16 Feb
2009
16 Feb
'09
3:30 a.m.
Well I decided to try again to bring my 64-bit Intel Micro-ITX board alive, running
64studio and Ardour, to use as an alternate DAW machine at a friend's studio. I gave
up trying to make a headless softsynth out of it, because it wouldn't boot off of a
USB flash drive. Now that I have the Atom-based EEE, that's working out rather well as
a portable softsynth, so I'm trying to find another use for the Micro-ITX since
it's been sitting around unused for many mohths.
The studio has two Digidesign Firewire audio interfaces there, one with 4 inputs and one
with 8. I'd ultimately like to have them both running, sync'ed up, for 12 tracks
of audio.
Problem is, 64studio 2.1 seems to have an ancient version of FreeBoB (no FFADO) and an
even more ancient version of JACKD (0.103.0, the same one I've been running for two
years now on my laptop).
Just for grins, I tried to hook up the Digi Firewire box, but jackd said "Root node
has no children!" over and over again, then SIGSEGV'ed. Oh well. gscanbus showed
the firewire interface just fine, and the binary package of FreeBoB doesn't seem to
include the "test-freebob" script and tools.
I dunno. Should I go with Sid? Or do any of the other Debian-derived audio distros support
FFADO right now?
I was hoping to show off how easily a 1.6Ghz 64-bit machine could record 12 tracks of
audio with low latency using Linux. Alas, the knock-yer-socks-off Linux demo might have to
wait a while.
-ken
16 Feb
16 Feb
5:52 a.m.
Ken Restivo wrote:
... 64studio 2.1 seems to have an ancient version of
FreeBoB (no FFADO) and an even more ancient version of JACKD (0.103.0, the same one
I've been running for two years now on my laptop).
64 Studio 2.1 *is* ancient, I use it all the time here. :)
I replaced JACK with a later version (0.109.2) by compiling and
installing with './configure --prefix=/usr'. However, IIRC later
versions of JACK and FFADO won't compile on this system due to other
more recent dependencies. YMMV, caveat emptor, good luck, etc.
Best,
dp
2:44 p.m.
On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 05:52:18AM -0500, Dave Phillips wrote:
Ken Restivo wrote:
Thanks. I'm a big fan of ancient software, since I value stability very highly. My
main Linux Audio laptop is running 0.103 and I haven't reconfigured it since May 2007.
I like it like that.
However, I'm setting up a new PC which requires support for new hardware (i.e.
Firewire), so now the goal is to get whatever works, working, and then hopefully not
change it for many years afterwords :-)
-ken
... 64studio 2.1 seems to have an ancient version
of FreeBoB (no FFADO) and an even more ancient version of JACKD (0.103.0, the same one
I've been running for two years now on my laptop).
64 Studio 2.1 *is* ancient, I use it all the time here. :)
I replaced JACK with a later version (0.109.2) by compiling and
installing with './configure --prefix=/usr'. However, IIRC later
versions of JACK and FFADO won't compile on this system due to other
more recent dependencies. YMMV, caveat emptor, good luck, etc.
17 Feb
17 Feb
1:47 p.m.
Ken Restivo wrote:
Well I decided to try again to bring my 64-bit Intel
Micro-ITX board
alive, running 64studio and Ardour, to use as an alternate DAW
machine at a friend's studio. I gave up trying to make a headless
softsynth out of it, because it wouldn't boot off of a USB flash
drive. Now that I have the Atom-based EEE, that's working out rather
well as a portable softsynth, so I'm trying to find another use for
the Micro-ITX since it's been sitting around unused for many mohths.
The studio has two Digidesign Firewire audio interfaces there, one
with 4 inputs and one with 8. I'd ultimately like to have them both
running, sync'ed up, for 12 tracks of audio.
Problem is, 64studio 2.1 seems to have an ancient version of FreeBoB
(no FFADO) and an even more ancient version of JACKD (0.103.0, the
same one I've been running for two years now on my laptop).
