4 Feb
2006
4 Feb
'06
4:57 p.m.
Hello audio users,
I'm working on JACK Rack 2 and would like to know how many of you are
using more than two channels and how important you consider more than
two.
Thanks,
Leslie
--
gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 0x52D70289
4 Feb
4 Feb
7:53 p.m.
On Sat, 2006-02-04 at 21:56 +0100, leslie.polzer(a)gmx.net wrote:
Hello audio users,
I'm working on JACK Rack 2 and would like to know how many of you are
using more than two channels and how important you consider more than
two.
I don't work with ambisonics, but some people might want to use the
ambisonics plugs in jack rack. They deal with 4 streams. With
ambisonics, you would probably want to have a different number of inputs
and outputs.
I have an idea to make better use of these plugins: what if in cases
where there are more than 2 streams, the ports would be represented in
the gui, and the connection model between those ports and the
inputs/outputs would be visualized and maybe even configurable.
I know of the issues with differentiating i/o's and how it's tricky to
make the perfect model. But in case of selecting a single model to deal
with the situation, it would be great that the gui would show how the
model is implemented between two plugs.
--
Sampo Savolainen <v2(a)iki.fi>
9 p.m.
On Sun, Feb 05, 2006 at 01:53:06AM +0200, Sampo Savolainen wrote:
On Sat, 2006-02-04 at 21:56 +0100,
leslie.polzer(a)gmx.net wrote:
That's indeed the case, and it's difficult to say which combinations
would be tyical or improbable. There should be no artificial limits.
Hello audio users,
I'm working on JACK Rack 2 and would like to know how many of you are
using more than two channels and how important you consider more than
two.
I don't work with ambisonics, but some people might want to use the
ambisonics plugs in jack rack. They deal with 4 streams. With
ambisonics, you would probably want to have a different number of inputs
and outputs. I have an idea to make better use of these plugins:
what if in cases
where there are more than 2 streams, the ports would be represented in
the gui, and the connection model between those ports and the
inputs/outputs would be visualized and maybe even configurable.
You can do this with AMS of course...
--
FA
5 Feb
5 Feb
6:49 a.m.
On Sun, 2006-02-05 at 02:06 +0100, fons adriaensen wrote:
On Sun, Feb 05, 2006 at 01:53:06AM +0200, Sampo
Savolainen wrote:
I agree that AMS/om etc. are better for freely routed processing, and
doing free routing is almost against the purpose of jack-rack which is
supposed to be a very easy, fast to use, serial plugin processor.
But, my idea is that the even if the connections cannot be routed
freely, the GUI would *show* how the outputs *are* routed. Knowing what
actually happens makes the tool more usable.
--
Sampo Savolainen <v2(a)iki.fi>
On Sat, 2006-02-04 at 21:56 +0100,
leslie.polzer(a)gmx.net wrote:
That's indeed the case, and it's difficult to say which combinations
would be tyical or improbable. There should be no artificial limits.
Hello audio users,
I'm working on JACK Rack 2 and would like to know how many of you are
using more than two channels and how important you consider more than
two.
I don't work with ambisonics, but some people might want to use the
ambisonics plugs in jack rack. They deal with 4 streams. With
ambisonics, you would probably want to have a different number of inputs
and outputs. I have an idea to make better use of these
plugins: what if in cases
where there are more than 2 streams, the ports would be represented in
the gui, and the connection model between those ports and the
inputs/outputs would be visualized and maybe even configurable.
You can do this with AMS of course... 
8:49 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: Need for more than stereo
On 2/5/06, Sampo Savolainen <v2(a)iki.fi> wrote:
On Sun, 2006-02-05 at 02:06 +0100, fons adriaensen
wrote:
Leslie, have you tried om? is jack rack 2 really required for
something? Om is fast, light weight and quite easy to use. If the gui
is too difficult for simple stuff you can just implement another jack
rack 2 as another gui for om, it communicates via osc and it's very
easy. If you want to see a simple and dodgy c specialist c gui for om
look at old smack sources when i used to include a gtk gui.
Loki
On Sun, Feb 05, 2006 at 01:53:06AM +0200, Sampo
Savolainen wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-02-04 at 21:56 +0100, leslie.polzer(a)gmx.net wrote:
> > Hello audio users,
> >
> > I'm working on JACK Rack 2 and would like to know how many of you
are
> > > using more than two channels and how important you consider more than
> > > two.
