Begin forwarded message:
The Music Technology Group of the Universitat Pompeu Fabra in Barcelona
(www.iua.upf.es/mtg), a research group known for its work on audio
processing technologies and their musical and multimedia applications,
has 4 open positions in different areas and projects:
- Graphical interface designer and programmer (MTG-2004-01-UI)
- Young researcher: Java, C++ and Artificial Intelligence (MTG-2004-01-PAI)
- Young researcher: Audio signal processing (MTG-2004-01-PSP)
- Technician for digital music library classification (MTG-2004-01-DML)
Find the details on our web page (Join us section).
Interested people should send an updated resume (CV) to Salvador Gurrera
(sgurrera(a)iua.upf.es).
Has anyone actually been denied membership to the mailing list yet? I'm sure the creator of the list had some reasons for that choice.
Taybin
-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Robillard <drobilla(a)connect.carleton.ca>
Sent: Jan 21, 2004 12:06 PM
To:
The Linux Audio Developers' Mailing List <linux-audio-dev(a)music.columbia.edu>
Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: linuxaudio.org
On Wed, 2004-01-21 at 13:32, Marek Peteraj wrote:
> > You sound paranoid.
>
> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/consortium-p
>
> Marek
I would really rather not fuel this thread (personally I think both
sides are being incredibly stupid) but this is the one thing that
bothers me.
Why is this list closed? Memership "will be held for approval", and the
archive isn't available for browsing.. what gives?
Certainly not the way things are done in the 'open source community'..
-Dave
On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 01:06:03 +1100, Rohan Drape wrote:
> > Also, what OSC library are you using? libOSC and OSC Kit seem to be
> > non-rentrant and a bit painful to use.
>
> jack.clock implements only a subset of the OSC protocol, more or less
> the same subset as SuperCollider [SC3], and for more or less the same
> reasons. In particular it does not implement the patten matching
> rules and does not implement a scheduler for incoming messages [ie. it
> does not accept incoming bundles]. I will add a note to this effect
> in the manual. Restricting address names to seven printing characters
> makes method dispatch an eight byte equality operation. Given this
> the implementation is straightforward and does not require a library
> beyond a simple network/host byte order convenience set. The current
> implementation is unneccesarily restritive about the type of numerical
> arguments, this should be relaxed, which will require a slightly more
> sophistcated infrastructure. I looked briefly at the libraries you
> mention a few years ago and decided much the same thing.
Thanks, thats helpful. I have a number of things I'd like to use OSC for
(and I've heard plenty of other linux audio people talking about starting
to use it), but theres a few things that bug me about it:
* Libraries not great. this seems solved by using the subset you're
talking about, I think it will be fine for my applications. I dont like
reinventing the wheel, but I need threadsafeness, and implementing a
library for the subset youre talking about seems easy.
* No service discovery. This is a big deal, but can be solved /if/ we
define a service discovery service before too many more people implement
OSC support :) The current situation where people just try to pick a port
number noone else is using (AFAICT) and hope it gets telepathically
transmitted to its peers is a bit fragile. Unless theres a database of
port ranges I haven't found?
* No method query. It would be nice if there was a well-known method that
caused some metadata about the other methods to be dumped. Maybe there
is and I just haven't seen it. This could also be done in the service
discovery stage though, through advertisment.
FWIW (I have some experience of optimising URL matchers), I would produce
a 64bit (or maybe only 32bit) hash of the paths, hash up incoming paths
and do a match on that. Its pretty quick (the only extra operation is the
hash and it will be < 1000 P3 cycles to execute), and allows arbitrary
length paths.
I'm very happy to discussus a GPL'd library implementation or service
discovery, but we should probably continue on l-a-d. I should
really have posted my questions there too. I've CC'd this reply.
- Steve
Hello all,
The feature I wrote on Ron Parker's studio starts on page 208 of the
February 2004 issue of Sound on Sound magazine, out today. It also
has a section featuring Mark Knecht, and contributions from Steve
Harris. The article is mostly about using Ardour, JACK and JAMin
together.
