Linux-audio-user February 2006

linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org

207 participants
268 discussions

[linux-audio-user] Info on recording/DSP techniques (tutorails / papers, etc.)

by Ryan Smith

On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 11:02:31 -0800 Tim Howard Wrote: > Hello, > > Does anyone know where I can find a fairly exhaustive set of > tutorials (or just explanations) about recording and digital signal > processing techniques? > > I'm not very familiar with subjects such as ADT, chorus, flanger, > comb filters, Bode frequency shifting, compressing and limiting, > vocoding, and 101 other cool effects. For most of them, I don't know > how they work, how to use them, or when to use them. I didn't see anyone mentioning this - so I apologize if I am repeating someone else's comment... You can find an excellent sound / technical encyclopedia on Stanford's website (with basic conceptual introductions on many subjects): http://ccrma.stanford.edu/~jos/pasp/Index.html Also - a mind-boggling wealth of online papers and books written by Julius Orion Smith (music / EE professor at Stanford). http://ccrma.stanford.edu/~jos/ Hope this is useful, Ryan

19 years, 1 month

[linux-audio-user] bcf2000 for Ardour control

by R Parker

Hi, I'm considering a BCF2000 for Control Room B where we do mastering, MIDI sequencing, region editing (Ardour), etc. This appears to be the unit Jesse has made functional for controling Ardour. Is that true? If someone could share their opinions and experiences with usability in Linux and as a control surface for Ardour that would be helpful. The unit has eight physical faders. Are there "layers" which enable mapping to 9 > 16, 17 > 24, etc? ron __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

19 years, 1 month

[linux-audio-user] Re: Muse

by David Baron

On Wednesday 22 February 2006 20:53, linux-audio-user-request(a)music.columbia.edu wrote: > > 1. Must dkpg-reconfigure to set the suid bit. The configure information > > said no need to do this for 2.6 kernels but use realtime-lsm which I do. > > Without setting the bit, it could not detect jack. > > You must be running JACK as root. Don't do that. I start jack using the jack controller qjackctl. This is not being run as root. There is no option to run jackd as root. Here is the command being run: /usr/bin/jackd -T -R -dalsa -r44100 -p2048 -n2 -D -Chw:0 -Phw:0 -s -S -i2 -o2 -H

19 years, 1 month

[linux-audio-user] Muse

by David Baron

Still cannot compile it but was able to install from Debian Sid. 1. Must dkpg-reconfigure to set the suid bit. The configure information said no need to do this for 2.6 kernels but use realtime-lsm which I do. Without setting the bit, it could not detect jack. 2. It could not load any ladspa plugins. Complained they all lacked the header and terminated on the first one. Had to run with the no plugin option. These plugins show up in xmms and audacity just fine. 3. Vst not enabled here, obviously, because fst and the vst development kit are not on Sid. Non-free. 4. Fluidsynth played any soundfont I tried as a piano. I cannot voutch for the soundfonts as I never used them anywhere. Freebies from some synth site. 5. Organ O-1 works very nicely but my 575mhz PIII cannot quite hack it. The distortion VAM also works. I had these working on previous muse versions off Sid as well. It is possible to write soft synth that will run fine on this machine, I have a few for Windows.

19 years, 1 month

[linux-audio-user] Re: Free Software vs. Open Source: Where do *you* stand?

