Linux-audio-dev

linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org

3 participants
7440 discussions

[linux-audio-dev] Terminology / sampler architecture

by Thorsten Wilms

Hi all! Besides widgte-level gui standards another topic for general usability is terminology. Naming of concepts like sessions, banks, presets, patches and so on. I expect quite some resistance about renaming stuff in existing apps, but a guideline would still be a good thing for future developments and minimizing confusion. So I would like to hear of personal preferences and known differences in naming on existing apps. Of special interest to me is naming and structure of the different organizational levels of samplers. And a specific questions: what is thought to be the best approach to allow both having multiple samples with greatly varying setups of filters/amps/etc (drumkits) and multiple samples for chromatic instruments with smooth changes of filter/amp/etc settings? Thanks in advance for any input! --- Thorsten Wilms

20 years, 3 months

[linux-audio-dev] Splitsheet

by Thorsten Wilms

Hi! While thinking about structure/organization for LDrum, I developed a concept for the gui of a modular system. http://wrstud.urz.uni-wuppertal.de/~ka0394/forum/04-06-15_splitsheet_01.png All happens in one window, with blocks that represent modules. These modules can be input filters (filtering channels, notes, velocity ranges), oscilators, sound filters, amp and everything else known from modular systems. The type of module for a block is determined by a dropdown menu. Other content are the type specific controls. Each block can be split up horizontaly or verticaly to create new blocks (see mockup for a horizontal split). Splitting could be offered in conetx menu or through dedicated buttons. Signal flow starts at the top and goes through top and bottom edges of blocks (no sideway signal flow). Splitting up and mixing happens automaticaly. Of course moduletypes could not be selected freely, because input filters would have to be chained directly, and could not be placed behind oscilators and the like. The system would make it easy to build rather simple chains of modules quite fast. noterange filters would allow to split things up using multiple samples or varying synthesis setups and join it back together at any stage. Alternatively to the block splitting, modules could be layed out on a canvas/grid. But that would require means to resize modules to form various relations. In short I think it would require more interaction for similar results. So this is a rough idea, free to be picked up. If there's real interest (a chance of implementation), it would be my pleasure to further develop it in cooperation. --- Thorsten Wilms

20 years, 3 months

[linux-audio-dev] [ANN] updates

by Fons Adriaensen

Already some bugfixes to the things I announced less than 24 hours ago... jaaa-0.1.1.tar.bz2 clthreads-0.0.3.tar.bz2 as usual to be found on <http://users.skynet.be/solaris/linuxaudio> Thanks to Jesse Chappell for pointing out the problems. -- FA

20 years, 3 months

[linux-audio-dev] [ANNOUNCE] Editor/Librarian for Rolands Alpha Juno synths

by Chris

Hi, The first release of my patch editor and librarian for Rolands Alpha Juno synths is available at: http://www.chriswareham.demon.co.uk/software/alphajuno/index.html It has been tested with an Alpha Juno 1, but should also support the Alpha Juno 2 and MKS 50 synthesisers. Now the bad news. I wrote the program on NetBSD, and I don't have access to a Linux machine to tweak and test it there. The only things that should need tweaking are in the source file "midi.c". If anyone could compile the program on Linux and let me have a diff of any changes, I would be most grateful. Failing that, I hope to have enough disk space to dual boot Linux as well as NetBSD in the near future, at which time I will port the program myself. As this has been quite an enjoyable and easy program to write, I am now interested in writing a generic editor and librarian for free Unix platforms. I am aware of the excellent JSynthLib, but its reliance on Java means it isn't easily ported across all the free Unix flavours. Writing a similar program in C or C++ would be the goal I'd like to pursue. Anyone interested in helping out (or who can point me at a project that's already undertaken this) please get in touch. Regards, Chris

20 years, 3 months

[linux-audio-dev] Sliders 2

by Ben

Thorsten, Regarding the fan display, how do you handle the case where the fader is at the very top or bottom of the screen? -Ben