Just for grins, I tried to hook up the Digi Firewire box, but jackd
said "Root node has no children!" over and over again, then
SIGSEGV'ed. Oh well. gscanbus showed the firewire interface just
fine, and the binary package of FreeBoB doesn't seem to include the
"test-freebob" script and tools.
I dunno. Should I go with Sid? Or do any of the other Debian-derived
audio distros support FFADO right now?
AFAIK FFADO won't help you with digidesign gear.
I was hoping to show off how easily a 1.6Ghz 64-bit machine could
record 12 tracks of audio with low latency using Linux. Alas, the
knock-yer-socks-off Linux demo might have to wait a while.
It will have to wait until someone convinces digidesign that FFADO is
something they want to help.
Greets,
Pieter
2:31 p.m.
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 07:47:47PM +0100, Pieter Palmers wrote:
Ken Restivo wrote:
Um, what? Digi gear isn't supported at all on Linux??! Auugh.
I guess they view it as hardware copy-protection for their software (what's the full
version of ProTools go for nowadays? US$4000 a copy? Sheesh.).
OK well that throws a monkey wrench into my plan to convert the studio from Mac/ProTools
to Linux/Ardour. Damn.
Hmm, a FOAF used to work as a QA engineer at Digi. Maybe he still does, I'll check.
-ken
Well I decided to try again to bring my 64-bit
Intel Micro-ITX board
alive, running 64studio and Ardour, to use as an alternate DAW
machine at a friend's studio. I gave up trying to make a headless
softsynth out of it, because it wouldn't boot off of a USB flash
drive. Now that I have the Atom-based EEE, that's working out rather
well as a portable softsynth, so I'm trying to find another use for
the Micro-ITX since it's been sitting around unused for many mohths.
The studio has two Digidesign Firewire audio interfaces there, one
with 4 inputs and one with 8. I'd ultimately like to have them both
running, sync'ed up, for 12 tracks of audio.
Problem is, 64studio 2.1 seems to have an ancient version of FreeBoB
(no FFADO) and an even more ancient version of JACKD (0.103.0, the
same one I've been running for two years now on my laptop).
Just for grins, I tried to hook up the Digi Firewire box, but jackd
said "Root node has no children!" over and over again, then
SIGSEGV'ed. Oh well. gscanbus showed the firewire interface just
fine, and the binary package of FreeBoB doesn't seem to include the
"test-freebob" script and tools.
I dunno. Should I go with Sid? Or do any of the other Debian-derived
audio distros support FFADO right now?
AFAIK FFADO won't help you with digidesign gear.
I was hoping to show off how easily a 1.6Ghz 64-bit machine could
record 12 tracks of audio with low latency using Linux. Alas, the
knock-yer-socks-off Linux demo might have to wait a while.
It will have to wait until someone convinces digidesign that FFADO is
something they want to help.
2:39 p.m.
On Tuesday 17 February 2009 20:30:53 Ken Restivo wrote:
OK well that throws a monkey wrench into my plan to
convert the studio from
Mac/ProTools to Linux/Ardour. Damn.
Maybe you can start by convincing them about Mac/Ardour?
I don't really understand why mac-users (especially if they paid premium money
for hardware) should switch to Linux where half their hardware isn't
supported... Shouldn't ardour (through jackd/portaudio) play perfectly one the
digi-stuff?
Have fun,
Arnold
3:06 p.m.
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 20:39, Arnold Krille <arnold(a)arnoldarts.de> wrote:
On Tuesday 17 February 2009 20:30:53 Ken Restivo
wrote:
Yes. but I think you answered the question yourself in the last sentence.
--
Anders Dahnielson
<anders(a)dahnielson.com>
OK well that throws a monkey wrench into my plan
to convert the studio
from
Mac/ProTools to Linux/Ardour. Damn.
Maybe you can start by convincing them about Mac/Ardour?
I don't really understand why mac-users (especially if they paid premium
money
for hardware) should switch to Linux where half their hardware isn't
supported... Shouldn't ardour (through jackd/portaudio) play perfectly one
the
digi-stuff?
3:41 p.m.
