24 Oct
2002
24 Oct
'02
3:32 p.m.
I'm trying to get a picture in my mind as to what is out there. Could
someone please give me a list of Wave editors that are seen as
potentially really good under Linux?
Cheers,
-Lea.
24 Oct
24 Oct
3:57 p.m.
On Thu, Oct 24, 2002 at 06:28:31PM +0100, Lea Anthony wrote:
I'm trying to get a picture in my mind as to what is out there. Could
someone please give me a list of Wave editors that are seen as
potentially really good under Linux?
My 2 faves are:
sweep
snd with dave phillips' UI hacks (which I think are now part
of the standard snd distro)
--
Paul Winkler
http://www.slinkp.com
"Welcome to Muppet Labs, where the future is made - today!"
4:14 p.m.
On 24 Oct 2002, Lea Anthony wrote:
I'm trying to get a picture in my mind as to what is out there. Could
someone please give me a list of Wave editors that are seen as
potentially really good under Linux?
snd, http://ccrma-www.stanford.edu/CCRMA/Software/snd/snd.html (superior)
sweep, http://www.metadecks.org/software/sweep/ (nice traditional)
--
9:29 p.m.
I just spent several hours last night comparing three different editors.
Basically, all of them have something to recommend, and
I plan on keeping all of them on my system. The skinny:
Snd: My old favorite. Easy to use, keeps getting better, but a bit
ugly still. Nonetheless, I know how to use, and I like it and recommend
you give it a try.
Sweep: Loads of fun, fast, pretty, nice use of LADSPA plugins. Still
no way to record directly into the program from an external source. and
the "scrubby" virtual stylus, while loads of fun, can get a bit tedious.
Still, a useful app to have around.
Audacity: Nifty, very fast, LADSPA support, offers direct recording and
nice undo feature. May become my bread-and-butter 2-track editor.
HTH
-dgm
Lea Anthony wrote:
I'm trying to get a picture in my mind as to what
is out there. Could
someone please give me a list of Wave editors that are seen as
potentially really good under Linux?
Cheers,
-Lea.
9:40 p.m.
On Thu, 24 Oct 2002 19:38:52 -0400
David Gerard Matthews <dgm4+(a)pitt.edu> wrote:
Sweep: Loads of fun, fast, pretty, nice use of LADSPA
plugins. Still
no way to record directly into the program from an external source.
Yes there is.
The little red icon/button in the bottom left corner of the window should
bring up a record dialog.
Erik
--
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
Erik de Castro Lopo nospam(a)mega-nerd.com (Yes it's valid)
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
"C is a programming language. C++ is a cult."
-- David Parsons in comp.os.linux.development.apps
10:19 p.m.
Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
On Thu, 24 Oct 2002 19:38:52 -0400
David Gerard Matthews <dgm4+(a)pitt.edu> wrote:
Sorry, didn't see that. Many apologies, and thanks for the tip! Will
be trying that out tonight!
-dgm
Sweep: Loads of fun, fast, pretty, nice use of
LADSPA plugins. Still
no way to record directly into the program from an external source.
Yes there is.
The little red icon/button in the bottom left corner of the window should
bring up a record dialog.
25 Oct
25 Oct
3:42 p.m.
Hi,
Erik de Castro Lopo hat gesagt: // Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
On Thu, 24 Oct 2002 19:38:52 -0400
David Gerard Matthews <dgm4+(a)pitt.edu> wrote:
Is this really of any use? I never recorded with sweep (I use
ecasound), but when I tried to load a 10 minute ogg file into sweep,
it refused this because of exhausted memory. I have 256 MB, that
should be enough for 10 minutes of sound data. So how good is sweep
with longer soundfiles?
ciao
--
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org__
Sweep: Loads of fun, fast, pretty, nice use of
LADSPA plugins. Still
no way to record directly into the program from an external source.
Yes there is.
The little red icon/button in the bottom left corner of the window should
bring up a record dialog. 
4:19 p.m.
Is this really of any use? I never recorded with sweep
(I use
ecasound), but when I tried to load a 10 minute ogg file into sweep,
it refused this because of exhausted memory. I have 256 MB, that
should be enough for 10 minutes of sound data. So how good is sweep
with longer soundfiles?
