While not directly a linux related question,
I am wondering about ultimately using linux
tools for the possible solution, so:
I get the feeling at times, when getting music
from torrents and such, that not all files
claiming to be flac are actually lossless.
It seems that sometimes folks will take an
mp3, reencode it in flac and distribute the
Now the question is whether it is possible to analyze an
audio file encoded in a lossless format and
determine if it existed as a lossy file in a
Any insight is appreciated.
To refine the question a bit;
Older laptops in this case... 1.6ghz - 2.2ghz dual core 64bit processors and their rough equivalents, running say, current KDE4 Ubuntu like environment, vs flux/blackbox <add ur choice here>, etc. anyone got any real results?
Like, I want to record at 128/2 ... Can I run a softsynth or Jammin on top of a few live plugins running simultaneously kind of difference or ... The point I'm subtly pointing toward... Does the lightweight WM or DT really give me anymore power to do something useful??
The only user difference in experience, for the most part that I see, is losing the automated bells n kazoo's tht heavy desktops handle. Of course there's more but I'm just curious about case examples with something to back them up & not be centered wholly on opinion.
I wanted to use some VST plugin over network.
I am trying to get netjack running.
My Master is Linux Mint 17 x86_64 (192.168.0.10) running jackdmp 1.9.10.
My Slave is a Windows 7 64Bit (192.168.0.30) running jackdmp 1.9.10.
With jack_netsource running on the Linux Master, nothing happend at all.
Neither with running jackd -dnet nor with jackd -dnetone on the Windows
With jack_net_master running on the Linux Master, I get the following
error: "NetJack master can not be opened", when I execute the following
command on the Windows slave: jackd.exe -R -S -d net -P8 -C8.
In this scenario I capture the following UDP datagram with Wireshark:
192.168.0.30 188.8.131.52 UDP 686 Source port: igrid
Destination port: igrid.
What I found with goioglew, was not helpful yet.
Has anyone some ideas, advice or web source?
> Message: 15
> Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2014 23:41:38 -0400
> From: Paul Davis <paul(a)linuxaudiosystems.com>
> On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 9:22 PM, Philipp ?berbacher <murks(a)tuxfamily.org>
>> If he really did violate the license then this has to be sorted out. He
>> should probably also use some other name to rule out confusions such as
>> the one you just experienced.
> he used a different name than any Fons had used. his name did still
> the four letters "zita".
Yes, the project name was different, but I think the relevant point was
that all the original copyright headers that Fons had used were not
modified to indicate that the original code had been change.
The "AUTHORS" file still only had Fons's name and contact information,
which is presumably why the user mentioned originally sent email to Fons
and not to JeffG, since Jeff had not left any kind of identifying
information in the project to indicate that even though Fons had
originated some of the code, Fons was not actually involved with that
project at all.
In that case lack of attribution is a kind of mis-attribution, and I think
must be the reason that section 2.a) of the GPLv2 exists.
> when people like jeffg (who even after repeated explanations continue to
> spout nonsense about how block structured audio processing on Linux or any
> other general purpose OS actually works) take GPL'ed code and fail to
> interact in any way with the original author, they are not violating the
> letter of the GPL but they are violating a big part of its "real world
Actually I think JeffG was explicitly violating section 2.a).
Do you disagree based on the degree to which the original code was
modified, that it no longer constituted "modified files" but were instead
new files which were not subject to this clause?
"a) You must cause the modified files to carry prominent notices stating
that you changed the files and the date of any change."
If they were that new then they should not have included the copyright
header with Fons's name.
(Apologies for the new few messages messing up the message identifiers, I
am currently subscribed to the digest.)
> From: Will Godfrey <willgodfrey(a)musically.me.uk>
> Subject: Re: [LAU] zitaretuner
> Message-ID: <20141010231842.1e9052fb@debian>
> Seems it's [zitaretuner SourceForge project] already been removed.
I hope I did not overstep any boundaries, but on Friday (10 October) I had
sent a copy of the LAU message from Fons to JeffG via the SourceForge
messaging facility. I received no reply but perhaps JeffG took the
project down as a (hopefully) good faith gesture that he had intended no
offense, and made a mistake through ignorance or carelessness.
Since the message was posted fairly publicly by Fons, I did not think it
would be any kind of breach of trust to forward on the message. Someone
please let me know if I was mistaken in that regard.
On 10/10/2014 05:14 PM, Wayne DePrince Jr. wrote:
> very cool, nice beat, love the melodies starting @1:03 and 2:51, and the
> "counter melody" @4:17. might be interesting to have the song change a
> bit more, perhaps tempo-wise, maybe go somewhere else musically? but
> overall i really am enjoying it.
> thanks for sharing.
Thanks for listening!
IEM Music Residency Program 2015 - Call for Applications
(sorry for x-posting - please distribute)
The Institute of Electronic Music and Acoustics (IEM) in Graz, Austria
is happy to announce its new Music Residency program and invites
applications from composers/sound artists for the 2015 edition.