10:19 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Need for JACK Rack (2)? (was: Re: Need for more than stereo)
Hello everyone!
On Sun, Feb 05, 2006 at 11:49:21PM +1100, Loki Davison wrote:
Leslie, have you tried om?
Thank you, Loki.
That application slipped my attention because I had
no good net connection for the past half year.
It looks very promising.
is jack rack 2 really required for something?
That's a question I'd like to pose here.
Are there any JACK Rack users that can convince me they will need it
in the future and tell me why they do not use other tools?
Best wishes to you all,
Leslie
--
gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 0x52D70289
http://nic-nac-project.de/~skypher/
11:08 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Need for JACK Rack (2)?
leslie.polzer(a)gmx.net wrote:
That's a question I'd like to pose here.
Are there any JACK Rack users that can convince me they will need it
in the future and tell me why they do not use other tools?
I use it all the time, mainly when working with synths like QSynth and
amSynth. I like it a lot. :)
What other tools ?
Best,
dp
11:16 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Need for JACK Rack (2)?
On Sun, Feb 05, 2006 at 10:33:32AM -0500, Dave Phillips wrote:
I use it all the time, mainly when working with synths
like QSynth and
amSynth. I like it a lot. :)
What other tools ?
Loki Davison and another guy mentioned "om" earlier in
this thread, and
I wonder whether it makes JACK Rack obsolete.
See http://www.nongnu.org/om-synth/ .
Leslie
--
gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 0x52D70289
http://nic-nac-project.de/~skypher/
11:30 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Need for JACK Rack (2)?
leslie.polzer(a)gmx.net wrote:
On Sun, Feb 05, 2006 at 10:33:32AM -0500, Dave Phillips
wrote:
Oh yes, I'm aware of Om, but it's a weightier app by far. I like light
tools: Jack Rack, midirgui, QJackCtl, and so forth.
But Om is cool.
Best,
dp
I use it all the time, mainly when working with
synths like QSynth and
amSynth. I like it a lot. :)
What other tools ?
Loki Davison and another guy mentioned "om" earlier in this thread, and
I wonder whether it makes JACK Rack obsolete.
See http://www.nongnu.org/om-synth/ .
12:18 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Need for JACK Rack (2)?
On Sun, 5 Feb 2006 16:14:39 +0100
leslie.polzer(a)gmx.net wrote:
On Sun, Feb 05, 2006 at 10:33:32AM -0500, Dave
Phillips wrote:
No,
while om-synth can do all that jack-rack can do, it takes a little more
work for the user to do so. jack-rack's advantage is its simple
straightforward approach to a common need. And om-synth's advantage is
its power :) IMHO they can very happily coexist.
Flo
--
Palimm Palimm!
http://tapas.affenbande.org
I use it all the time, mainly when working with
synths like QSynth and
amSynth. I like it a lot. :)
What other tools ?
Loki Davison and another guy mentioned "om" earlier
in this thread, and
I wonder whether it makes JACK Rack obsolete.
See http://www.nongnu.org/om-synth/ . 
12:35 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Need for JACK Rack (2)?
--- Florian Schmidt <mista.tapas(a)gmx.net> wrote:
On Sun, 5 Feb 2006 16:14:39 +0100
leslie.polzer(a)gmx.net wrote:
earlier in this thread, and
And there is no om-synth for FC3 + CCRMA
ron
On Sun, Feb 05, 2006 at 10:33:32AM -0500, Dave
Phillips wrote:
> I use it all the time, mainly when working with
synths like QSynth and
amSynth.
I like it a lot. :)
What other tools ?
Loki Davison and another guy mentioned "om" I wonder whether it makes JACK Rack obsolete.
See http://www.nongnu.org/om-synth/ .
No,
while om-synth can do all that jack-rack can do, it
takes a little more
work for the user to do so. jack-rack's advantage is
its simple
straightforward approach to a common need. And
om-synth's advantage is
its power :) IMHO they can very happily coexist. Flo
--
Palimm Palimm!
http://tapas.affenbande.org
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
7:12 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: Need for JACK Rack (2)?
> > > What other tools ?
> > Loki Davison and another guy mentioned "om"
> earlier in this thread, and
> > I wonder whether it makes JACK Rack obsolete.
> >
> > See http://www.nongnu.org/om-synth/ .
