20 Jul
2003
20 Jul
'03
11:12 a.m.
Greetings
I've got just back on this list after a year of lurking and learning more
Linux. The audio software is developing amazingly, so I finally took the
plunge and ordered an RME Hammerfall DSP Digiface and a couple of Frontier
Tango24 A/D convertors, when I noticed a bargain at Turnkey in London (UK).
So I'll at last be entering a world of sound, to edit a few years worth of
DAT tapes, instead of sitting here in silence listening to my PC fans (well,
my CD player too!).
I'm running Debian on a few Pentium III 450MHz machines I've got here; I'd
been planning to get a dual Athlon system but decided to wait (forever? :)
until they are cool enough to run quietly. For the time being I just need
to edit stereo and 4-track recordings, so 450MHz should do.
I really welcome the advice you guys have poured into this list, and am
looking forward to joining in the banter, instead of sitting on the fence.
Malcolm Smith
http://www.canopus22.demon.co.uk/
21 Jul
21 Jul
3:33 p.m.
Hello. Welcome. I'm fairly new here too but have already got some great
advice and now my system is runing well and performing great.
If you are just doing simple editing, I would highly recommend Audacity.
It doesn't need all the low-latency stuff to get going and can do
multitrack with ALSA support. Should be fine for 4 tracks.
-l[e^2]
------------------------------
http://www.fallingforward.net/
people experimenting with music, art and technology
On Sun, 20 Jul 2003, Mr. Spock wrote:
Greetings
I've got just back on this list after a year of lurking and learning more
Linux. The audio software is developing amazingly, so I finally took the
plunge and ordered an RME Hammerfall DSP Digiface and a couple of Frontier
Tango24 A/D convertors, when I noticed a bargain at Turnkey in London (UK).
So I'll at last be entering a world of sound, to edit a few years worth of
DAT tapes, instead of sitting here in silence listening to my PC fans (well,
my CD player too!).
I'm running Debian on a few Pentium III 450MHz machines I've got here; I'd
been planning to get a dual Athlon system but decided to wait (forever? :)
until they are cool enough to run quietly. For the time being I just need
to edit stereo and 4-track recordings, so 450MHz should do.
I really welcome the advice you guys have poured into this list, and am
looking forward to joining in the banter, instead of sitting on the fence.
Malcolm Smith
http://www.canopus22.demon.co.uk/
9:33 p.m.
On Sunday 20 July 2003 08:04 am, Mr. Spock wrote:
I've got just back on this list after a year of
lurking and learning more
Linux. The audio software is developing amazingly, so I finally took the
plunge and ordered an RME Hammerfall DSP Digiface and a couple of Frontier
Tango24 A/D convertors, when I noticed a bargain at Turnkey in London (UK).
Awesome.
So I'll at last be entering a world of sound, to
edit a few years worth of
DAT tapes, instead of sitting here in silence listening to my PC fans
(well, my CD player too!).
Awesome.
I'm running Debian on a few Pentium III 450MHz
machines I've got here; I'd
been planning to get a dual Athlon system but decided to wait (forever? :)
until they are cool enough to run quietly. For the time being I just need
to edit stereo and 4-track recordings, so 450MHz should do.
Here is where I _highley_ recommend the program 'sweep'. No offense to the
authors of audacity, but I just find it to be a very clunky program to use.
Sweep is very very similar to the program 'soundforge' on win32. It has
recently been jackified thanks to Torbin Hohn (thanks Torbin!). You have to
download his patches to sweep which you can find on the linux-audio-dev
mailing list. Anyway, here is the link to sweep:
http://www.metadecks.org/software/sweep/
Have fun!
--
Levi Burton
http://www.puresimplicity.net/~ldb/
9:45 p.m.
On Monday 21 July 2003 06:19 pm, Levi Burton wrote:
Here is where I _highley_ recommend the program
'sweep'. No offense to the
authors of audacity, but I just find it to be a very clunky program to use.
Sweep is very very similar to the program 'soundforge' on win32. It has
recently been jackified thanks to Torbin Hohn (thanks Torbin!). You have
to download his patches to sweep which you can find on the linux-audio-dev
mailing list. Anyway, here is the link to sweep:
Oops! I meant Torben Hohn, not Torbin Hohn. Sorry Torben!
