Hi.
Does anyone out there know what the audio buffer size settings in
Windows and MacOS really mean? If you say "128 samples" does that
translate to 2 buffers of 128 samples --- one buffer playing, one buffer
filling --- or 2 buffers of 64 samples? Is it 256 samples of latency or
128?
I realize this isn't _exactly_ a Linux audio question, but perhaps
someone out there knows something about this. We're trying to get an
apples to apples comparison of our Linux/ALSA based system with a
Windows/MacOS system.
We set the ALSA driver to 2x128 and we get results that jibe more with
the 256 setting in Windows.
But when we hooked a Windows system up to a scope it looked more like
the 128 sample setting was running 2x64 samples. So... we're confused.
Any pearls of wisdom out there? ... mo
===================================
Michael Ost, Software Architect
Muse Research, Inc.
most(a)museresearch.com
Hi!
Worked out a design for fan-sliders:
http://wrstud.urz.uni-wuppertal.de/~ka0394/forum/04-06-12_fan_slider_02.png
I wanted the whole slider to appear raised, emphasizing
it's clickable everywhere. Therefor the glass capsule
look serves a purpose, and is not just eye-candy.
The orange/yellow is supposed to give enough contrast in
brightness alone, and to give a feel of energy, without
being too agressive.
First 3 sizes, to see how it looks like down to quadratic
for replacing small knobs (not sure about that).
Then on mouse-over. It must be imediately clear, that
there is this functionality, and I hope this will make
noobs try what happens when moving the pointer towards
that area. Also doubles as alternative to the usual
highlighting for now.
This initial area fades out to the outside, as does
the part right of the pointer position when the pointer
is outside the main slider. This is for indicating that
you can always move farther outwards (well, screen
edges could be the limit, but shouldn't be, IMHO)
I moved away from showing straightened lines on the
outside (reiterating the plain slider). I thought it
would make interpretation easier, but now think it only
leads to a weird distorted 3d look.
Note that the mouse pointer will be offset from
the mark according to where the user clicked on the
slider. Such behaviour might seem strange first, but
I know from Blender that one can get used to it in not
time, and then it's just fine.
And finaly showing a little transparency. Should allow
to compare with other sliders that would otherwise be
hidden. But must be carefully adjusted, to not just
result in a mess on screen.
On mouse buttons and modifiers:
- Left is clear
- Right should be reserved for context menu. But who
says a slider can't have one: min, max, reset/center,
copy/paste ...
- Middle button could be used for jump mode (value
snaps to mouse position imediately)
- Wheel and +/- keys could work on mouse-over already
Now Ctrl is used to emulate right-click on the Mac and
I believe in Blender. Therefor Ctrl-leftclick should be
configurable.
What about middle-click emulation?
Shift could be used to open the fan area enlarged right
above the slider, or any other way as shortcut to higher
precison.
Alt for changing the value in steps, maybe.
---
Thorsten Wilms
Marek Peteraj:
> >
> > Ouch, never be sarcastic/ironic on e-mail. I completely agree with
> > you. I though that was clear by my "Oh..." comment which you had
> > cut away. The point was: _i_ actually want to customize everything
> > via scheme-scripts (that is true), which Tim Hockin made (some kind of)
> > a joke about. And by saying that I tried to express that what Tim Hockin
> > perhaps means is ridiculous, does perfectly makes sense for
> > other. We need to have choises/alternatives/anarchy/etc. because
> > we are all different, etc.
>
> Were not that different actually, we're human beings ;)
>
> Besides, look at the CD vs. tons of DVD "standards" issue.
> Having lots of opportunities in DVD burning world can make you perfectly
> incompatible with your friends.
>
> That's why CD still works.
>
Thats not a valid analogy. I was talking about customizing
user interfaces.
> And Kjetil - you're a perfect minority and actually being ignorant to
> those who are the exact opposite. Freedom will stay on linux. It's
> because it's open source.
>
I have a feeling you are trying to start a flame-war?
--
Marek Peteraj:
> >
> > Personally speaking, as a free software developer I don't care if my
> > programs are deemed as sucessful, they work for me, and handful of other
> > people - this makes me happy :)
> I'd like to see what other developers of the most popular linux audio
> projects think. Because if they share your opinion, i'd rather save some
> bucks and buy myself a mac.
> Linux audio is perfectly unusable for me. Currently.
I do this because I like to do cool things I beleive no one has ever done
before. And I like unix and I love fvwm, emacs, bash, guile, etc..
I also have access to all the sources in the operating system,
all the drivers I use (except for the nvidia driver :((( ), all the
libraries, all the applications, the sources are available for everything.
I have full control. This makes it theoretical possible to make the
ultimate sound system. :) If I did this because I wanted to be a
superstar or something, I would have written for windows or mac, not
AmigaOS (not that much anymore) and linux which is the case now.
And no, linux audio is definitely not perfectly unusable for me.