>
> No,
>
> while om-synth can do all that jack-rack can do, it
> takes a little more
> work for the user to do so. jack-rack's advantage is
> its simple
> straightforward approach to a common need. And
> om-synth's advantage is
> its power :) IMHO they can very happily coexist.
As i said originally, om is big and powerful with it's standard gui.
The engine however is very light weight and i would be unshocked if it
were lighter than jack rack and more stable. So there may be demand
for a simple performance related gui for om (maybe called jack rack
2). More complex patch editing can be done in the om_gtk or the
python, supercollider, etc bindings. Engine and gui are not bound in
any way, so it's not very difficult to write another gui. You could
even make it load jack-rack files.
Loki
6 Feb
6 Feb
8:38 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: Need for JACK Rack (2)?
Hello Loki,
On Mon, Feb 06, 2006 at 10:11:58AM +1100, Loki Davison wrote:
As i said originally, om is big and powerful with
it's standard gui.
The engine however is very light weight
Also in terms of dependencies?
if it were lighter than jack rack and more stable.
Don't forget that we are talking about a complete rewrite of JACK Rack 1
(which is quite stable in its own right).
Leslie
--
gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 0x52D70289
http://nic-nac-project.de/~skypher/
9:17 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: Need for JACK Rack (2)?
On 2/6/06, leslie.polzer(a)gmx.net <leslie.polzer(a)gmx.net> wrote:
Hello Loki,
On Mon, Feb 06, 2006 at 10:11:58AM +1100, Loki Davison wrote:
As i said originally, om is big and powerful with
it's standard gui.
The engine however is very light weight
Also in terms of dependencies?
if it were lighter than jack rack and more
stable.
Don't forget that we are talking about a complete rewrite of JACK Rack 1
(which is quite stable in its own right).
Leslie
--
gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 0x52D70289
http://nic-nac-project.de/~skypher/
From the om site.
The Om engine (which can be built by itself) requires:
Liblo 0.22 and above
Jack 0.99 and above.
And can optionally use:
Alsa sequencer
DSSI
LADSPA
It would also be great for overworked Dave to get some help ;-)
Loki
10:11 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: Need for JACK Rack (2)?
From the om
site.
The Om engine (which can be built by itself) requires:
Liblo 0.22 and above
Jack 0.99 and above.
And can optionally use:
Alsa sequencer
DSSI
LADSPA
It would also be great for overworked Dave to get some help ;-)
Loki 
10:21 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: Need for JACK Rack (2)?
On Mon, Feb 06, 2006 at 03:10:59PM +0100, Michael Bohle wrote:
Hmmm, om dosn`t work without lash, and lash dosn't
work on my system.
(conn_mgr_start: could not look up service name: Servname not supported
for ai_socktype
loader_run: server closed socket; exiting)
Check your /etc/services entry, looks like its got a typo, or it's missing.
- Steve
11:10 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: Need for JACK Rack (2)?
Hi Steve,
I found some very rare info and editing the /etc/services with this
entre:
# A try for lashd
lashd 16180/tcp # LASH client/server protocol
I'm not a network administrator and the /etc/services is very huge...
Thx
Michael
Hmmm, om
dosn`t work without lash, and lash dosn't work on my system.
(conn_mgr_start: could not look up service name: Servname not supported
for ai_socktype
loader_run: server closed socket; exiting)
Check your /etc/services entry, looks like its got a typo, or it's missing.
- Steve
11:50 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: Need for JACK Rack (2)?
On Mon, Feb 06, 2006 at 04:10:28PM +0100, Michael Bohle wrote:
Hi Steve,
I found some very rare info and editing the /etc/services with this
entre:
# A try for lashd
lashd 16180/tcp # LASH client/server protocol
I'm not a network administrator and the /etc/services is very huge...
<gruble>Right, your lash package should have added that line, and theres no need
for lash to require it at all, but still...</gruble>
- Steve
Hmmm, om
dosn`t work without lash, and lash dosn't work on my system.
(conn_mgr_start: could not look up service name: Servname not supported
for ai_socktype
loader_run: server closed socket; exiting)
Check your /etc/services entry, looks like its got a typo, or it's missing.
- Steve 
10:33 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: Need for JACK Rack (2)?
On Mon, Feb 06, 2006 at 03:10:59PM +0100, Michael Bohle wrote:
Hmmm, om dosn`t work without lash, and lash dosn't work on my system.