*if* sweep uses floats or ints to represent audio data in memory (a
big *if*) then 10 minutes of 48kHz 2 channel audio is about 219MB:
mins * secs/min * samples/sec * bytes/sample * channels
10 * 60 * 48000 * 4 * 2 = 230400000 / 1048576 = 219
i would consider a much more fundamental problem with sweep (which the
author has plans to fix at some point) is the assumption that the
audio data will fit in memory. this just isn't viable for working with
"music" rather than "audio clips".
gnoise doesn't do this, and neither does snd. i am not sure about
audacity, but i suspect it doesn't either.
--p
5:08 p.m.
"Paul Davis" <paul(a)linuxaudiosystems.com> wrote:
i would consider a much more fundamental problem with
sweep (which the
author has plans to fix at some point) is the assumption that the
audio data will fit in memory. this just isn't viable for working with
"music" rather than "audio clips".
gnoise doesn't do this, and neither does snd. i am not sure about
audacity, but i suspect it doesn't either.
That is correct.
Josh
--
"Only Angels can sing that high, and only dogs can hear it." -- James Evans
5:16 p.m.
On Fri, Oct 25, 2002 at 02:18:43 -0400, Paul Davis wrote:
*if* sweep uses floats or ints to represent audio data
in memory (a
big *if*) then 10 minutes of 48kHz 2 channel audio is about 219MB:
Its float internall IIRC.
i would consider a much more fundamental problem with
sweep (which the
author has plans to fix at some point) is the assumption that the
audio data will fit in memory. this just isn't viable for working with
"music" rather than "audio clips".
Agreed.
gnoise doesn't do this, and neither does snd. i am
not sure about
audacity, but i suspect it doesn't either.
Audacity, and glame use disk paging.
IMHO sweep has the best UI (speed, clarity, usability), its a shame about
the RAM thing, but maybe thats why its so fast.
- Steve
26 Oct
26 Oct
1 a.m.
Steve Harris wrote:
There was an article on Audacity's disk paging system in the summer 2002
issue of the Computer Music Journal
(http://mitpress2.mit.edu/e-journals/Computer-Music-Journal/Documents/Conten…);
unfortunately only an abstract is available online. [I did glimpse at
it in a library last week, but not long enough to really grok the
explanations of how it works.]
-dgm
gnoise
doesn't do this, and neither does snd. i am not sure about
audacity, but i suspect it doesn't either.
Audacity, and glame use disk paging.
IMHO sweep has the best UI (speed, clarity, usability), its a shame about
the RAM thing, but maybe thats why its so fast.
- Steve
25 Oct
25 Oct
6:15 p.m.
On Friday 25 October 2002 02:18 pm, Paul Davis wrote:
>Is this really of any use? I never recorded with
sweep (I use
>ecasound), but when I tried to load a 10 minute ogg file into sweep,
>it refused this because of exhausted memory. I have 256 MB, that
>should be enough for 10 minutes of sound data. So how good is sweep
>with longer soundfiles?
i would consider a much more fundamental problem with
sweep (which the
author has plans to fix at some point) is the assumption that the
audio data will fit in memory. this just isn't viable for working with
"music" rather than "audio clips".
gnoise doesn't do this, and neither does snd. i am
not sure about
audacity, but i suspect it doesn't either.
I regularly edit 2 hour 44.1k stereo 16bit files with Audacity. Sweep looks
really really good -- but won't open that size file. Audacity has a bug in
its handling of that size file, which I need to report when I have time to
write it up properly, but it's something I can work around easily enough.
--
Lamar Owen
WGCR Internet Radio
1 Peter 4:11
26 Oct
26 Oct
12:41 a.m.
On Fri, Oct 25, 2002 at 02:18:43PM -0400, Paul Davis wrote:
yep (floats)
in fact sweep will even tell you how much memory it's blowing:
http://www.metadecks.org/software/sweep/images/screenshots/tour/new_file.png
Is this really
of any use? I never recorded with sweep (I use
ecasound), but when I tried to load a 10 minute ogg file into sweep,
it refused this because of exhausted memory. I have 256 MB, that
should be enough for 10 minutes of sound data. So how good is sweep
with longer soundfiles?
*if* sweep uses floats or ints to represent audio data in memory (a
big *if*) then 10 minutes of 48kHz 2 channel audio is about 219MB:
mins * secs/min * samples/sec * bytes/sample * channels
10 * 60 * 48000 * 4 * 2 = 230400000 / 1048576 = 219 
i would consider a much more fundamental problem with sweep (which the
author has plans to fix at some point) is the assumption that the
audio data will fit in memory. this just isn't viable for working with
"music" rather than "audio clips".
yep, you're right about that assumption. This year I kind of had to make a
stable editor for short clips, so I went all out on the GUI and usability
for sweep.
