This is Steinway_IMIS soundfont, version 2.2.
This version fixes the issue with loops. I hope this is the good one
and there are no more remaining major bugs.
Marcos is a little busy right now, so he asked me to make this fix. He
is thinking to make other improvements, so expect more updates soon.
Does anyone know of a good plugin that will generate subharmonics?
I would like to put a little more low frequency "oomph" into my bass
track. Preferrable LADSPA, but VST would work, too.
Thanks for any help!
Research tells me that QSynth seems to be the only currently
available/usable GUI for FluidSynth, but I get big xruns whenever I try and
use it. FluidSynth itself doesn't cause me problems (I know because I'm able
to use the FluidSynth-DSSI plugin fine in Rosegarden etc). The problem is
that I want to use FluidSynth with Ardour3, but Ardour3 doesn't support DSSI
plugins yet. So the only solution I have is to find a standalone interface
for FluidSynth and then to link up using Jack. I looked at the old GUI
'FluidGUI' but it seems to be so old that it won't properly install on
recent versions of Ubuntu.
So does anyone know of:
1) A GUI for FluidSynth other than QSynth and FluidGUI?... or
2) An application other than the above 2 which would allow me to load
Thanks in advance.
I found this old discussion about the Zoom R16 in the archive of LAU.
Strangely, in that archive there is a missing reply from Mr. Brett McCoy.
(You can find the missing one a the bottom of this archive:
Mr. McCoy claims to have enabled the Zoom R8 (yes, there is quite a
difference between r16 and r8) as a multi-input soundcard for ardour and
also as a control surface in 12.04 64bits.
There is no information as to which driver is being in use in his post. And
searching the web only leads me to various WIP to get the R16 running on
My question is, has anyone got any news about this device and a possible
Specifically to Mr. Brett McCoy: what driver did you use to make jack aware
of your r8?
Thank full for any hints, yours,
Some old posts exist about the UAC2 support for the Sound Devices USBPre2 but some problem remains.
The current status is that this sound card is supported as a USB 1.1 card in high-speed mode.
But this card is not seen as a Usb Audio Class 2 on Linux. On Mac OS X this card is recognized as UAC2.
My principal problem is that the "device descriptor" provided by the card is always a USB1.1 class
There is two modes of boot for the card (pressing the "1" button, the card is in full speed mode, without pressing in UAC2 mode)
There is only one difference between these two modes in the lsusb -v : the "bInterval" go to 4 from 1.
This is already view by Clemens on:
In this another post, we can seen:
Bernardo Barros wrote:
> Ok, I reconnected without pressing "1".
> Bus 002 Device 002: ID 0926:0202
> Device Descriptor:
> bNumConfigurations 2
Strange, I have never 2 on bNumConfigurations ! Somebody can test it on its card ?
This is perhaps my problem, my card only provides one "Configuration Descriptor".
The second one is certainly the UAC2 "Configuration Descriptor".
The lsusb without 1 pressed : http://pastebin.com/8yjjASv7
The lsusb with 1 pressed : http://pastebin.com/pGFdjR4K
The usbmon trace of the insertion of the usbpre2 (without "1") : http://pastebin.com/pySC4Age
This sound card is great, it is very disappointing to not be able to used it with all functionnalities.
I search help in order to debug this problem.
I am devlopper, I can test kernel patches without problem.
Thank for any idea (or patch).
QMidiArp 0.5.2 has just seen the light of the day. It brings mainly
two improvements. One is a comeback, that of tempo changes on the fly,
and that now includes also tempo changes of a potential Jack Transport
master. Also the Jack Transport starting position is finally taken into
account, so that QMidiArp should be in sync also when starting the
transport master not at zero.
The second one is Non Session Manager support, mainly thanks to the work done by Roy Vegard Ovesen!
Note that for compiling in NSM support you will now need liblo as dependency.
Enjoy, and enjoy LAC in Graz this year
QMidiArp is an advanced MIDI arpeggiator, programmable step sequencer and LFO.
Everything is on
o Tempo changes are again possible while running, both manually or by
a Jack Transport Master
o Jack Transport position is now taken into account when starting,
QMidiArp used to start always at zero
o Muting and sequencer parameter changes can be deferred to pattern
end using a new toolbutton
o Modules in the Global Storage window have mute/defer buttons
o Global Storage location switches can be set to affect only the pattern
o Non Session Manager support with "switch" capability (thanks to
Roy Vegard Ovesen)
o NSM support requires liblo development headers (liblo-dev package)
Kevin Utter wrote:
>> Please show the output of "lsusb -v" for this device.
> Its listed here.
That was without "-v".