(conn_mgr_start: could not look up service name: Servname not supported
for ai_socktype
loader_run: server closed socket; exiting)
lash is an option, not a requirement for om.
---
Thorsten Wilms
10:52 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: Need for JACK Rack (2)?
Am Montag, den 06.02.2006, 15:33 +0100 schrieb Thorsten Wilms:
On Mon, Feb 06, 2006 at 03:10:59PM +0100, Michael
Bohle wrote:
Ok I see.
But om dosn't start (I thought I was a prob with lash)
If I call om_gtk:
om_gtk
[StateManager] Unable to open settings file /home/metasymbol/.omgtkrc
[Main] No engine URL specified. Attempting to use
osc.udp://localhost:16180
[OSCController] Started OSC listener on port 16601
[OSCController] Attempting to contact engine at
osc.udp://localhost:16180/ ......................
.................................................
.................................................
........................................
(never ending)
any idea?
Michael
Hmmm, om dosn`t work without lash, and lash dosn't work on my system.
(conn_mgr_start: could not look up service name: Servname not supported
for ai_socktype
loader_run: server closed socket; exiting)
lash is an option, not a requirement for om.
---
Thorsten Wilms 
11:06 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: Need for JACK Rack (2)?
Michael Bohle <core(a)jacklab.net> writes:
But om dosn't start (I thought I was a prob with
lash)
If I call om_gtk:
om_gtk
[StateManager] Unable to open settings file /home/metasymbol/.omgtkrc
[Main] No engine URL specified. Attempting to use
osc.udp://localhost:16180
[OSCController] Started OSC listener on port 16601
[OSCController] Attempting to contact engine at
osc.udp://localhost:16180/ ......................
.................................................
.................................................
........................................
(never ending)
any idea?
Michael
You need to start the engine first (make sure you run jackd):
om &
om_gtk
./MiS
7:39 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: Need for JACK Rack (2)?
On Mon, 2006-06-02 at 15:51 +0100, Michael Bohle wrote:
Am Montag, den 06.02.2006, 15:33 +0100 schrieb
Thorsten Wilms:
You need to run the engine (om) yourself.
As of a few days ago in CVS, the Gtk client has a nice friendly
connection dialog with a button to launch the engine, so the next
release will not cause this confusion.
I probably should have gotten around to that much earlier, but whatever.
It worked. :)
-DR-
On Mon, Feb 06, 2006 at 03:10:59PM +0100, Michael
Bohle wrote:
Ok I see.
But om dosn't start (I thought I was a prob with lash)
If I call om_gtk:
om_gtk
[StateManager] Unable to open settings file /home/metasymbol/.omgtkrc
[Main] No engine URL specified. Attempting to use
osc.udp://localhost:16180
[OSCController] Started OSC listener on port 16601
[OSCController] Attempting to contact engine at
osc.udp://localhost:16180/ ......................
.................................................
.................................................
........................................
(never ending)
any idea?
Hmmm, om dosn`t work without lash, and lash dosn't work on my system.
(conn_mgr_start: could not look up service name: Servname not supported
for ai_socktype
loader_run: server closed socket; exiting)
lash is an option, not a requirement for om.
---
Thorsten Wilms
7:37 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: Need for JACK Rack (2)?
On Mon, 2006-06-02 at 15:10 +0100, Michael Bohle wrote:
Hmmm, om dosn`t work without lash, and lash dosn't work on my system.
(conn_mgr_start: could not look up service name: Servname not supported
for ai_socktype
loader_run: server closed socket; exiting)
Just to clarify: Om does NOT require Lash! Actually it's not even
working in CVS right now at all. :)
-DR-
From the om site.
The Om engine (which can be built by itself) requires:
Liblo 0.22 and above
Jack 0.99 and above.
And can optionally use:
Alsa sequencer
DSSI
LADSPA
It would also be great for overworked Dave to get some help ;-)
Loki 
10:50 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: Need for JACK Rack (2)?
One thing I'd like to see (beside multi-channel outputs) in JACK Rack 2
is support of LADSPA RDF files, so that for example with TAP
Reverberator, JACK Rack 2 will show the type of reverbs properly in a
drop down list, instead of a slider with only numbers.
7:36 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Re: Need for JACK Rack (2)?
On Mon, 2006-06-02 at 13:37 +0100, leslie.polzer(a)gmx.net wrote:
Hello Loki,
On Mon, Feb 06, 2006 at 10:11:58AM +1100, Loki Davison wrote:
Actually, it would be quite simple to make an Om frontend that's
literally identical to the Jack Rack front end in every way. Or even
take the current Jack Rack GUI and just bolt it on.