--
Levi Burton
http://www.puresimplicity.net/~ldb/
22 Jul
22 Jul
12:47 p.m.
On Mon, Jul 21, 2003 at 06:31:28PM -0500, Levi Burton wrote:
On Monday 21 July 2003 06:19 pm, Levi Burton wrote:
no problem :)
i am used to that... since you probably pronounce it like torbin :)
--
torben Hohn
http://galan.sourceforge.net -- The graphical Audio language
Here is where I _highley_ recommend the program
'sweep'. No offense to the
authors of audacity, but I just find it to be a very clunky program to use.
Sweep is very very similar to the program 'soundforge' on win32. It has
recently been jackified thanks to Torbin Hohn (thanks Torbin!). You have
to download his patches to sweep which you can find on the linux-audio-dev
mailing list. Anyway, here is the link to sweep:
Oops! I meant Torben Hohn, not Torbin Hohn. Sorry Torben! 
1:52 a.m.
Here is where I _highley_ recommend the program
'sweep'. No offense to the
authors of audacity, but I just find it to be a very clunky program to use.
Sweep is very very similar to the program 'soundforge' on win32. It has
recently been jackified thanks to Torbin Hohn (thanks Torbin!). You have to
download his patches to sweep which you can find on the linux-audio-dev
mailing list. Anyway, here is the link to sweep:
Sweep has a great interface, but it still has one significant
downside: all the audio is loaded into memory. This prevents
the effective editing of large soundfiles or sessions unless you
have a ton of memory (or it will swap all over you). For smaller
files, like a single stereo song, it works great.
jlc
2:04 a.m.
On Monday 21 July 2003 10:38 pm, Jesse Chappell wrote:
[...]
Sweep has a great interface, but it still has one
significant
downside: all the audio is loaded into memory. This prevents
the effective editing of large soundfiles or sessions unless you
have a ton of memory (or it will swap all over you). For smaller
files, like a single stereo song, it works great.
I didnt know this. Thanks for the clarification of what sweep can do. I had
only been using it for short peices of sound.
--
Levi Burton
http://www.puresimplicity.net/~ldb/
6 a.m.
On Mon, Jul 21, 2003 at 11:38:08PM -0400, Jesse Chappell wrote:
Sweep has a great interface, but it still has one
significant
downside: all the audio is loaded into memory. This prevents
the effective editing of large soundfiles or sessions unless you
have a ton of memory (or it will swap all over you).
Is there a significant difference between having (a) the audio editing
program or (b) the memory manager decide what to keep in physical memory
and what to swap to disk?
--
Anahata
anahata(a)treewind.co.uk Tel: 01638 720444
http://www.treewind.co.uk Mob: 07976 263827
6:55 a.m.
On Tue, Jul 22, 2003 at 08:48:00AM +0100, Anahata wrote:
On Mon, Jul 21, 2003 at 11:38:08PM -0400, Jesse
Chappell wrote:
Yes. Both from a practical p.o.v. and theoretical. Dominic (one of the
authors of audacity) has a paper about it in Computer Music Journal 26(2)
pp 62--76.
Try loading a GB file into sweep and audacity and you will see the
difference immediatly.
- Steve
Sweep has a great interface, but it still has one
significant
downside: all the audio is loaded into memory. This prevents
the effective editing of large soundfiles or sessions unless you
have a ton of memory (or it will swap all over you).
Is there a significant difference between having (a) the audio editing
program or (b) the memory manager decide what to keep in physical memory
and what to swap to disk?
7 a.m.
On Tuesday 22 July 2003 02:48 am, Anahata wrote:
[...]
Is there a significant difference between having (a)
the audio editing
program or (b) the memory manager decide what to keep in physical memory
and what to swap to disk?
Well, unless I am mistaken, a user with normal privileges (non-root) cannot
disable paging of memory (using mlock() stuff). So, im not exactly sure what
sweep does to gaurantee it is only using physical memory, if that is indeed
what it is doing. Perhaps the sweep author can shed some light on what is
going on.
So yes, as a root user there is definitly a significant difference in how
memory is managed if the program utilizes the mlock() system call. It is
garaunteed a range of memory will not be swapped out to disk.
As a non-root user, I do not believe there is anyway to know what is currently
swapped to disk and what is not, so the question you ask then becomes moot.
