11 Jul
2011
11 Jul
'11
11:20 a.m.
Hi
A friend of mine has a birthday comming up. His wife asked me for
advice, because she'd like to treat him with a sound card. So I'm hoping
for some recomendations for a soundcard that:
1) works with linux
2) has (at least) two 48V xlr mic inputs
3) has (at least) two line in (could be shared with the mic ins)
4) has headphones out, with some good monitor features (like my FA66)
I was looking at the roland quad-capture, what has the right price tag,
but that's doesn't seem to be working with linux, or?
--
Atte
http://atte.dk http://modlys.dk
11 Jul
11 Jul
3:55 p.m.
Hey Atte,
Those sound a lot like the requirements I'm look at right now. The
Quad-capture looks nice, but it's not going to be out until later this
summer, and, being a new device, its support under Linux could be of
dubious status until somebody gets one to play with.
The Native Instruments Komplete Audio 6 is the one I'm looking at. 24/96
is also a big requirement for me, and it satisfies that too.
-w
on Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 11:20:35AM +0200, Atte Andr? Jensen wrote:
Hi
A friend of mine has a birthday comming up. His wife asked me for
advice, because she'd like to treat him with a sound card. So I'm
hoping for some recomendations for a soundcard that:
1) works with linux
2) has (at least) two 48V xlr mic inputs
3) has (at least) two line in (could be shared with the mic ins)
4) has headphones out, with some good monitor features (like my FA66)
I was looking at the roland quad-capture, what has the right price
tag, but that's doesn't seem to be working with linux, or?
--
Atte
http://atte.dk http://modlys.dk
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
5:28 p.m.
The Fast Track Pro worked out of the box on my system. I have an issue
that it disappears sometimes during playback (the "hack" solution is
to switch it on and off..), but this happens also on windows. Its just
a warranty case. The plastic case of the card feels bit cheap, but for
the rest its fine for me.
It did not test it with both ins at the same time so far.
Hope this helps,
l
2011/7/11 William Light <wrl(a)illest.net>et>:
Hey Atte,
Those sound a lot like the requirements I'm look at right now. The
Quad-capture looks nice, but it's not going to be out until later this
summer, and, being a new device, its support under Linux could be of
dubious status until somebody gets one to play with.
The Native Instruments Komplete Audio 6 is the one I'm looking at. 24/96
is also a big requirement for me, and it satisfies that too.
-w
on Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 11:20:35AM +0200, Atte Andr? Jensen wrote:
Hi
A friend of mine has a birthday comming up. His wife asked me for
advice, because she'd like to treat him with a sound card. So I'm
hoping for some recomendations for a soundcard that:
1) works with linux
2) has (at least) two 48V xlr mic inputs
3) has (at least) two line in (could be shared with the mic ins)
4) has headphones out, with some good monitor features (like my FA66)
I was looking at the roland quad-capture, what has the right price
tag, but that's doesn't seem to be working with linux, or?
--
Atte
http://atte.dk http://modlys.dk
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
8:40 p.m.
Then there's sound devices usbpre2 wich probably is way out of the
considered price range.. I might get it in the near future if noone else
does :P
On 07/11/2011 06:28 PM, Lukas Kaser wrote:
The Fast Track Pro worked out of the box on my system.
I have an issue
that it disappears sometimes during playback (the "hack" solution is
to switch it on and off..), but this happens also on windows. Its just
a warranty case. The plastic case of the card feels bit cheap, but for
the rest its fine for me.
It did not test it with both ins at the same time so far.
Hope this helps,
l
2011/7/11 William Light<wrl(a)illest.net>et>:
Hey Atte,
Those sound a lot like the requirements I'm look at right now. The
Quad-capture looks nice, but it's not going to be out until later this
summer, and, being a new device, its support under Linux could be of
dubious status until somebody gets one to play with.
The Native Instruments Komplete Audio 6 is the one I'm looking at. 24/96
is also a big requirement for me, and it satisfies that too.
-w
on Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 11:20:35AM +0200, Atte Andr? Jensen wrote:
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Hi
A friend of mine has a birthday comming up. His wife asked me for
advice, because she'd like to treat him with a sound card. So I'm
hoping for some recomendations for a soundcard that:
1) works with linux
2) has (at least) two 48V xlr mic inputs
3) has (at least) two line in (could be shared with the mic ins)
4) has headphones out, with some good monitor features (like my FA66)
I was looking at the roland quad-capture, what has the right price
tag, but that's doesn't seem to be working with linux, or?
--
Atte
http://atte.dk http://modlys.dk
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
8:59 p.m.
2011/7/11 alexander <axeldenstore(a)gmail.com>
Then there's sound devices usbpre2 wich probably
is way out of the
considered price range.. I might get it in the near future if noone else
does :P
I've assembled a list not long ago. Linux support state is still
unknown, or missing though:
( Hint: Images... take time to load ! )
http://wiki.linuxaudio.org/wiki/current_audio_gear
Feel free to add a device, if you think it's missing.