I'm not about to do it any time soon, but just saying.. :)
-DR-
As i said originally, om is big and powerful with
it's standard gui.
The engine however is very light weight
Also in terms of dependencies? 
5 Feb
5 Feb
11:42 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Need for JACK Rack (2)?
I use it all the time too! I'm sure, we need JACK Rack 2, 3, ... :-)
======= On Sunday 05 February 2006 18:33, Dave Phillips wrote: =======
leslie.polzer(a)gmx.net wrote:
That's a question I'd like to pose here.
Are there any JACK Rack users that can convince me they will need it
in the future and tell me why they do not use other tools?
I use it all the time, mainly when working with synths like QSynth and
amSynth. I like it a lot. :)
What other tools ?
Best,
dp
12:24 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Need for JACK Rack (2)? (was: Re: Need for more than stereo)
Hi!
Are there any JACK Rack users that can convince me
they will need it
in the future and tell me why they do not use other tools?
I don't know about Om, it scared me with the amount of dependencies, while
Jack Rack compiled smoothly (Slack 10.2). I use it for live audio processing,
I use my computer as an effect processor for reverberation etc. in my sound
services. I can't think of a substitute, so, please keep on:)
Byez!
Carotinho
___________________________________
Yahoo! Mail: gratis 1GB per i messaggi e allegati da 10MB
http://mail.yahoo.it
6 Feb
6 Feb
8:03 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Need for JACK Rack (2)?
leslie.polzer(a)gmx.net wrote:
Hello everyone!
On Sun, Feb 05, 2006 at 11:49:21PM +1100, Loki Davison wrote:
Leslie,
my suggestion is to keep working on Jack Rack. Don't pay too much
attention to what other software is around. Don't think in terms of
competition.
Some users will always prefer your software, some will be attracted by
om or other programs. Or they'll use both, but for different tasks. Open
source is also about choice.
If you'll enjoy adding support for more channels, do it. Otherwise, just
try to keep the project alive.
c.
--
www.cesaremarilungo.com
Leslie, have you tried om?
Thank you, Loki. That application slipped my attention because I had
no good net connection for the past half year.
It looks very promising.
is jack rack 2 really required for something?
That's a question I'd like to pose here.
Are there any JACK Rack users that can convince me they will need it
in the future and tell me why they do not use other tools?
Best wishes to you all,
Leslie
8:58 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Need for JACK Rack (2)?
On Tue, Feb 07, 2006 at 01:03:13AM +0100, Cesare Marilungo wrote:
my suggestion is to keep working on Jack Rack.
Don't pay too much
attention to what other software is around. Don't think in terms of
competition.
Some users will always prefer your software, some will be attracted by
om or other programs. Or they'll use both, but for different tasks.
Wise words IMHO.
A user may prefer one program over another because it suits his/her way
of working, for performance reasons, for simplicity or for complexity,
or maybe just because how it looks. You can't predict this. If you make
something that works for you, and it's technically sound and stable,
then others will use it.
Open source is also about choice.
Choice and diversity. Some authors will copy the functionality and
look and feel of popular windoze apps, some will go for no-compromise
performance, some make things that are very specialised, and others
create things that are just crazy. They all have their place.
--
FA
5 Feb
5 Feb
10:46 a.m.
New subject: SPAM-LOW: [linux-audio-user] Need for more than stereo
On Saturday 04 February 2006 15:56, leslie.polzer(a)gmx.net wrote:
Hello audio users,
I'm working on JACK Rack 2 and would like to know how many of you are
using more than two channels and how important you consider more than
two.
Speaking for myself and others I work with - YES! We need more than two
channels. There are many, many uses - due in part to the new media formats
that allow for multi-channel playback - and don't forget about sound
installations.
G
6894
days inactive
6896
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
30 comments
17 participants
participants (17)
-
Andrew Gaydenko -
Carotinho -
Cesare Marilungo -
Dave Phillips -
Dave Robillard -
Florian Schmidt -
fons adriaensen -
Greg Wilder -
leslie.polzer＠gmx.net -
Loki Davison -
Michael Bohle -
Michal Seta -
Petter Sundlöf -
R Parker -
Sampo Savolainen -
Steve Harris -
Thorsten Wilms