20 years, 3 months

[linux-audio-dev] Draft position statement of AGNULA on ALSA firmware

by Andrea Glorioso

Dear all, after a very busy period I finally managed to find the needed time and concentration to write the first darft of AGNULA position on distributing ALSA firmware. To make a long story short, the final position I'm proposing is that AGNULA *should* distribute such firmware, but should carefully explain why it's doing it and how it thinks that this is not the optimal solution. I'd like all of you to comment on the following draft statement, whether you find it acceptable or not. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++ THE AGNULA PROJECT POSITION ON ALSA FIRMWARE For quite a long time, the ALSA project [0] has been providing a reference architecture and top-quality Linux drivers for a wide variety of sound cards. All the code of the core ALSA system and of the drivers has been released under either the GNU GPL license or under a Free Software license, as defined by the Free Software Foundation. The AGNULA project is very thankful to the ALSA team for allowing the A/DeMuDi distribution to use and distribute their software. However, AGNULA is facing a difficult problem dealing with a subtle issue: firmware. Many professional grade soundcards require "firmware" (hexadecimal blobs of data which have to be "uploaded" on the hardware for it to do work properly, or to work at all in some cases), which the ALSA project distribute in a separate package. The question arose whether AGNULA would be entitled to distribute such firmware as part of its A/DeMuDi distribution. During its funded lifetime as a European Commision IST project, AGNULA was bound to only distribute Free Software as defined by the Free Software Foundation guidelines; the participation of Free Software Foundation Europe as a member of the AGNULA Consortium was meant to guarantee this specific part of the agreement. After the end of the funded lifetime, AGNULA has become a (mostly) volunteer project; however, FSFE has registered the "AGNULA" trademark and allows it to be used only by projects which fulfill the general goal of supporting Free Software, from both the technical and the philosophical points of view. Current AGNULA volunteers have, of course, no problem with FSFE registering the trademark - on the contrary, we feel this is a useful strategy to avoid our work being misused. To make a long story short, AGNULA has reached the conclusion that it *will* distribute the firmware needed to make some sound cards properly work. To make a short story long, let us explain our line of reasoning: (1) The first question is whether we can legally distribute such firmware at all, barring for a moment the problem of its "freeness". The ALSA project has been given permission to distribute it, and our investigation showed no proof that this permission refers to the ALSA project and not to other parties; so we concluded that we could legally distribute such firmware. (2) The second question is whether such firmware is "software" (i.e. a computer program) or "data". The distinction between the two is very, very blurry. The position of AGNULA is that the firmware we are discussing about can be actually considered software (i.e. a computer program) in the sense that it is interpreted by a piece of hardware to execute some operations. (3) The third question is, given that we consider firmware as software, what is the "preferred form for modification" of such firmware. The wording we use is not random: it's the way the GNU GPL license defines the "source code" of a program. Now, if the "preferred form for modification" of said firmware is editing the hex codes themselves, then we are actually distributing the source together with the program. Unfortunately, we are quite convinced (based on our personal experience, and on us being overly cautious) that the "preferred form for modification" of such firmware is not hacking on hexadecimal values; we think the firmware is the result of some higher-level language being compiled into the resulting "blob" (no more and no less than what happens with "ordinary" computer programs). Given (1), (2) and (3) we conclude that the firmware we are discussing about can't actually be considered Free Software. However, given that: (4) without such firmware, most professional-grade sound cards won't work; (5) the Free Software community, and AGNULA specifically, has not gained enough momentum in the audio field to be able to convince any major sound card manufacturer that it should release the source code of its firmware (supposing (3) is true, of course) lest AGNULA won't distribute such firmware inside A/DeMuDi, (6) the unwillingness by AGNULA to distribute such firmware would actually *damage* Free Software, because we think most people - who for years have been using proprietary software to do their pro audio and sound work - will simply refuse to accept the extra burden of having to download a separate package and configure it outside the usual distribution mechanism; (7) we feel that providing a downloader for such firmware would be a hypocritical stance - "we don't give you X, but we give you an easy way to get X". We don't see the point in acting this way. the AGNULA project has decided that it *will* distribute the alsa-firmware package in the next releases of its AGNULA/DeMuDi distribution. Please bear with this long message a bit more. (8) We don't feel this is a completely satisfactory solution. We think the user should be in complete control of the system s/he is using, and the only way to get that is to have complete access to the source code of the software s/he is using and the possibility to modify and redistribute it without too much hassle. Media Innovation Unit - Firenze Tecnologia (MIU-FT), itself a part of the AGNULA team, is convinced that Free and Open Hardware is an interesting line of research that should be further investigated, and will allocate a part of its resources in the coming months to understand the issues involved and the possible solutions. Interested parties should contact MIU-FT technical coordinator (Andrea Glorioso <sama(a)miu-ft.org>). (9) Although A/DeMuDi distributes jMax, a program which is in and by itself Free Software but is currently depending on non-free Java Runtime Environments implementations, we don't feel obliged or compelled to distribute a non-free JRE because of our decision to distribute ALSA firmware. We feel the two situations are non-comparable: providing an alternative to those parts of jMax which depend on a non-free JRE (namely the GUI) is substantially easier, both technically and legally, than writing replacement firmware for the sound cards which need it. (10) This decision on firmware *only* applies to ALSA firmware - i.e. the firmware currently distributed by the ALSA project. We reserve the right to decide, on a case by case basis, whether we will distribute firmware which will be included into the ALSA package in the future and/or firmware for other parts of a system running our A/DeMuDi distributioon. (11) We do know that the Debian project has taken a different route than us. Although we are striving to make A/DeMuDi as much integrated into Debian as possible, we want to reserve - in this and in other occasion - the freedom to decide autonomously what we feel is better for the advancement of Free Software. On behalf of the AGNULA project, Andrea Glorioso [0] http://www.alsa-project.org/ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Comments, criticisms, whatever should be sent to: <users(a)lists.agnula.org> Best regards, -- Andrea Glorioso andrea.glorioso(a)agnula.org AGNULA Technical Manager http://www.agnula.org/ M: +39 333 820 5723 F: +39 (0)51 930 31 133 "Libre Audio, Libre Video, Libre Software: AGNULA"