Please run "lsusb -v -d 0582:0120".
>> If you know how to compile your own kernel ...
> I'm willing to learn, but just haven't done this yet.
How to do this depends on the distribution.
>> If the Octa-Capture is similar to the Quad-Capture, then basic playback
>> and capture will work, but not any front-panel controls, which might
>> make it unusable.
> Meaning it would disable the front-panel controls?
That is what happens with the Quad-Capture.
> My question/answer: "How much are you willing to do to make it happen?"
Well I'm not exactly sure anymore to be honest, I didn't think my
message would start such a rant!
But after reading all the answered, two things seem to stand out:
1. A lot of the FOSS music software are not for the general public. I
wouldn't agree myself (I mean, Ardour, Hydrogen or Yoshimi are as
straight forward as a music software can be)... And for that, nothing
much I/we can do but participate to the code (which I do when I can),
make donations (which I do every year), provide feedback, provide bug
reports, etc, etc, etc...
And obvisouly use the software and produce some tunes! Which I do too:
(Although now I realise that nowhere I say that it's completely
recorded/produced with only FOSS softwares!)
2. More interrestingly, the "appeal to famous artists" didn't seem to
be well received... What seems to come out though is that although the
FOSS community seems to be good to produce software, we don't seem to
be good at advertising it :)
- Ardour has...49 followers on facebook... Nothing on the wall...
- Hydrogen...94...and one entry on the wall...
- Couldn't find a # tag for any of these on Twitter...
I know I know, we are not advertisers, we are developers!
But what if a small group of us (and yeah, including me :)) would do that?
How do we go about that? We have loads of website/tools to share code
and software (sourceforge, svn, git, etc..), but none to organise
ourself into a community to create some kind of organised campagn of
advertisement on social networks (or other tools)!
What I have in mind is what was done by ThisOneIsOnUs... what they did
for their production is exacty what we do every day for FOSS
> -Mike Mazarick
> PS - sorry for the top posting, but I thought it better in this instance
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Aurélien Leblond [mailto:email@example.com]
>> Sent: Monday, August 01, 2011 11:07 AM
>> To: linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
>> Subject: [LAU] An appeal to famous artists?
>> I'm writing this post because of a few experiences I had over the
>> years into world of amateur music production (but I'm sure it does
>> applies to every artistic domains).
>> I'm an amateur musician and a Linux enthusiast, and even though I work
>> as a developer, my professional activity doesn't directly have
>> anything to do with both these
>> domains (although in the case of Linux this is quite a shame, but
>> that's another subject). But one thing I am surrounded with at work is
>> fellow musicians.
>> I have setup a pretty nice home studio in my flat: electronic drumkit,
>> alright USB sound-card, good quality speakers, electric guitar, pretty
>> big guitar fx board, USB
>> keyboard with a lot of knobs, few synthesizers and......a laptop
>> running Ubuntu, Ardour, Hydrogen, AlsaModularSynth, Yoshimi, LV2, etc,
>> etc and etc...
>> A few of these colleagues came to my place to play music, and all of
>> them were impressed by the level of investment, and invariably the
>> first question that comes
>> up is the price of all the hardware and software... So when I
>> explained that I gathered the hardware over the last few years and
>> that the software is free, I always get
>> that little wink and smile:
>> - “haaaa 'free'? Bittorent yeah?”
>> - “no no no...not THAT free... I'm using Linux, and I'm trying to make
>> a point of using only free software in my music production... Actually
>> it's not free as you think it is,
>> I do try to make some donations every year, blablabla...”
>> And invariably, I get “the look” (you all know which one I'm talking
>> As the sessions go on and my colleagues see the different software in
>> actions, they always start to make the comparison with what they use
>> in other OS: “Wouah I
>> can't do that with my drum machine! And this software Ardour is pretty
>> cool, and I really like the sound of this synthesizer! What is it?
>> AlsaModularMix you say?
>> Well it looks weird but I like it!”...
>> Then as the conversation goes on on gears and software, it generally
>> goes like this “oh, I bought this synth because Trent Reznor from Nine
>> Inch Nails is using it
>> and I wanted to get that sound...”, “this guitar fx? Bought it because
>> the guys in Slayer are using it and I love” (yes all my mates and
>> myself are metal heads!).
>> So I started to think... And I thought a little bit more... All the
>> people I know in the music world, we always use references to known
>> artist: “Trent Reznor uses this,
>> The Edge uses that, Brian Eno has this synth, etc”. There is even a
>> website that list the gears used by famous guitar players.