On Tuesday 17 February 2009 21:06:29 Anders Dahnielson wrote:
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 20:39, Arnold Krille
<arnold(a)arnoldarts.de> wrote:
I did? I didn't say "Make them buy overpriced proprietary stuff to use it with
free software", I said "If they already happen to have the bad proprietary
stuff, why try to convince them off the full free ensemble where they have to
spend more money on new hardware if they could just do a smooth transition by
switching one component at a time?" Applies both for Mac/ProTool and
Mac/Motu...
Or is the digi-stuff not usable with apples' portaudio?
Arnold
On Tuesday 17 February 2009 20:30:53 Ken Restivo
wrote:
Yes. but I think you answered the question yourself in the last
sentence. OK well that throws a monkey wrench into my plan
to convert the studio
from
Mac/ProTools to Linux/Ardour. Damn.
Maybe
you can start by convincing them about Mac/Ardour?
I don't really understand why mac-users (especially if they paid premium
money
for hardware) should switch to Linux where half their hardware isn't
supported... Shouldn't ardour (through jackd/portaudio) play perfectly
one the
digi-stuff?
4:21 p.m.
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 21:41, Arnold Krille <arnold(a)arnoldarts.de> wrote:
On Tuesday 17 February 2009 21:06:29 Anders Dahnielson
wrote:
I did? I didn't say "Make them buy overpriced proprietary stuff to use it
with
free software", I said "If they already happen to have the bad proprietary
stuff, why try to convince them off the full free ensemble where they have
to
spend more money on new hardware if they could just do a smooth transition
by
switching one component at a time?" Applies both for Mac/ProTool and
Mac/Motu...
Or is the digi-stuff not usable with apples' portaudio?
Oh, I think I missread. Sorry.
--
Anders Dahnielson
<anders(a)dahnielson.com>
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 20:39, Arnold Krille
<arnold(a)arnoldarts.de>
wrote:
> On Tuesday 17 February 2009 20:30:53 Ken
Restivo wrote:
> > OK well that throws a monkey wrench into my plan to convert the
studio
> from
> > Mac/ProTools to Linux/Ardour. Damn.
> Maybe you can start by convincing them about Mac/Ardour?
> I don't really understand why mac-users (especially if they paid
premium
money
for hardware) should switch to Linux where half their hardware isn't
supported... Shouldn't ardour (through jackd/portaudio) play perfectly
one the
digi-stuff?
Yes. but I think you answered the question yourself in the last
sentence.
18 Feb
18 Feb
4:28 a.m.
On Tuesday 17 February 2009 22:21:44 Anders Dahnielson wrote:
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 21:41, Arnold Krille
<arnold(a)arnoldarts.de> wrote:
I probably mixed up portaudio and coreaudio to confuse you further...
Why are they all named *audio??? :-)
Have fun,
Arnold
On Tuesday 17 February 2009 21:06:29 Anders
Dahnielson wrote:
I did? I didn't say "Make them buy overpriced proprietary stuff
to use it
with
free software", I said "If they already happen to have the bad
proprietary stuff, why try to convince them off the full free ensemble
where they have to
spend more money on new hardware if they could just do a smooth
transition by
switching one component at a time?" Applies both for Mac/ProTool and
Mac/Motu...
Or is the digi-stuff not usable with apples' portaudio?
Oh, I think I
missread. Sorry. On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 20:39, Arnold Krille
<arnold(a)arnoldarts.de>
wrote:
> On Tuesday 17 February 2009 20:30:53 Ken
Restivo wrote:
> > OK well that throws a monkey wrench into my plan to convert the
studio
> from
> > Mac/ProTools to Linux/Ardour. Damn.
> Maybe you can start by convincing them about Mac/Ardour?
> I don't really understand why mac-users (especially if they paid
premium
money
for hardware) should switch to Linux where half their hardware isn't
supported... Shouldn't ardour (through jackd/portaudio) play
perfectly one the
digi-stuff?
Yes. but I think you answered the question yourself in the last
sentence.
17 Feb
17 Feb
4:39 p.m.