The article is also on the SoS website, but it is only available to
subscribers for the first six months.
http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/feb04/articles/mirrorimage.htm
Cheers
Daniel
Hi all,
The name "LADCCA" was always intended to be a working name but even
though there's a long way to go, it's out there and people seem to be
using it. I wouldn't worry about it that much, but the first thing
anyone seems to say about LADCCA is "what a horrible name" :) I'm crap
at thinking up stuff like this (JACK Rack was originally called "JACK
LADSPA Host" :) so if anyone has any decent ideas, please let me know.
Cheers,
Bob
--
Bob Ham <rah(a)bash.sh>
"At some point, keystroke recorders got installed on several machines at
Valve. Our speculation is that these were done via a buffer overflow in
Outlook's preview pane." -- Gabe Newell on the Half-Life 2 source leak
Marek Peteraj wrote:
> Suddenly you're now speaking as the representative of the whole Linux
>
>audio community. But you're not. Neither am I. The only true
>representatives of the Linux Audio community are the Linux Audio
>Developers.
>
ehh??
where's the logic in that??
as a composer, i say: what good is my writing music without an audience
to hear it?
what good is it writing applications, if there is noone to use them?
what good is a body, if every part of it wanted to be a hand, or a foot?
it would not function without eyes, nose, ears...
you speak as if the Linux Audio Developers are some kind of gods... but
none of us would exist in this community without each other. thats what
c-o-m-m-u-n-i-t-y means.
m~
--
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
--Benjamin Franklin
|\ _,,,---,,_
ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ HTTP 503: Too Busy
|,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-'
'---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL
.::. www.iriXx.org .::. www.copyleftmedia.org.uk .::.
http://plugin.org.uk/timemachine/
* Now uses GTK, instead of SDL to draw the window, hopefully a bit
more friendly on maintainers.
* Meters.
* Now records up to 8 channels (use the -c flag).
* Can set the output directory/file prefix (-p flag).
* Hiting the window close icon now makes sure you have all the data
written to disk.
I've a feeling that someone mailed me a patch and I've lost it and not
included it, so if its you please mail me again.
Enjoy,
Steve
A)
Xinerama _does_ support open GL, at least with my matrox card, I can have
openGL on one monitor of the two. That is a limitation of the card
hardware, AFAIK, not of X.
Still there are a lot of these cards around so openGL would not be very
useful.
B)ergonomics
Mutli head setups are extremely useful.
I can easily see both monitors without turning my head, and in a glance I
can see the state of several applications. Or I have the documentation in
a browser on one monitor and the app on another. Much easier on the brain
than constantly switching workspaces back and forth.
In a studio there is also a lot of other gear that needs to be watched;
mixing-desk, outboard equipment, talent etc. Using a multihead setup you
can put the transport and the metering on a monitor near the console, and
the editor window on a monitor optimally placed for "desk-work" ergonomics
(eye height, keyboard at the right place etc)
It is also adviced to move your eyefocus around during work to prevent
RSI. (look out a window etc.) Focusing to much on a relatively tiny area
all the time is very bad ergonomics. So head movement by itself is not
bad, the opposite in fact.
Gerard
> From: Kjetil Svalastog Matheussen <k.s.matheussen(a)notam02.no>
> Benjamin Flaming:
>>
>> "People without working hardware acceleration" includes anyone
>> using more
>> than one monitor. X refuses to allow hardware acceleration with
>> Xinerama.
>> Since multiple monitors are central to my working style (and that of
>> many
>> recording studios), using OpenGL could have serious drawbacks.
>>
>
> Programs where it makes sense using two or more monitors are in my opinion
> seriously crippled. Its about 2.3 million times faster (rough guess) to
> press a key (to switch to another view) than to turn your head. In
> addition, you can get wiplash (or something similar) by turning your head
> too much. Please explan why I'm wrong, if I am.
>
>
> --
Benjamin Flaming:
>
> "People without working hardware acceleration" includes anyone using more
> than one monitor. X refuses to allow hardware acceleration with Xinerama.
> Since multiple monitors are central to my working style (and that of many
> recording studios), using OpenGL could have serious drawbacks.
>
Programs where it makes sense using two or more monitors are in my opinion
seriously crippled. Its about 2.3 million times faster (rough guess) to
press a key (to switch to another view) than to turn your head. In
addition, you can get wiplash (or something similar) by turning your head
too much. Please explan why I'm wrong, if I am.
--