>> I have a couple of friends back in my home country who are trying to
>> build up a recording studio... They work 100 hours a week recording
>> and promoting local bands,
>> they eat pasta because the money is tight.......but they spent I don't
>> know how much into brand new Macs and software licenses...
>> I can hear you from here already “WHY DID YOU NOT TELL THEM ABOUT
>> Well......I did:
>> - “Yeah RIGHT! Every known musicians use Macs! They are designed for
>> Really? Who decided that? Aaaaaaahhhhh yeah I forgot, Apple is very
>> good at advertisement... See that little illuminated apple at the back
>> of every of their laptops?
>> That sticks out well when Trent Reznor posts pictures of his studio,
>> or when you see pictures of ?uestLove on stage...
>> - “Linux and stuff... It's for free... It must sucks... I mean you
>> need loads of research and money to create the software to play
>> - “It's not stable enough...”
>> Ok, I give you that... But we have come a long way... And I bet that a
>> good Ubuntu setup without alpha or beta versions of any software would
>> be stable...
>> And obviously the user base on proprietary software is bigger, so more
>> testers, more feedbacks... But hey, look at my laptop, pretty stable
>> - “It's too complicated... with these command lines and all...”
>> Hmmm yes and no there... Yes setting up a Linux machine with a low
>> latency kernel is quite complicated... But remind me how much did you
>> spent to setup your
>> Mac? And yeah you are right, we used command lines in Linux... But YOU
>> don't have to! When was the last time you saw a Linux machine? Ah
>> yeah, when I
>> show you my Mandrake machine 10 years ago... Well we came a long way
>> since that time, you should check it again! I mean playing, recording
>> and producing
>> music on a computer IS a complicated business, whatever OS you use.
>> - “And when it doesn't work, who do I ask?”
>> Hmmmm, when Cubase doesn't work, what do you do? Oh yeah, you google
>> your issue and you browse around forums to find a solutions...
>> Actually when you have an issue with your mac in general, is it Apple
>> or a dude on some forums who gives you the solution?
>> So I thought a little bit more... In the world of artists (I thinking
>> here especially about music, but it is probably right in other
>> artistic domains), brands are created
>> because artists use them, no?
>> And SERIOUSLY, in the world of music, the Open Source world certainly
>> have brilliant tools! And the Open Source certainly has to speak to a
>> lot of artist if they
>> knew about it? The sense of freedom, the sense of sharing? Isn't it
>> what Bob Marley or Rage Against the Machine were singing about?
>> Trent Reznor (yes, I am a big fan) has been releasing music under
>> Creative Common licenses... He let the people decide how much they
>> wanted to pay for
>> some of his albums (remind you of something? Donations?). He let fans
>> record all the concerts of his last tour, let them mix it, cut it,
>> produce it, package it and
>> sale it (check out ThisOneIsOnUs). He even provided the tracks of some
>> songs for the fan to have fun and mix them differently... Surely a guy
>> like that would
>> understand the value of Free Software. And where there is one, there
>> might be others...
>> (Sorry for the long introduction but) What I am getting at is this:
>> Should we make an appeal to artists to produce something using only
>> Open Source software?
>> What do you guys think? Isn't it the best time to promulgate such a
>> message, with the social media and all? And if yes, what would be the
>> best way?
>> Or am I completely wrong? And there is something in the big picture I
>> didn't see?
I'm happy to announce OpenAV productions: http://openavproductions.com
OpenAV productions is a label under which I intend to release my
linux-audio software projects. The focus of the software is on the workflow
of creating live-electronic music and video.
The release system for OpenAV productions is one based on donations and
time, details are available on http://openavproductions.com/support
Sorcer is a wavetable synth, and is ready for release. Check out the
interface and demo reel on http://openavproductions.com/sorcer
Greetings from the LAC, -Harry
*Wrote this some time ago to the list, never got a reply. Now looking
through the archives, I don't see this mail at all. I did attach a file, so
maybe it was filtered.
This is why I am duplicating this.*
I notice that no Linux samplers seem to support wav file loop points. All
Windows DAWs that I have used support the format and there are a lot of
samples out there with perfect loop points which is very useful.
I have no idea whether this is part of the spec or not but these
looppoints have been used for more than 15 years, that's for sure,
of these sample collections have been around during tracking days. I did
find something on loops here: http://www.sonicspot.com/guide/wavefiles.html
But I think you, devs, know better than me anyway.
I think it would be great if LMMS, samplers like Petri-Foo would support
this, as this adds a lot of functionality. Many sample collections provide
perfect loops and it is tiresome to have to try to remake it by hand each
time, while in some software it is simply impossible at all.
What do you think?
ps: I can provide you with a sample example with loop points