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 09:41:23PM +0100, Arnold Krille wrote:
On Tuesday 17 February 2009 21:06:29 Anders Dahnielson
wrote:
This particular Digi gear is already visible in JACK on a Mac. I suppose this is because
there is a Mac CoreAudio driver for it, and presumably JACK sits on top of that, and thus
can see it.
I have not tried running the Digi gear with with Ardour on a Mac, because this particular
Mac was too old and fragile to add all the X11 crap I'd need in order to get Ardour to
run on it. But I don't see why it wouldn't work.
So, to answer your question, someone who has an investment in a Mac and Digi gear can
probably run Ardour, and thus leverage their investment in the Digi gear.
In my particular situation, I was trying to create a Linux convert. But I guess that's
not in the cards right now.
-ken
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 20:39, Arnold Krille
<arnold(a)arnoldarts.de> wrote:
I did? I didn't say "Make them buy overpriced proprietary stuff to use it with
free software", I said "If they already happen to have the bad proprietary
stuff, why try to convince them off the full free ensemble where they have to
spend more money on new hardware if they could just do a smooth transition by
switching one component at a time?" Applies both for Mac/ProTool and
Mac/Motu...
Or is the digi-stuff not usable with apples' portaudio?
On Tuesday 17 February 2009 20:30:53 Ken Restivo
wrote:
Yes. but I think you answered the question yourself in the last
sentence. OK well that throws a monkey wrench into my plan
to convert the studio
from
Mac/ProTools to Linux/Ardour. Damn.
Maybe
you can start by convincing them about Mac/Ardour?
I don't really understand why mac-users (especially if they paid premium
money
for hardware) should switch to Linux where half their hardware isn't
supported... Shouldn't ardour (through jackd/portaudio) play perfectly
one the
digi-stuff? 
4:56 p.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Ken Restivo wrote:
Ken,
There's a nice OS X-native Ardour2 out there. Works a treat...
Frank
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 09:41:23PM +0100, Arnold
Krille wrote:
> On Tuesday 17 February 2009 21:06:29 Anders Dahnielson wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 20:39, Arnold Krille
>> <arnold(a)arnoldarts.de> wrote:
<snip>
Or is the
digi-stuff not usable with apples' portaudio?
This particular Digi gear is already visible in JACK on a Mac. I
suppose this is because there is a Mac CoreAudio driver for it, and
presumably JACK sits on top of that, and thus can see it.
I have not tried running the Digi gear with with Ardour on a Mac,
because this particular Mac was too old and fragile to add all the
X11 crap I'd need in order to get Ardour to run on it. But I don't
see why it wouldn't work.
So, to answer your question, someone who has an investment in a Mac
and Digi gear can probably run Ardour, and thus leverage their
investment in the Digi gear.
In my particular situation, I was trying to create a Linux convert.
But I guess that's not in the cards right now.
-ken -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iEYEARECAAYFAkmbMrYACgkQhIzUKCTXcU2AgQCdFyyib84UpJ/2PtkywzK4/CI0
Yz8AoLgRvBb+fVtHiC8gTkJJ1M+fruv9
=2MU4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
9:40 p.m.
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 04:57:10PM -0500, frank pirrone wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Ken Restivo wrote:
Ken,
There's a nice OS X-native Ardour2 out there. Works a treat...
Not on Panther, which is what the studio's Mac (G5) is running.
-ken
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 09:41:23PM +0100, Arnold
Krille wrote:
> On Tuesday 17 February 2009 21:06:29 Anders Dahnielson wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 20:39, Arnold Krille
>> <arnold(a)arnoldarts.de> wrote:
<snip>
Or is the
digi-stuff not usable with apples' portaudio?
This particular Digi gear is already visible in JACK on a Mac. I
suppose this is because there is a Mac CoreAudio driver for it, and
presumably JACK sits on top of that, and thus can see it.
I have not tried running the Digi gear with with Ardour on a Mac,
because this particular Mac was too old and fragile to add all the
X11 crap I'd need in order to get Ardour to run on it. But I don't
see why it wouldn't work.