by Maluvia

[Warning: Long Post] I realize this is belated, and am sure that everyone is weary of this discussion, but since I have patiently read and considered the remarks of everyone else on these subjects, I would like the opportunity to add my own observations - just for the record. On OSS: This discussion began as an evaluation of the 'worthiness' of OSS - with particular regard to professional audio production. It appeared to be Pete's premise that since various open-source tools he has worked with have failed to meet his particular needs, it is therefore questionable that OSS can meet anyone else's pro-audio needs, and further, calls into question the value of OSS as a whole. There seems to be an implicit suggestion that if various OSS tools do not match or exceed the performance of proprietary ones, or if OSS is not going to supplant commercial software - then perhaps it should just be abandoned - as though this were a war, and one must choose sides. Each of us has unique needs. If there were a one-size-fits-all solution, there would not already be many different commercial solutions, as well as open-source ones. There is certainly room for all, and people should have a choice. Feeling compelled to consign OSS, RMS and the Torah into the ideological trash bin sounds like a philosophical crisis. To move beyond ideologies, methodologies, and idolatries that no longer serve one is a wise thing, and it is the hallmark of a mature soul that they are able to tread their own path according to their own conscience without feeling the need to compel others to either share their beliefs or tread that path alongside them. OSS came into being simply because existing commercial software was not meeting the needs of many, and alternatives needed to be created. Some of these needs included having greater freedom as to how to use programs, the license to modify and develop them, and the ability to acquire and distribute them at little or no monetary cost. Some of us desire greater choice and to have more control over our programs and how we use them, as well as having access to software features that existing commercial software does not offer. OSS is filling those needs for the segment of the population we represent. Can OSS exceed the quality and performance of commercial software? Of course it can. In some cases it will and in others it will not, and the judgement as to when it does so will always be an individual and subjective one. There will also be open-source programs developed for which there do not exist any commercial equivalents - in which case, the open-source world will be motivating and driving development in the commercial one. This provides more choices for us all and keeps proprietary development from stagnating - since they are forced to remain competitive - and this is good for everyone. On Copyright and Morality: I find it absurd to discuss morality and law in the same breath, as though they are somehow equivalent. Morality is first and foremost subjective, and secondly it is innate. You can neither teach nor legislate it. (Yes, you can use behavioral modification to train your dog not to attack your visitors, but that does not mean you have ingrained in them a moral ethos.) Anyone who has reached the stage of being an individualized, self-conscious human being already has an internalized sense of 'right and wrong'. They are aware of what is in their own self-interest and what is in the interest of the rest of humanity, as well as the planet itself, and they realize that those interests are interlinked and inseparable. They seek to 'do no harm' because they recognize that harm inflicted on their fellow man, or on the earth which sustains them, harms them as well - and it simply 'feels' wrong. I find it equally absurd to claim that 'copyleft' could not exist without 'copyright' - you might just as well claim that copyright exists because of copyleft or any other right. A 'right' is simply claimed and then defended. I can claim I have the 'right' to rule the world, and if I can defend that 'right' through fiscal might and force of arms - then I do. I can also claim the right to be free, but unless I am able to succesfully defend that right - I do not have it. This discussion has foundered by muddling the concept of moral right - in the sense of a (sometimes commonly held) view of 'right and wrong' - which is an abstract concept, with the concept of legal right - which is concrete to the extent that it is enforceable within a social collective. Something can be a legal right - such as apartheid, and yet be morally reprehensible, while there are countless moral rights which are not legal ones - at least not universally so. Laws are made for the benefit of the state, not the individual. They exist to insure the continuance of the state - its power, control and wealth - and to reward and extend privileges and favor to its patrons - the rich and powerful aristocracy-corporatocracy-plutocracy - whatever you want to call that class of human society. They certainly do not exist to enforce moral behavior on societal members, although they may be cloaked in 'moral' terms to increase the likelihood of their general acceptance and compliance. States can, and invariably do, solicit, encourage, subsidize and even legislate extremely antisocial and 'immoral' behavior when it serves their requirements for continuation or expansion of their power and control. An individual cannot benefit by state - statutory - 'copyright' law unless they have the financial means and/or societal standing and political clout to pursue the legal remedies available to enforce it. Except in rare instances, only powerful corporations such as exist within the publishing and recording industries, are able to utilize these laws on their own behalf to intimidate and punish those who threaten to cut into their profits. The lowly artist or programmer would likely find it extremely difficult, as well as prohibitively expensive and time-consuming, to attempt a defense of their copyright, and in most cases, will either be oblivious to the fact of a copyright violation, choose not to pursue it, or at best, accept some pittance of an out-of-court settlement. This is the *real* world we're talking about here - not utopia. Copyright is an appeal to the legal sanctions of the state to uphold a legislated 'right'. Copyleft is - in essence - an appeal to the (moral) conscience of others to utilize the creative of work of another in an ethical way, and consider voluntary remuneration of its creator. (I know the 'remuneration' part has nothing specifically to do with copyleft, but it is nevertheless an implicit aspect of the entire thought system from which copyleft arose.) On remumerating open-source authors: It is certainly not fair that musicians, artists, programmers, writers, and other producers of creative works and inventions find it so difficult to receive appropriate remuneration for their efforts - let alone be able to make a livelihood from them. It is an utter travesty that so many people will think nothing of spending $25 for a steak dinner, or hundreds for a night on the town, yet balk at spending $15 - $25 for an independently produced CD or an open-source/independently developed software program - the former providing only a transitory diversion - the latter providing a source of lasting enjoyment, or possibly a means to pursue one's own creative work or empower them in the pursuit of their own livelihood. (And yet many of these same people think a large corporation is completely justified in charging hundreds or thousands for a proprietary program.) These attitudes are symptomatic of deep pathologies, imbalances and inequities within modern industrial society, and will require major socio-economic revolution - not to mention evolution - to remedy. When people are deprived of a decent living wage, and on top of that, are compelled to spend so much of what they do make in the form of taxes, compulsory insurance, and other obligatory expenses not of their own choosing - they are understandably reluctant to voluntarily part with the little that remains to them. This has devalued the worth of artistic creation (and I include software and invention in this category). If people were not forced to spend so much of their money against their will on things they do not value, they would be far more able and willing - anxious, in fact - to spend it supporting the things they *do* appreciate and value. And in my view, this is precisely why the continuance of the open-source revolution is so important, regardless of whether people are making money off their creations, or the products are viewed as equal in quality to proprietary ones. The open-source movement, along with the blogosphere and other innovative new forms of social networking and collaboration, are critical elements of the social revolution in progress which will create a new social order - perhaps a true 'global village' - as opposed to a global plantation - holding the potential to remedy the many social inequities which the present one imposes. There is indeed a clash of cultures, of civilizations and values, playing out in our times, and it is up to each of us to exercise our free-will to choose what kind of future we wish to participate in creating and being a part of. For myself, I have already made that choice, and have no doubt as to the ultimate outcome - it is only a matter of time. Pax, Maluvia