I'm actually more interested personally in editing music than clips, so
this is going to change. I've already got most of the internal code for
that (and a whole lot more), but I'll shut up about that until its done.
what I have found though is that you can do a hell of a lot more in memory
than I'd previously thought possible, now I have to translate as much of
that as possible to a work with disk caching :)
Conrad.
24 Oct
24 Oct
11:27 p.m.
Well, I don't know why I haven't announced it here yet, but... I'm the
author of ReZound
http://rezound.sourceforge.net
check it out...
-- Davy
Lea Anthony wrote:
I'm trying to get a picture in my mind as to what
is out there. Could
someone please give me a list of Wave editors that are seen as
potentially really good under Linux?
Cheers,
-Lea.
25 Oct
25 Oct
2:43 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] (REQ:) Linux live encoding
Hi
My and my friend are thinking of setting an open radio station. Only
choice I have is linux (that is all I use). I am trying to find something
that will do live encoding for me. All the content on the station will be
non-copyrighted and royalty free and I want the software used to be that
too.
Please tell me what my options are, for live encoding, I will probably use
ogg, since mp3 is not royalty free.
Also is there any hardware that would do this encoding for me. If not, and
the software is available. I might turn it into a dedicated blackbox for
live encoding.
Thanks
3:05 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] (REQ:) Linux live encoding
On Fri, Oct 25, 2002 at 12:58:57 -0400, mawali(a)news.icns.com wrote:
Hi
My and my friend are thinking of setting an open radio station. Only
choice I have is linux (that is all I use). I am trying to find something
that will do live encoding for me. All the content on the station will be
non-copyrighted and royalty free and I want the software used to be that
too.
This question is more appropriate for linux-audio-user.
If you are after a command line tool, you might want to look at ecasound
(http://eca.cx/)
- Steve
10:09 p.m.
Thanks for your help guys! Does anyone of you guys/authors know if there
is a "standard way" to indicate marker positions of a given audio file
when starting up the process?
I mean, wouldn't it be great if each app saw -MS and -ME on the command
line to indicate the marker positions of the given audio file? That way,
if you're using, say, ardour, there would be a way of launching external
editors but making them more tightly integrated.
Just wondering what you think....
-Lea.
On Fri, 2002-10-25 at 02:24, Davy Durham wrote:
Well, I don't know why I haven't announced it
here yet, but... I'm the
author of ReZound
http://rezound.sourceforge.net
check it out...
-- Davy
Lea Anthony wrote:
I'm trying to get a picture in my mind as to
what is out there. Could
someone please give me a list of Wave editors that are seen as
potentially really good under Linux?
Cheers,
-Lea.
11:17 p.m.
Is this any better than having the file format have the markers in
it? WAVE and OGG have this. I imeplemented it in ReZound's native
format as well. (clicking around on the horizontal ruler lets you edit
the markers). The only probably is that (for ReZound) I had to make
some changes to libaudiofile to make it 'correctly' support markers.
It's in audiofile's cvs, but there hasn't been a public release since
it got added there. If you download my rpm, or standalone binary
packages from sourceforge both should be able to save cues (and user
notes) in wave, aiff, ogg, and .rez file formats.
-- Davy
Lea Anthony wrote:
Thanks for your help guys! Does anyone of you
guys/authors know if there
is a "standard way" to indicate marker positions of a given audio file
when starting up the process?
I mean, wouldn't it be great if each app saw -MS and -ME on the command
line to indicate the marker positions of the given audio file? That way,
if you're using, say, ardour, there would be a way of launching external
editors but making them more tightly integrated.
Just wondering what you think....
-Lea.
On Fri, 2002-10-25 at 02:24, Davy Durham wrote:
Well, I don't know why I haven't announced
it here yet, but... I'm the
author of ReZound
http://rezound.sourceforge.net
check it out...
-- Davy
Lea Anthony wrote:
I'm trying to get a picture in my mind as to
what is out there. Could
someone please give me a list of Wave editors that are seen as
potentially really good under Linux?
Cheers,
-Lea.
8055
days inactive
8056
days old
linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
17 comments
13 participants
participants (13)
-
Conrad Parker -
David Gerard Matthews -
Davy Durham -
Erik de Castro Lopo -
Frank Barknecht -
Joshua Haberman -
Kjetil S. Matheussen -
Lamar Owen -
Lea Anthony -
mawali＠news.icns.com -
Paul Davis -
Paul Winkler -
Steve Harris