28 Nov
2004
28 Nov
'04
9:26 a.m.
On Sun, 2004-11-28 at 13:35, R Parker wrote:
--- Marek Peteraj <marpet(a)naex.sk> wrote:
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.
On Sat, 2004-11-27 at 23:21, Lee Revell wrote:
100%. Flame away...
I really hope you don't do that. 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
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. :) 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
28 Nov
28 Nov
9:55 a.m.
New subject: Behringer [was Re: [linux-audio-user] Re: [linux-audio-dev] RME is no more]
[Marek Peteraj]
A not uncommon belief has it that the investment called 'trust' is
worth more than any monetary investment.
Cheers, Tim
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.
10:16 a.m.
New subject: Behringer [was Re: [linux-audio-user] Re: [linux-audio-dev] RME is no more]
On Sun, 2004-11-28 at 14:50, Tim Goetze wrote:
[Marek Peteraj]
A not uncommon belief has it that the investment called 'trust' is
worth more than any monetary investment.
Ah i don't know. I mean, you guys have put a lot of time into what your
doing anyway. And in my case the trust in rme turned out to be a bummer
just becasue i was thinking that they have trust in the open source
developers. If they did have such trust, something like this would never
happen. Once again, the simple answer is www.audioscience.com.
Marek
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. 
2:34 p.m.
New subject: Behringer [was Re: [linux-audio-user] Re: [linux-audio-dev] RME is no more]
On Sun, 2004-11-28 at 10:15, Marek Peteraj wrote:
On Sun, 2004-11-28 at 14:50, Tim Goetze wrote:
Why don't the guys who do the driver development see if audioscience
would be interested in producing pro audio cards (not just broadcast)
with driver help from the OS community. They seem like they have their
act together.
Jan
[Marek Peteraj]
A not uncommon belief has it that the investment called 'trust' is
worth more than any monetary investment.
Ah i don't know. I mean, you guys have put a lot of time into what your
doing anyway. And in my case the trust in rme turned out to be a bummer
just becasue i was thinking that they have trust in the open source
developers. If they did have such trust, something like this would never
happen. Once again, the simple answer is www.audioscience.com.
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.
3:02 p.m.
New subject: Behringer [was Re: [linux-audio-user] Re: [linux-audio-dev] RME is no more]
On Sun, 2004-11-28 at 19:53, Jan Depner wrote:
On Sun, 2004-11-28 at 10:15, Marek Peteraj wrote:
Do you mean the ALSA developers? Audioscience does its drivers for ALSA,
no volunteers needed. :)
On Sun, 2004-11-28 at 14:50, Tim Goetze wrote:
Why don't the guys who do the driver development see if audioscience [Marek Peteraj]
Ah i don't know. I mean, you guys have put a lot of time into what your
doing anyway. And in my case the trust in rme turned out to be a bummer
just becasue i was thinking that they have trust in the open source
developers. If they did have such trust, something like this would never
happen. Once again, the simple answer is www.audioscience.com.
> 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.
A not uncommon belief has it that the investment called 'trust' is
worth more than any monetary investment. would be interested in producing pro audio cards (not
just broadcast)
with driver help from the OS community. They seem like they have their
act together.
Seems like a good idea to me. The 5044 cards offers 8 analog i/os of
24/192 and i wonder whether such card could not already be used for
studio purposes.
But in any case, they're very close.
Marek
4:27 p.m.
New subject: Behringer [was Re: [linux-audio-user] Re: [linux-audio-dev] RME is no more]
> > Ah i don't know. I mean, you guys have
put a lot of time into what your
> > doing anyway. And in my case the trust in rme turned out to be a bummer
> > just becasue i was thinking that they have trust in the open source
> > developers. If they did have such trust, something like this would
> > never happen. Once again, the simple answer is www.audioscience.com.
>
> Why don't the guys who do the driver development see if audioscience
Thanks for the vote of confidence!
Do you mean the ALSA developers? Audioscience does its
drivers for ALSA,
no volunteers needed. :)
Not so fast... we at audioscience would love to have some help with our ALSA
driver and our underlying HPI driver.
We are a small company that supports various Micros~1 flavours as well as
Linux 2.4 and 2.6 kernel variations. I am the single person who does all the
linux stuff, and would still say I don't know enough to do it easily or
properly.
(Of course I have had help from our customers and other alsa developers, and
kudos to Takashi Iwai for doing the work to incorporate our ALSA driver into
the alsa tree)
So step right up...
> would be interested in producing pro audio cards
(not just broadcast)
> with driver help from the OS community. They seem like they have their
> act together.
So, what is the difference between our current offerings and what you'd like
to see in a "pro audio card"?
Seems like a good idea to me. The 5044 cards offers 8
analog i/os of
24/192 and i wonder whether such card could not already be used for
studio purposes.
But in any case, they're very close.
Marek
regards
Eliot Blennerhassett
5:10 p.m.
New subject: Behringer [was Re: [linux-audio-user] Re: [linux-audio-dev] RME is no more]
On Mon, Nov 29, 2004 at 09:27:46AM +1300, Eliot Blennerhassett wrote:
So, what is the difference between our current
offerings and what you'd like
to see in a "pro audio card"?
I don't see any gross difference except the input/output connectors.
Bundle the 5042 or 5044 with adapters or breakout boxes, and price them
roughly in the ballpark (allowing for feature and/or spec differences)
with M-audio's Delta 1010LT and 1010, and you might have another market
to tap into. Worth investigating anyway.
That's a pretty low price target, though.
The Delta 1010 can be had for $500 new; the 1010 LT for considerably
less. Another point of comparison would be Echo Layla for ~ $700 US.