19 years, 1 month

Re: [linux-audio-user] (no subject)

by Sampo Savolainen

Quoting Ismael Valladolid Torres <ivalladt(a)punkass.com>: > I run the command below and it works, it plays the wave file: > > $ aplay -D default shared/testing.wav > Playing WAVE 'shared/testing.wav' : Signed 16 bit Little Endian, Rate > 11025 Hz, Mono > > However the command below fails: > > $ aplay -D hw:0,0 shared/testing.wav > Playing WAVE 'shared/testing.wav' : Signed 16 bit Little Endian, Rate > 11025 Hz, Mono > aplay: set_params:901: Channels count non available > > I thought it was posible to select audio channels this way using > aplay. No .asoundrc here. Any ideas? your system probably has a global /etc/asound.conf which maps default to a plughw device of some sort. That way alsa converts the mono 11025hz signal to something your soundcard is capable of playing. With hw:x,y you can select the hardware (hw) device (x) and subdevice (y). It depends on your configuration which number each device has, and it depends on your hardware what subdevices each device has. Subdevices are _not_ channels. Sampo

19 years, 1 month

[linux-audio-user] Playing WAVE, was Re: (no subject)

by Ismael Valladolid Torres

Giuliano Pochini escribe: > > > On Wed, 22 Feb 2006, Ismael Valladolid Torres wrote: > > > $ aplay -D hw:0,0 shared/testing.wav > > Playing WAVE 'shared/testing.wav' : Signed 16 bit Little Endian, Rate 11025 Hz, Mono > > aplay: set_params:901: Channels count non available > > > > I thought it was posible to select audio channels this way using > > aplay. No .asoundrc here. Any ideas? > > Try: > > aplay -v -Dplughw:0,0 shared/testing.wav > > This one works. What does "plug" mean here? Cordially, Ismael -- mí, myself et moi http://lamediahostia.blogspot.com/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/ivalladt/