20 years, 3 months

[linux-audio-dev] [ANNOUNCE] Yatm 0.1.0

by Mario Lang

Hi. It is small, dumb, and simple, but I just couldn't resist letting you all know about my first Linux audio application written in C (well, actually C++, but I had no choice!) What is it? Yatm is a small command-line mp3 player with tempo variation capabilities. It uses libao for audio output, libmad to decode MPEG audio, and libsoundtouch to do the tempo changing. A sample usage case would be for listening to audiobooks at a different tempo than originally recorded. It could also be used as a backend for DAISY Digital Talking Book format player in the future (see http://www.daisy.org/). The name Yatm stands for Yet Another Time Machine :-). Where is it? http://delysid.org/yatm-0.1.0.tar.gz TODO: * Add support for seeking and timed playback (using the original time of the audio file, such that indexes into a file do not need to be translated according to current tempo) * Add support for playing RIFF WAV files and OGG/Vorbis. * Add a simple command-line interactive mode to be able to change tempo during playback without interrupting the program. * Add the ability to define several indices at startup which will be reported to stdout when reached. This could be used to advance a reading cursor when presenting a DAISY book which does have detailed index information. Since this is my first Linux Audio app, comments are highly appreciated. -- CYa, Mario | Debian Developer <URL:http://debian.org/> | Get my public key via finger mlang(a)db.debian.org | 1024D/7FC1A0854909BCCDBE6C102DDFFC022A6B113E44

20 years, 3 months

Re: [linux-audio-dev] Knobs, the reply

by urban schlemmer

hi@all (and sorry if this is gonna be a new thread) >I think the clicks in most mouse wheels would make it >unsuitable for >manipulating audio controls. no, wrong answer. i work with sequoia und every `click' shifts volume 0,3dB. perfect handling even for life mixes. urban http://www.nusurf.at/