So, to answer your question, someone who has an investment in a Mac
and Digi gear can probably run Ardour, and thus leverage their
investment in the Digi gear.
In my particular situation, I was trying to create a Linux convert.
But I guess that's not in the cards right now.
-ken 
18 Feb
18 Feb
4:41 a.m.
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 3:40 AM, Ken Restivo <ken(a)restivo.org> wrote:
You're going to run into problems with anything else you want to do on that
Mac if you continue to insist on running Panther on it.
I appreciate your comments about valuing stability. But the reason that
Ardour 2.7.1 exists, and JACK 0.116.2 exists, and OS X 10.5.6 exists is that
the developers of this software, for the most part, were trying to fix
issues that negatively impacted stability. yes, new features were part of
the deal too, but i can speak authoritatively when i say that the new
versions of Ardour and JACK are MUCH more stable than the old versions you
keep running.
To give you an idea of the kind of problems in Panther - nobody has ever
even succeeded in being able to build Ardour on panther, let alone actually
run it. There are many, many important fixes that came out during the Tiger
release cycle and now for Leopard. Its true that there were a few backward
steps - the famous airport driver fix that trashed the audio stack - but
these have been fixed and I very much doubt you will find any hardcore OS X
audio users who feel that Panther is in anyway superior to later versions of
Leopard or even Tiger.
There's a nice OS X-native Ardour2 out there.
Works a treat...
Not on Panther, which is what the studio's Mac (G5) is running.
-ken
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user
11:27 a.m.
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 10:41:34AM +0100, Paul Davis wrote:
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 3:40 AM, Ken Restivo
<ken(a)restivo.org> wrote:
You're going to run into problems with anything else you want to do on that
Mac if you continue to insist on running Panther on it.
I appreciate your comments about valuing stability. But the reason that
Ardour 2.7.1 exists, and JACK 0.116.2 exists, and OS X 10.5.6 exists is that
the developers of this software, for the most part, were trying to fix
issues that negatively impacted stability. yes, new features were part of
the deal too, but i can speak authoritatively when i say that the new
versions of Ardour and JACK are MUCH more stable than the old versions you
keep running.
To give you an idea of the kind of problems in Panther - nobody has ever
even succeeded in being able to build Ardour on panther, let alone actually
run it. There are many, many important fixes that came out during the Tiger
release cycle and now for Leopard. Its true that there were a few backward
steps - the famous airport driver fix that trashed the audio stack - but
these have been fixed and I very much doubt you will find any hardcore OS X
audio users who feel that Panther is in anyway superior to later versions of
Leopard or even Tiger.
I understand and agree with all you say, and thanks for setting the record straight.
However, in this particular situation, he's stuck with what he's got:
1) This is not my machine. I can't tell the owner what to run on it.
2) Tiger and Leopard cost money. The studio owner hasn't any to spend.
3) It's an old G5. No idea how much slower Tiger/Leopard would run on it.
Or what it would break. ProTools *must* run on it, and cannot
be risked being broken, since that's what the bread and butter of
the studio is. An "upgrade" that goes awry would be a disaster.
4) I had a spare Mini-ITX mobo that I was going to lend/donate to
use as a Linux Audio workstation. Alas, I can't do that because
Digi won't support the efforts of the FFADO developers.
So the one option remaining is to try loading Ardour/JACK on the studio owner's
MacBook Pro, which is (IIRC) running Tiger. It won't get him converted to Linux but at
least it'd give him an alternative to ProTools.
Glad to hear that the native OSX port is done. I'll try to install it for him today if
he remembers to bring his MacBook in to the session.
-ken
There's a nice OS X-native Ardour2 out there.
Works a treat...
Not on Panther, which is what the studio's Mac (G5) is running.
5864
days inactive
5866
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
14 comments
7 participants
participants (7)
-
Anders Dahnielson -
Arnold Krille -
Dave Phillips -
frank pirrone -
Ken Restivo -
Paul Davis -
Pieter Palmers