If I am mistaken im sure someone will point it out =)
--
Levi Burton
http://www.puresimplicity.net/~ldb/
23 Jul
23 Jul
6:07 p.m.
On Tuesday, July 22, 2003, at 03:48 AM, Anahata wrote:
On Mon, Jul 21, 2003 at 11:38:08PM -0400, Jesse
Chappell wrote:
Yes. I believe Audacity only loads the graphical waveform view into RAM
and the rest is streamed from disk. Dominic
Mazonni (audacity's lead developer) explained the exact algorithm once
on the dev list, ending the sentence with "...and a little black magic"
so I assume the algorithm is a bit complicated.
I have opened and worked on files over two hours long in Audacity.
-lee
Sweep has a great interface, but it still has one
significant
downside: all the audio is loaded into memory. This prevents
the effective editing of large soundfiles or sessions unless you
have a ton of memory (or it will swap all over you).
Is there a significant difference between having (a) the audio editing
program or (b) the memory manager decide what to keep in physical
memory
and what to swap to disk? 
22 Jul
22 Jul
7:27 a.m.
Sweep has a great interface, but it still has one
significant
downside: all the audio is loaded into memory. This prevents
the effective editing of large soundfiles or sessions unless you
have a ton of memory (or it will swap all over you).
I wouldn't regard this as a downside - it's just a consequence of the
in-RAM design. Sweep and Audacity (which is a hard disk recorder)
complement each other very well.
You wouldn't use Audacity for real-time scratching effects, or
scrubbing through a file to find an edit point by ear. You wouldn't
use Sweep for recording four channels of 32-bit float audio for half
an hour or longer. But I've done these things with the other program,
with great sucess.
A killer feature of free software is that you don't have to choose a
single proprietary 'solution', which will usually be a design
compromise - you get to use both Sweep and Audacity, and many other
programs, depending on what you need at that moment.
Cheers
Daniel
1:56 p.m.
Daniel James wrote on Tue, 22-Jul-2003:
This is a good point, I didn't really mean it as a deficiency, just
a usage caveat.
If Conrad does update it to stream from disk, he might
consider it an option in addition to the current practice (so no usage advantages
are compromised).
jlc
Sweep has a
great interface, but it still has one significant
downside: all the audio is loaded into memory. This prevents
the effective editing of large soundfiles or sessions unless you
have a ton of memory (or it will swap all over you).
I wouldn't regard this as a downside - it's just a consequence of the
in-RAM design. Sweep and Audacity (which is a hard disk recorder)
complement each other very well.
You wouldn't use Audacity for real-time scratching effects, or
scrubbing through a file to find an edit point by ear. You wouldn't
use Sweep for recording four channels of 32-bit float audio for half
an hour or longer. But I've done these things with the other program,
with great sucess.
A killer feature of free software is that you don't have to choose a
single proprietary 'solution', which will usually be a design
compromise - you get to use both Sweep and Audacity, and many other
programs, depending on what you need at that moment. 
7:39 a.m.
On Mon, 21 Jul 2003 23:38:08 -0400
Jesse Chappell <jesse(a)essej.net> wrote:
Sweep has a great interface, but it still has one
significant
downside: all the audio is loaded into memory. This prevents
the effective editing of large soundfiles or sessions unless you
have a ton of memory (or it will swap all over you). For smaller
files, like a single stereo song, it works great.
Conrad (Sweep author) is working on fixing this, but is currently
flimming around Europe attending Linux conferences etc.
Erik
--
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
Erik de Castro Lopo nospam(a)mega-nerd.com (Yes it's valid)
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
"We reject kings, presidents, and voting. We believe in rough
consensus and running code." -- Dave Clark (IETF 1992)
5:52 a.m.
On Mon, Jul 21, 2003 at 06:19:18PM -0500, Levi Burton wrote:
Here is where I _highley_ recommend the program
'sweep'.
Yes!!! Nice site - and I want sweep!
I think it has changed a lot since I first heard of it, some years ago.
--
Anahata
anahata(a)treewind.co.uk Tel: 01638 720444
http://www.treewind.co.uk Mob: 07976 263827
7590
days inactive
7593
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
14 comments
9 participants
participants (9)
-
Anahata -
Daniel James -
Erik de Castro Lopo -
Jesse Chappell -
Lee Azzarello -
Levi Burton -
Mr. Spock -
Steve Harris -
torbenh＠gmx.de