--
Paul Winkler
http://www.slinkp.com
8:20 p.m.
New subject: audioscience [was Re: [linux-audio-user] Re: [linux-audio-dev] RME is no more]
On Mon, 2004-11-29 at 10:27, Eliot Blennerhassett wrote:
Hi Eliot, thanks for clarifying this up for us. Nevertheless i think
that what you do is great and your the *only* company that does provide
official alsa drivers and support for professional audio products(i know
it's just you but anyway, the philosophy is cool). I think that you
would get a lot of feedback if you entered the studio market.
I think that having a breakout box with 24/192 converters inside the
breakoutbox would rock. 8 analog i/o is fine too. Most such devices
usually offer around 26 channels of inputs + 26 chans of outputs, ~1/2
being digital. Hmmm now that i think about it, the 5042(the AES/EBU one)
with a breakoutbox with analog i/o would be really cool. Not sure about
how much load the DSP processor can handle and whether it's flotingpoint
capable, but running a few ladspas on such DSP would be very nice too.
:)
Just some initial thoughts.
Marek
> > Ah i
don't know. I mean, you guys have put a lot of time into what your
> > doing anyway. And in my case the trust in rme turned out to be a bummer
> > just becasue i was thinking that they have trust in the open source
> > developers. If they did have such trust, something like this would
> > never happen. Once again, the simple answer is www.audioscience.com.
>
> Why don't the guys who do the driver development see if audioscience
Thanks for the vote of confidence!
Do you mean the ALSA developers? Audioscience
does its drivers for ALSA,
no volunteers needed. :)
Not so fast... we at audioscience would love to have some help with our ALSA
driver and our underlying HPI driver.
We are a small company that supports various Micros~1 flavours as well as
Linux 2.4 and 2.6 kernel variations. I am the single person who does all the
linux stuff, and would still say I don't know enough to do it easily or
properly.
(Of course I have had help from our customers and other alsa developers, and
kudos to Takashi Iwai for doing the work to incorporate our ALSA driver into
the alsa tree)
So step right up... > would be interested in producing pro audio
cards (not just broadcast)
> with driver help from the OS community. They seem like they have their
> act together.
So, what is the difference between our current offerings and what you'd like
to see in a "pro audio card"?
9:44 p.m.
New subject: audioscience [was Re: [linux-audio-user] Re: [linux-audio-dev] RME is no more]
On Sun, 2004-11-28 at 20:19, Marek Peteraj wrote:
On Mon, 2004-11-29 at 10:27, Eliot Blennerhassett
wrote:
Hi Eliot, thanks for clarifying this up for us. Nevertheless i think
that what you do is great and your the *only* company that does provide
official alsa drivers and support for professional audio products(i know
it's just you but anyway, the philosophy is cool). I think that you
would get a lot of feedback if you entered the studio market.
I think that having a breakout box with 24/192 converters inside the
breakoutbox would rock. 8 analog i/o is fine too. Most such devices
usually offer around 26 channels of inputs + 26 chans of outputs, ~1/2
being digital. Hmmm now that i think about it, the 5042(the AES/EBU one)
with a breakoutbox with analog i/o would be really cool. Not sure about
how much load the DSP processor can handle and whether it's flotingpoint
capable, but running a few ladspas on such DSP would be very nice too.
:)
There seem to be a number of things that you could offer ranging from
something like the M-Audio 1010 to the top end RME products. There is
also a lot of interest at the moment in some sort of firewire audio
interface which could be very handy for laptop users. Apparently RME
will not be providing information for their latest firewire device.
Until Marek mentioned the company I had never heard of audioscience. I
would certainly be more inclined to support a company with this kind of
policy towards Linux.
Jan
> >
Ah i don't know. I mean, you guys have put a lot of time into what your
> > doing anyway. And in my case the trust in rme turned out to be a bummer
> > just becasue i was thinking that they have trust in the open source
> > developers. If they did have such trust, something like this would
> > never happen. Once again, the simple answer is www.audioscience.com.
>
> Why don't the guys who do the driver development see if audioscience
Thanks for the vote of confidence!
Do you mean the ALSA developers? Audioscience
does its drivers for ALSA,
no volunteers needed. :)
Not so fast... we at audioscience would love to have some help with our ALSA
driver and our underlying HPI driver.
We are a small company that supports various Micros~1 flavours as well as
Linux 2.4 and 2.6 kernel variations. I am the single person who does all the
linux stuff, and would still say I don't know enough to do it easily or
properly.
(Of course I have had help from our customers and other alsa developers, and
kudos to Takashi Iwai for doing the work to incorporate our ALSA driver into
the alsa tree)
So step right up... > would be interested in producing pro audio
cards (not just broadcast)
> with driver help from the OS community. They seem like they have their
> act together.
So, what is the difference between our current offerings and what you'd like
to see in a "pro audio card"? 
2 Dec
2 Dec
2 p.m.
New subject: Behringer [was Re: [linux-audio-user] Re: [linux-audio-dev] RME is no more]
Eliot Blennerhassett <linux(a)blennerhassett.gen.nz> writes:
we at audioscience
I will certainly put my eyes on audioscience now.
Having a company working so close with the community is really great.
--
Esben Stien is b0ef(a)esben-stien.name
http://www.esben-stien.name
irc://irc.esben-stien.name/%23contact
[sip|iax]:b0ef@esben-stien.name
7079
days inactive
7083
days old
linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
9 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
Eliot Blennerhassett -
Esben Stien -
Jan Depner -
Marek Peteraj -
Paul Winkler -
Tim Goetze