Quite the contrary; pd, supercollider, snd, ladspa, alsa, jack and the
very low-latish kernel make it to be a very usable platform for creative
work you can't do in other OS's.
--
The latest release of Specimen, a midi controllable audio sampler for
Linux, adds 4 LFOs which can modulate volume, panning, cutoff and
resonance into mix. Additionally, the LFOs can be tempo synced to
either midi or the jack-transport mechanism.
Available for immediate leeching from www.gazuga.net, or
you can download the tarball directly here:
http://www.gazuga.net/specimen-0.3.0.tar.gz
I'm working on a roadmap for Specimen, and I'm interested in hearing
what features people are most interested in having. If there's
something you want Specimen to do, let me know; the most popular
features will get incorporated first.
[pb]
Hello again!
The discussion about linear or radial mouse movement for
knobs finaly got me to mockup an idea i had in my mind
for sometime already.
For now I call it fan sliders:
http://wrstud.urz.uni-wuppertal.de/~ka0394/forum/04-06-10_fan_slider_01.png
It's all about concept, not style.
The idea is to allow rather small sliders, but on mouse-down lines from
top and button appear on one side (important for making the feature
discoverable). Outside of the inital slider the pointer position is indicated
by the crossing middle and vertical line. The straight horizontal extension
is only meant to make reading easier. So up/down is value change, outwards
increases precision (can of course be turned for stuff like pan).
If the graphics do not fit on the screen, it still can work because the
value is indicated by the initial slider and inclination of the center line
(well, at least I hope so).
Default expansion direction should be reading direction, but moving the
pointer out on the other side could make it turn over. Close to the right
screen edge the behaviour could be as known from menus.
The first mockup has a slider where the dragable part is clearly defined.
The second gives a stronger sense of value, but is not clear about where
to click (I propose everywhere on the slider area, always grabbing the
actual value. No special behaviour like known from scrollbars).
It's also more space efficient, because the whole are can be used (with
the other one a half button must be spared on both ends each.)
For those concerned about precision of pointer movement / inadvertently
changes to precision while adjusting value:
Instead of linear spreading out, it could be stepped (lines looking like
stairs). But that would be much less elegant.
Comments, please!
---
Thorsten Wilms
Are you all on vacation because we have 60 mails per day?
Horizontal motion is better than vertical. Try it! I can move
the pointer horizontally 1000 pixels easily without moving
my hand -- I just rotate hand and skew fingers, fast. For vertical
motion I have to slide the whole arm on the table -- feels bad
and is slow.
Juhana
Alfons Adriaensen:
>On Thu, Jun 10, 2004 at 07:24:59PM +0200, Kjetil Svalastog Matheussen wrote:
>>
>> Tim Hockin:
>> >
>> > I know Linux people love to claim how choice is our strength, but I think
>> > it's bunk. Linux needs a single GUI environment that has a lot of deep
>> > flexibility
>>
>> Yes! I completely agree with this.
>
>What exactly do you mean by Linux "needing" something ?
>
>And how are you going to impose that single GUI environment ?
>Will you take me to court when I write a new window manager. or
>a widget that doesn't have your 'imprimatur' ?
>
>If you want your freedom to program limited, please goto
>Windoze or MAC. But please do no impose your limitations on
>others.
Ouch, never be sarcastic/ironic on e-mail. I completely agree with
you. I though that was clear by my "Oh..." comment which you had
cut away. The point was: _i_ actually want to customize everything
via scheme-scripts (that is true), which Tim Hockin made (some kind of)
a joke about. And by saying that I tried to express that what Tim Hockin
perhaps means is ridiculous, does perfectly makes sense for
other. We need to have choises/alternatives/anarchy/etc. because
we are all different, etc.
--
Tim Hockin:
>
> I know Linux people love to claim how choice is our strength, but I think
> it's bunk. Linux needs a single GUI environment that has a lot of deep
> flexibility
Yes! I completely agree with this.
> (and I don't mean Scheme config files :)
Oh...
:)
--
> Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 13:21:05 +0200
> From: Tim Orford <tim(a)orford.org>
>
> the major weakness in this setup for me is the neccesity to render the
> midi before mixing. At least that means all elements of the arrangement
> can be visualised and edited in one place, but re-editing the rendered
> parts is problematic.
....snip
> i wonder if this is a concern to anyone else?
I see your point. The difference is that I only use MIDI instruments for
certain specific things, where I write the parts on the piano and/or paper
enter them in the computer and make a few small edits. But with a specific
instrument that I like and don't have to tweak. Whereas the effects and
mixes and montages I all do with raw audio. So I never missed the kind of
global sessioning because I don't use MIDI that way.
>
> Despite your comment about the 'mega-application', both Rosegarden and
> Ardour aim to be such things, but dont, at the current time, appear to
> do anything that the 2 apps you mentioned cant.
besides interconnecting with about all other linux audio apps.
Which was my point. I have nothing against applications that can do a lot,
but I don't like applications that are islands.
cheers
Gerard