings, today Dan Dennedy (dan-AT-dennedy.org), lead developer of Kino, happened to stumble on the Linux Audio Blog. He left a few comments especially relevant to the ongoing 1394 discussion: <http://linuxaudioblog.jawebada.de/software/alsa/firewire-alsa-driver-at-sf-…> <http://linuxaudioblog.jawebada.de/kernel/firewire-eventually-to-be-supporte…> <http://linuxaudioblog.jawebada.de/music/gilberto-gil-jumping-on-the-linux-b…> Dan on the web: <http://www.dennedy.org/> Kino: <http://kino.schirmacher.de> P.S. Daniel, I hope you don't mind me CCing you. I think this is mainly addressed to the FreeBob team. -- Jan Weil http://linuxaudioblog.jawebada.de

21 years

Re: Behringer [was Re: [linux-audio-user] Re: [linux-audio-dev] RME is no more]

by Frank Barknecht

Hallo, Mark Knecht hat gesagt: // Mark Knecht wrote: > On Sun, 28 Nov 2004 22:09:17 +0100, Frank Barknecht <fbar(a)footils.org> wrote: > <SNIP> > > > > Nobody can steal free software, because they already own it. (As long > > as they follow the rules as stated in the GPL etc.) > > This is so patently untrue I cannot imagine how you got here. > > GPL == GP License > > Nothing under GPL is 'owned' by me. It is 'licensed'. I didn't create > it so I don't have any rights other than those granted me. If you own > something you can do anything you want with it simply because you own > it. If it is licensed you must follow the terms of the license > specifcally because the real owner only grants you the rights in the > license. Well, that's what I wrote: As long as you follow the license, you can do everything you want with it. The free software licenses are designed in a way, that you can do everything, that does not try to take away the right to do everything with the software from other users. Even the original "owner", the autor of the software, cannot take away these rights once he released a piece of code under a libre license. In this way he is as much an "owner" as you are. (He is more "owner" in the case that he wants to double license his code under a non-free licens, but then this piece of code is not free software anymore. He still cannot take back the code he already had set free.) I am not strictly talking "law" here. But e.g. the FSF is working on freeing software from owners (Why Software Should Not Have Owners, [1]) by giving authors the same rights as users (and thus making them "owners", too, in a way) [1] http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/why-free.html Ciao -- Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org__

21 years

Re: why open source drivers [was Re: [linux-audio-user] Re: [linux-audio-dev] RME is no more]

by Marek Peteraj

On Mon, 2004-11-29 at 01:32, Mark Knecht wrote: > On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 03:19:14 +0100, Marek Peteraj <marpet(a)naex.sk> wrote: > > > > > ???? RME never 'supported' the card under Linux. The 'supported' the > > > developers by providing technical info. I did not purchase the card > > > because of RME telling me it would be OK to use the card under Linux. > > > They never stated such things. > > > > Unfortunately they did. To quote a part of their response: > > "> [linux-audio-dev] RME is no more > > > > Complete BS. We have and will support Linux/Alsa as before. The only > > excluded product is the Fireface." > > > > Marek > > Well, I don't know exactly what you're calling BS No no you don't understand, i was quoting RME. I had a discussion with them on their forum. Marek

21 years

Re: why open source drivers [was Re: [linux-audio-user] Re: [linux-audio-dev] RME is no more]