20 years, 3 months

[linux-audio-dev] [OT] marketing hype

by Marek Peteraj

Paul: > <paul returns from a week away> > % f +gtk-in > % rmm cur-last > % f +gtkmm-in > % rmm cur-last > % f +new > % rmm `pick -from wine-devel` > % rmm `pick -from xdg-list` > and then i can put all those commands in script and next time just do: > % clean-mail >that's what i call a mail client. And this is exactly what explains the clutter in ardour UI. Sorry Paul, but this is your way of handling email. My way of choosing and using email clients(and other apps) is simply driven by the same needs most users have. To read, write and manage email easily. I just want to fetch my emails, click twice to respond to them, perhaps...hmm backup my mboxes so that i can import them next time with two other clicks? The only advanced feature i'm using is filters perhaps. And that's just setting up a filter so that i don't care next time, and it's damn easy in evolution. One thing you might all consider as stupid. I need it black on white to concentrate. And 19th century ncurses is driving me crazy. And yes, i'm using linux audio, using gentoo, compiling packages from sources, running jack, configuring all that stuff etc etc. Fons: > There seems to be a belief that computers and software would eleminate > the > need for education and training, that sitting at a DAW turns you > instantly > into a sound engineer, But knowing the features of a DAW isn't *at *all* the only thing you need to know in *order* to be a sound engineer. And the less it takes up the better for the rest of the things a sound engineer has to *know* in order to be a good sound engineer. > and clicking the mouse on soft synth makes you > a qualified musician. It *never* did, *even* with *tons* of perfect win/mac software. All tools there only. > This is a complete fallacy, and IMHO just one > manifestation of the global dumbing-down exercise that's happening all > around us, and that is driven by those who make money out of it. So you call not removing disturbing non-efficient and stupid UI designs which make your life harder and all that -- fallacy and dumbing-down?? :) Certain things i just don't get into my head and probably never will: * Why do some people here believe that centralising information, encouraging standards and trying to make some "proprietary/pro"-grade oss software is going to take your freedom of choice? Suppose we have say 6 different applications (DAW, drummachine, sampler, you name it)that perfecly compete with proprietary world. Does *that* take the freedom of choice? Does encouraging of toolkits(we've got two major ones) take your freedom? Did jack take your freedom to make your own audio server? No. Why? Two words - *Open* *Source* The only thing that's going to happen is that *most* users will use those 6 applications in a (what people tend to call here) dumb environment. And those users haven't even arrived here yet. Because they are the *real* non-technical users. The rest can fiddle around with configurations and code as much as they can. Not(!) so in win32 and to some extent also on mac. Can you tweak evolution code-wise? sure you can. Can you just go ahead with your own client? sure you can. Can you pick your favorite toolkit or make your own? Sure you can. But why do i have to install 280+ toolkits in order to use linux audio? Last note - i might be a dick, but i'm honest. Marek

20 years, 3 months

[linux-audio-dev] linux use (was [OT] marketing hype)

by vanDongen/Gilcher

Well as a profesional linux user (music is my dayjob) I can maybe describe some of the things that make linux much more productive for me than mac or windows. Jack is one of the key points. (with alsa sequencer but midi loopback is not unique, the mac has had that for ages) Workspaces and keyboard control in the window manager is another. As you say, making a production involves a lot of different pieces of software and/or equipment. I work mainly in software these days, but there are always some things easier with outboard stuff. So I need many different programs, and the fact that they can all talk to each other is great, because ,even on the mac, you always need that one small utility to fix a little thing, do a special effect etc. For instance, I had to do some songs for a children's theatre show (music for the elephant, the crocodile on the train etc). It was so nice to edit the score in rosegarden (which has pretty nice score entry) send it as midi to fluidsynth and hydrogen and record it into ardour which has the best editing/mixing facilities. I can quickly make a special special-effect in csound and run parts of a session through that, never having to quit this, start that, make batches so etc. So unless you are willing to stick with one mega-application (logic or cubase), and I have never been able to, linux is more productive in this way. The other thing that makes linux more productive for me is the windowmanager I am using: ion, a tabbed/tiled window manager which I would like to promote here as one of the most productivity enhancing piece of software I know. It is unorthodox, but it manages your windows instead of cluttering the desktop. No icons, no eyecandy. Takes getting used to, but I never ever have to hunt for a window hidden underneath somewhere, or find it on the toolbar or the thingy OSX has now (a seperate program that shows all windows in minature so you can click where you want to go). Instead I have the screens (dual head) seperated into tiles, I can navigate with my keyboard to whatever window I want, I optimize screen real-estate, so it is much easier to show many different plugin windows f.i. etc.. etc.. But I have worked a only little bit on OSX and I found it very annoying, ridiculous special effects, a toolbar that pops up,no extra workspaces to order your apps. Way to much fluff. In conclusion, I can say that I could probably make the endresult, the music, on any system, but that I can do it quicker and more to my liking on linux. But I am not your average user probably, I code sometimes as a hobby and I like looking at the internals. Gerard On Friday 11 June 2004 09:01, linux-audio-dev-request(a)music.columbia.edu From: Tim Orford <tim(a)orford.org> > i dont mean to be aggressive, i'm just really intrigued to > know how people get any music done. There is never any talk on > this list or LAU about real software usage or workflows etc. > > for most people its not enough just to be able to do something, > it has to be doable without impacting productivity or creativity. > > my personal experience is this: Music production is now an > integrated process where the synthesis, composition, programming, > recording, arrangement, and mixing of music overlap and everything > is editable at all stages. I guess i'm biased by my own desires and > studio experiences, but i do beleive this is what the majority of > people want. > > such a system is not acheivable by bedroom hackers, it requires > some cooperation and organisation. Currently all we have are > the supporting peripherals (synths, editors, fx). > > is there really noone here who is seriously interested in this? -- electronic & acoustic musics-- http://www.xs4all.nl/~gml

20 years, 3 months

Jump to page:

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