--
E.R.
13 Jul
13 Jul
11:46 p.m.
On 07/11/2011 08:59 PM, Emanuel Rumpf wrote:
I've assembled a list not long ago. Linux support
state is still
unknown, or missing though:
Thanks, that was helpful. I suggested the cakewalk, since I had good
experiences with the edirol/roland/now-it-seems-cakewalk line before.
--
Atte
http://atte.dk http://modlys.dk
14 Jul
14 Jul
8:35 a.m.
On 07/11/2011 08:59 PM, Emanuel Rumpf wrote:
I've assembled a list not long ago. Linux support
state is still
unknown, or missing though:
( Hint: Images... take time to load ! )
http://wiki.linuxaudio.org/wiki/current_audio_gear
Feel free to add a device, if you think it's missing.
Hello Emanuel,
Changed some support statuses ;)
Best,
Jeremy
10:56 a.m.
Jeremy Jongepier wrote:
On 07/11/2011 08:59 PM, Emanuel Rumpf wrote:
> I've assembled a list not long ago. Linux support state is still
> unknown, or missing though:
> ( Hint: Images... take time to load ! )
> http://wiki.linuxaudio.org/wiki/current_audio_gear
Hmm, I noticed that you're linking to product images on the vendors'
sites. Isn't that a bit rude?
And some of those images take long time to load because you're snagging
some large size images, only to scale them down in the HTML. Example:
the Fast Track Ultra Back image is 3949x900 px, but you're scaling it
down to 500x114 px. Image would come down much faster if you were
serving a scaled-down 500x114px version from the LinuxAudio server ...
And the Echo AudioFire8 images aren't even scaled down in HTML.
> Feel free to add a device, if you think it's
missing.
I've been told the Echo AudioFire 12 has been fully supported via FFADO
for quite awhile now, but to date I haven't been able to make one work.
Could possibly be a junk Firewire chipset in my laptop.
Nice list, definitely will consult it!
--
David
gnome(a)hawaii.rr.com
authenticity, honesty, community
2:19 p.m.
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 4:56 AM, david <gnome(a)hawaii.rr.com> wrote:
Jeremy Jongepier wrote:
how would that be rude?
On 07/11/2011 08:59 PM, Emanuel Rumpf wrote:
>
> I've assembled a list not long ago. Linux support state is still
> unknown, or missing though:
> ( Hint: Images... take time to load ! )
> http://wiki.linuxaudio.org/wiki/current_audio_gear
Hmm, I noticed that you're linking to product images on the vendors' sites.
Isn't that a bit rude?
7:39 p.m.
Paul Davis wrote:
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 4:56 AM, david
<gnome(a)hawaii.rr.com> wrote:
Cuz you're using their bandwidth for your site's benefit.
--
David
gnome(a)hawaii.rr.com
authenticity, honesty, community
Jeremy Jongepier wrote:
how would that be rude? On 07/11/2011 08:59 PM, Emanuel Rumpf wrote:
> I've assembled a list not long ago. Linux support state is still
> unknown, or missing though:
> ( Hint: Images... take time to load ! )
> http://wiki.linuxaudio.org/wiki/current_audio_gear
Hmm, I noticed that
you're linking to product images on the vendors' sites.
Isn't that a bit rude?
8:08 p.m.
2011/7/14 david <gnome(a)hawaii.rr.com>om>:
Paul Davis wrote:
Do you actually think those few bytes matter these days ?
It is not my sites benefit, because the site is not commercial.
One could agree, it is for everyones benefit.
Should I even use my own bandwidth in order to promote their products ??
Likely "I" even do, because dokuwiki has a cache !
I'm saying "I", because actually it's neither my site nor my wiki,
I'm just a usual contributor using its liberty.
You could see it like this: I'm using the wiki as my jotter,
hoping my entries are helpful for others too.
It's encouraging to hear, they sometimes actually are :-)
--
E.R.
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 4:56 AM, david <gnome(a)hawaii.rr.com> wrote:
Cuz you're using their bandwidth for your site's benefit.
Jeremy Jongepier wrote:
how would that be rude?
On 07/11/2011 08:59 PM, Emanuel Rumpf wrote:
>
> I've assembled a list not long ago. Linux support state is still
> unknown, or missing though:
> ( Hint: Images... take time to load ! )
> http://wiki.linuxaudio.org/wiki/current_audio_gear
Hmm, I noticed that you're linking to product images on the vendors'
sites.
Isn't that a bit rude? 
8:43 p.m.