by Marek Peteraj

On Mon, 2004-11-29 at 00:58, Mark Knecht wrote: > On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 02:25:09 +0100, Marek Peteraj <marpet(a)naex.sk> wrote: > > On Sun, 2004-11-28 at 21:31, Mark Knecht wrote: > > > > > One nice example. Korg 1212 i/o, worked under win98, doesn't under winXP > > because korg does not provide support for it. There is an alsa driver > > for it now(and specs), so basically the life of that card is extended to > > eternity. > > > > There are more such damn good reasons for open source drivers. People > > just don't shout too loud. :) > > Fair enough. There are companies here in Silicon Valley that take over > 'end of life' chip designs and manufacturer them for a while to help > customers, but there isn't much money in it most of the time, just as > there is probably no financial reason for Korg to support that card. I > didn't like it when DigiDesign said they weren't going to continue to > support the 001 forever and I was forced into buying an 002 or going > away from Windows. Unortunately there was no other platform that > maintained my music investment as well so I stuck with Digi. > > That's the nature of technology. It gets outdated. Not too many > companies making buggy whips anymore either... > > >> However how did Marek end up being an RME customer when > > > there was (as far as I know) never any support for this device under > > > Linux, nor anyone even really saying there would be? > > > > Actually not quite, it seemed as if there would be support, Thomas > > wanted to do the driver. I just invested too much trust in RME. My > > fault. > > And I am very sorry about that. You don't have to be. > It is a disappointment I'm sure. > You're a long ways away. If it was more practical I'd probably buy the > unit from you. I have uses. I'm sure others will too. You'll sell it > and get good money. Chalk the loss up to learning and > remember..."Trust, but verify". Agreed. It was a lesson to learn. Thanks for your 'heads up' :) > > > > > > In my case I Was > > > told that supporting the HDSP 9652 would be a non-issue based on the > > > DigiFace working. It turned out to be true, but then again it took > > > about a year to become really useful to me, and even today doesn't > > > work as well as it does under Windows. How did he end up with this > > > device and in this position? > > > > > > I somehow don't think this is RME's fault... > > > > If RME did the drivers for your HDSP 9652 then you could directly > > contact them and ask them for support. I'm sure Thomas would help you > > aswell if he had the card, and that's the problem. In such case claiming > > that they do support alsa is just plain unfair. > > ???? RME never 'supported' the card under Linux. The 'supported' the > developers by providing technical info. I did not purchase the card > because of RME telling me it would be OK to use the card under Linux. > They never stated such things. Unfortunately they did. To quote a part of their response: "> [linux-audio-dev] RME is no more Complete BS. We have and will support Linux/Alsa as before. The only excluded product is the Fireface." Marek

21 years

Re: why open source drivers [was Re: [linux-audio-user] Re: [linux-audio-dev] RME is no more]

by Marek Peteraj

On Sun, 2004-11-28 at 21:31, Mark Knecht wrote: > On Sun, 28 Nov 2004 15:20:33 -0500, Lee Revell <rlrevell(a)joe-job.com> wrote: > > On Sun, 2004-11-28 at 12:06 -0800, Mark Knecht wrote: > > > > > > > > Fine with me. If I shelled out for RME hardware I better be able to > > > > call RME for support, same as on any other OS. You get what you pay > > > > for, right? > > > > > > Sure, but when you buy it and the box says 'Requires Mac OS X or > > > Windows XP' then as a buyer I have to respect that. I cannot expect > > > them to support Linux when it wasn't advertised that it works on > > > Linux. RME has given me GREAT support under Windows and I expect that > > > this will not change. They are a great company. I own two cards and > > > wouldn't hesitate to buy another if I was going to set up another > > > Windows box. > > > > Yeah, I was referring to an Nvidia like scenario, where they don't > > release open drivers, but release closed Linux drivers of comparable > > quality and the same support as the Windows driver. > > Sure, I get it. However I think you and plug in a close source RME > card driver and happily use it if it was available. I think Marek, > Frank and others do not feel this way. I had no second thoughts about > putting an NVidia controller in my dad's Linux box even though I used > ATI up until then. My experience using both is no that different, but > for me it's not political. > > Am I wrong when I think this desire is particularly European in > nature? I'm so Open Market driven, especially when it comes to > technology, that I hardly seem to understand this oter POV. However, I > am interested. One nice example. Korg 1212 i/o, worked under win98, doesn't under winXP because korg does not provide support for it. There is an alsa driver for it now(and specs), so basically the life of that card is extended to eternity. There are more such damn good reasons for open source drivers. People just don't shout too loud. :) > > > > > Of course I would be pretty annoyed if they just drop Linux completely, > > for the same reasons as others in this thread - they have a relationship > > with the community at this point. But I don't think they would be that > > stupid. After all pissing off hundreds of potential customers is just > > as bad an idea as giving valuable IP to the competition. > > > > Darn straight. However how did Marek end up being an RME customer when > there was (as far as I know) never any support for this device under > Linux, nor anyone even really saying there would be? Actually not quite, it seemed as if there would be support, Thomas wanted to do the driver. I just invested too much trust in RME. My fault. > In my case I Was > told that supporting the HDSP 9652 would be a non-issue based on the > DigiFace working. It turned out to be true, but then again it took > about a year to become really useful to me, and even today doesn't > work as well as it does under Windows. How did he end up with this > device and in this position? > > I somehow don't think this is RME's fault... If RME did the drivers for your HDSP 9652 then you could directly contact them and ask them for support. I'm sure Thomas would help you aswell if he had the card, and that's the problem. In such case claiming that they do support alsa is just plain unfair. Marek

21 years

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

Linux-audio-dev