The Residency is aimed at individuals wishing to pursue projects in
performance, composition, installation and sound art, development of
tools for art production and related areas.
Duration of residency: 5 months
Start date: March 1st 2015 (negotiable)
Monthly salary: Approx. EUR 1100 (net)
APPLICATION DEADLINE: 1st of December 2014 23:59 CEST
The Institute of Electronic Music and Acoustics is a department of the
University of Music and Performing Arts Graz and was founded in 1965. An
internationally well renowned institution in its field, it currently
holds a staff of more than 25 members. IEM offers education to students
in composition and computer music, sound engineering, contemporary music
performance and musicology. It is well connected to the University of
Technology as well as to the University of Graz through two joint study
The artwork produced at IEM is released through the Institute's own
OpenCUBE and Signale concert series, as well as through various
collaborations with international artists and institutions.
IEM's main activities are centered around the three main research areas
Signal Processing and Acoustics
and contributions to these, or any other related field of relevance, are
invited for the Music Residency program.
What we expect from applicants:
- An outstanding project proposal that adds new perspectives to the
Institute's activities and resonates well with the interests of IEM.
- The successful applicant will work on-site in Graz for the major part
of the Residency.
- Willingness to exchange and share ideas, knowledge and results with
IEM staff members and students and engage in scholarly discussion.
- The ability to work independently within the Institute.
- A dissemination strategy as part of the project proposal that ensures
the publication of the work, or documentation thereof, in a suitable
format. This could be achieved for example through the release of media,
journal or conference publication, a project website or other means that
help to preserve the knowledge gained through the Music Residency and
make it available to the public.
What we offer to the successful applicant:
- Support in artistic production and arts-based research
- Exchange with competent and experienced staff members
- shared office space for the entire period and access to studios
including the CUBE which has a 24-channel loudspeaker system;
- Contact with peers from similar or other disciplines
- Infrastructure (electroacoustic music studios, icosahedral loudspeaker
array, motion capture technology)
- Concert and presentation facilities (CUBE 24 channel loudspeaker
- Existing networks with local/international partners
- We provide a monthly salary of approx. EUR 1100 net per month in
addition to health and accident insurance.
An application form providing more information is available at
Feel free to contact residency(a)iem.at if you have any questions.
Today I got an email of a user asking me to help him make a plugin
called 'zitaretuner' work. I never wrote such a plugin, and I didn't
even know it existed. So I can't help this user.
Of course this made me curious, and I managed to get a copy of
the source code of this lv2 plugin. And I wasn't very amused.
As expected it's based on zita-at1, and again a complete disaster.
The DSP code of zita-at1 is written as a neat self-contained C++
class with a very clean interface, and this is done explicitly to
make it re-usable.
But instead of re-using it, the author of the plugin decided to
rewrite it in C, and combine it in the same source file with parts
of libzitaresampler (instead of using that as a library as it is
meant to), and with whatever is required to turn it into an lv2.
The whole thing is just a single source file.
The same author (who is know only as 'jg') didn't bother to add
a decent GUI, relying on the plugin host to create one. That means
for example that the note selection buttons (which also double as
'current note' indicators in zita-at1), are replaced by faders.
Only $GOD knows what they are supposed to control.
And as a final topping on the cake, that whole crappy thing is
presented as if I were the author of it all. No mention at all
that things have been modified, and by whom or why. This alone
is a clear violation of the license under which zita-at1 was
released. And whoever did it doesn't even have the courage to
I've complained about this sort of thing before, and this time
I'm really pissed. So let one thing be clear: I will never again
release any code under a license that allows this sort of thing
A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia.
It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris
and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow)
I am in a bit of a time-bind and am wondering if anyone could help me
with this. Namely, I am trying to cobble a sftp system where conference
participants may want to upload their proposed submissions and once they
are uploaded that they are unable to delete their own or anyone else's
submission. Going with commercial solutions is not an option.
So, what I did so far is change /etc/ssh/sshd_config so that sftp
chroots said user's home dir, and prevents access via ssh. I also
created a sftponly group and added the user to it. I adjusted home dir
permissions and created a subfolder "submissions" where users can submit
their projects. Finally, I added umask to strip permissions from
So, the /etc/ssh/sshd_config has the following entry
Match Group sftponly
ForceCommand internal-sftp -u 0222
So, everything works, except no matter what permissions assign via
umask, even if I change ownership manually via a different ssh user
session, sftp client can still erase the file. How is this possible? And
more importantly, how can one circumvent that? And perhaps most
importantly is there an easier way to do this?
Below are permissions of folders in question:
drwxr-xr-x 3 root USER 4096 Oct 10 15:21 .
drwxr-xr-x 36 root root 4096 Oct 7 12:16 ..
drwxr-xr-x 2 USER sftponly 4096 Oct 10 19:39 submissions
Any idea how this can be fixed?
Ivica Ico Bukvic, D.M.A.
ICAT Senior Fellow
School of Performing Arts – 0141
Blacksburg, VA 24061