On 14/07/2011, Emanuel Rumpf <xbran(a)web.de> wrote:
Yes. When you use a large image and tell the browser to resize it, you
use up my bandwidth to download it, the vendor's bandwidth to serve
it, and my memory to decompress it. That may well make Firefox fall
over with an out of memory error. You are screwing everyone else
because you can't be bothered to do the right thing. If you don't
think that's rude, there's precious little hope for you.
Cuz you're
using their bandwidth for your site's benefit.
Do you actually think those few bytes matter these days ?
9:28 p.m.
2011/7/14 Gwenhwyfaer <gwenhwyfaer(a)gmail.com>om>:
On 14/07/2011, Emanuel Rumpf <xbran(a)web.de>
wrote:
Yes. When you use a large image and tell the browser to resize it, you
use up my bandwidth to download it, the vendor's bandwidth to serve
it, and my memory to decompress it. That may well make Firefox fall
over with an out of memory error. You are screwing everyone else
because you can't be bothered to do the right thing. If you don't
think that's rude, there's precious little hope for you.
The objection I've heard so far is "I'd be rude".
You are the first one to actually explain the reason for that claim. So thanks.
Pages as myspace a.o. have been doing the same, but
I have to very much agree, loading that many large images (at once) is a bad
thing and likely I would have added thumbnails anyway.
Not "likely", because I'd think it's wrong, but "likely",
because
time and work is involved.
The strange thing is:
I took a lot of time gathering the links, images, etc...
Now: Instead of going ahead and improving the page themself,
for example by adding thumbnails, some are
simply complaining.
--
E.R.
Cuz
you're using their bandwidth for your site's benefit.
Do you actually think those few bytes matter these days ? 
15 Jul
15 Jul
2:56 a.m.
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 09:28:40PM +0200, Emanuel Rumpf wrote:
2011/7/14 Gwenhwyfaer <gwenhwyfaer(a)gmail.com>om>:
The default answer usually is:
"It's a WIKI. If you want to improve it, go right ahead".
-ken
On 14/07/2011, Emanuel Rumpf <xbran(a)web.de>
wrote:
Yes. When you use a large image and tell the browser to resize it, you
use up my bandwidth to download it, the vendor's bandwidth to serve
it, and my memory to decompress it. That may well make Firefox fall
over with an out of memory error. You are screwing everyone else
because you can't be bothered to do the right thing. If you don't
think that's rude, there's precious little hope for you.
The objection I've heard so far is "I'd be rude".
You are the first one to actually explain the reason for that claim. So thanks.
Pages as myspace a.o. have been doing the same, but
I have to very much agree, loading that many large images (at once) is a bad
thing and likely I would have added thumbnails anyway.
Not "likely", because I'd think it's wrong, but "likely",
because
time and work is involved.
The strange thing is:
I took a lot of time gathering the links, images, etc...
Now: Instead of going ahead and improving the page themself,
for example by adding thumbnails, some are
simply complaining.
Cuz
you're using their bandwidth for your site's benefit.
Do you actually think those few bytes matter these days ?
4:39 a.m.
On 15/07/2011, Ken Restivo <ken(a)restivo.org> wrote:
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 09:28:40PM +0200, Emanuel
Rumpf wrote:
In fairness, I haven't even visited the pages being discussed here.
However, there's a website I would quite like to visit, but which uses
impossibly large images and expects the browser to resize them, and it
reliably crashes Firefox on my usual machine. So my response was
probably born of [dm]isplaced irritation; had I come across such an
instance on a wiki page I might well have sorted the problem out
myself... assuming I had the right to upload images to said wiki, of
course.
The strange thing is:
I took a lot of time gathering the links, images, etc...
Now: Instead of going ahead and improving the page themself,
for example by adding thumbnails, some are
simply complaining.
The default answer usually is:
"It's a WIKI. If you want to improve it, go right ahead".
14 Jul
14 Jul
7:39 p.m.
2011/7/14 david <gnome(a)hawaii.rr.com>om>:
Jeremy Jongepier wrote:
Rude? I'm showing their products - the way they intended them to appear !
Vendors would applaud ! :)
On 07/11/2011 08:59 PM, Emanuel Rumpf wrote:
>
> I've assembled a list not long ago. Linux support state is still
> unknown, or missing though:
> ( Hint: Images... take time to load ! )
> http://wiki.linuxaudio.org/wiki/current_audio_gear
Hmm, I noticed that you're linking to product images on the vendors' sites.
Isn't that a bit rude?
And some of those images take long time to load
because you're snagging some
large size images,
This is intentional too. Sometimes you'd like to have a closer look.
Nice list, definitely will consult it!
Thanks !
--
E.R.
4815
days inactive
4819
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
17 comments
10 participants
participants (10)
-
alexander -
Atte André Jensen -
david -
Emanuel Rumpf -
Gwenhwyfaer -
Jeremy Jongepier -
Ken Restivo -
Lukas Kaser -
Paul Davis -
William Light