19 years, 1 month

[linux-audio-user] muse - watchdog fatal error

by emanuele ..:: www.rumoridifondo.com ::..

hi all, i would likd to try "Muse" on my mandriva linux. so i've installed thac's rpm. but i got a problem. i launch the application and it starts, but after a couple of seconds it crashes. so i've run it from terminal and i see this: -------------- [bobo@localhost ~]$ muse no locale <muse_it_IT> in </usr/share/muse/locale> fatal error: open /dev/rtc failed: No such file or directory MusE:readConfiguration(): unknown tag midiInputDevice MusE:readConfiguration(): unknown tag midiInputChannel MusE:readConfiguration(): unknown tag midiRecordType MusE:readConfiguration(): unknown tag midiThruType MusE:readConfiguration(): unknown tag midiFilterCtrl1 MusE:readConfiguration(): unknown tag midiFilterCtrl2 MusE:readConfiguration(): unknown tag midiFilterCtrl3 MusE:readConfiguration(): unknown tag midiFilterCtrl4 MusE:readConfiguration(): unknown tag txSyncPort MusE:readConfiguration(): unknown tag rxSyncPort MusE:readConfiguration(): unknown tag mixerVisible MusE:readConfiguration(): unknown tag sequencer MusE:readConfiguration(): unknown tag drumedit MusE:readConfiguration(): unknown tag pianoroll MusE:readConfiguration(): unknown tag masteredit MusE:readConfiguration(): unknown tag waveedit MusE:Song: unknown tag automation MusE:Song: unknown tag type MusE:Song: unknown tag follow MusE:Song: unknown tag drummap MusE: WatchDog: fatal error, realtime task timeout (0,258-3) - stopping all services watchdog timeout [bobo@localhost ~]$ ------------------------------------ what is "/dev/rtc" (3rd line) and "watchdog"? i'm using jack in realtime mode, kernel multimedia (2.6.12-12.mm.1mdk) and the audio group. thank you for your help. bye emanuele

19 years, 1 month

[linux-audio-user] Re: Re: Free Software vs. Open Source: Where do *you* stand?

by olivier

>It sounds like the system works: >"A World Trade Organization agreement reached in 2003 >allows countries >facing a public health emergency to issue "compulsory >licenses" to >manufacture generic versions of patented drugs." >Lee hmmm , I think that at the beginning , the brasil and others africans countries, didn't ask for any permissions for doing this drugs, and break the patents laws ... this link is probably more explicit : http://www.dowjonesnews.com/sample/samplestory.asp?StoryID=2005070501030035… I think this is very complicated, because of course it's not an easy way to make research without any investment, and in that point the patent is probably good for the dynamic of creation, but in an other point , if you have the solution for keep alive somebody, (or millions of people...) and you don't do it , especially for a problem about money, and if for this reason they die, you could be assimilated as a criminal ... it's not easy to say what is right and what is wrong, that's the same in intellectual property, and we'll probably need, to adapt the intelectual property and patents laws to the evolutions, I would say that we have some responsability, and we can't do only what we want, even with what we create, sorry for the noise ... ___________________________________________________________________________ Nouveau : téléphonez moins cher avec Yahoo! Messenger ! Découvez les tarifs exceptionnels pour appeler la France et l'international. Téléchargez sur http://fr.messenger.yahoo.com

19 years, 1 month

[linux-audio-user] Awkward Silence

by Vaughan Famularo

Hi again I am wondering if any of you may be interested in having a listen to my sons (3 of them) band? named Awkward Silence They are really packing out their LIVE gigs, and last week were approached by an independant Aussie label. AND today, were just offered a deal by a New York based management company, so presently the boys are pretty pumped. If you are interested in having a listen, you can hear their songs at http://www.myspace.com/awkwardsilence Be cool but more importantly, be awkward Let me know what you think Peppercorn

19 years, 1 month

← Newer
1
...
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
...
27
Older →

Jump to page:

2025

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-user February 2006