26 Jul
2015
26 Jul
'15
3:31 a.m.
Hi All,
I've been a reader on the list for a while, not a poster until now.
I am preparing to outfit a computer for songwriting in Linux.
I will be using the command line notation options, of which there are
rather
a few from Lillypond to muscript.
I am hoping that how I picture this will match the creative reality smiles.
My first question is this.
some high end soundcards that are supported in Debian? I know its been
updated, but I intend using squeeze for a start. Getting the floor solid
before say adding updated furniture.
While I know that four duplex cards are common, I want the best quality I
can find for the work.
say if you <hope this makes sense> wanted to connect a full sized piano
keyboard to the card?
Thanks in advance,
Karen
26 Jul
26 Jul
4:09 a.m.
On 25/07/15 09:31 PM, Karen Lewellen wrote:
I've been a reader on the list for a while, not a
poster until now.
I'm an intermediate level user, so take this advice with a grain of salt...
I am preparing to outfit a computer for songwriting
in Linux. [...]
My first question is this.
some high end soundcards that are supported in Debian? I know its been updated,
but I intend using squeeze for a start. Getting the floor solid before say
adding updated furniture.
So, from what I've learned for my set up...
1. hardware... audio interface
the key takeaway is to look for USB class compliant gear. Hardware that is class
compliant conforms to the standard specs (e.g. USB, MIDI), and is much more
likely to be supported in GNU/Linux. Whereas devices that *aren't* class
compliant require additional proprietary drivers in Windows/Mac OS X, and it's
pretty unlikely that drivers (proprietary or libre) will be available in
GNU/Linux for those devices.
There's a starter list here that helped me:
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UbuntuStudio/SupportedHardware#Audio_Devi…
I recently bought a Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 which is fully supported in GNU/Linux
(it's USB 2.0 class compliant). (I also have a Presonus Firepod firewire
interface, which I'd bought in my Windows days, which is thankfully supported by
FFADO drivers...)
Sometimes compatibility varies by company, but sometimes it varies by product
even from the same company. I'd suggest you start looking from devices that are
listed as known to be fully supported, and look within that group for features
that you want (e.g. number/type of inputs, audio quality, etc.)...
I've found Libre Music Production to be a great resource, e.g.
http://libremusicproduction.com/articles/understanding-recording-hardware
http://libremusicproduction.com/answer/class-compliant
http://libremusicproduction.com/answer/audio-interfacesoundcard
2. Debian...
You'll have super old packages from Squeeze (whereas if you went to Jessie, you
could use the KXStudio repositories and have super current audio packages), but
I don't think that would be a dealbreaker...
(Eventually though, unless you are comfortable configuring everything that you
need to in stock Debian, you'll want an audio distribution or at least the
KXStudio repositories in Debian:
http://libremusicproduction.com/articles/advantages-choosing-audio-orientat…
)
What you *do* need for sure though to be able to effectively use an audio
interface is a low latency kernel.
A few years back, I was using Ubuntu Studio, which took care of that for me.
Lately, in Debian Jessie ( + KXStudio ), I settled on using liquorix:
http://liquorix.net/
Not sure if that'll work in Squeeze? Maybe?
But aside from having old versions of applications, the low latency kernel is
the thing that would matter most... otherwise, using Debian Squeeze shouldn't
AFAIK matter at all otherwise in terms of being able to connect to a class
compliant audio interface...
say if you <hope this makes sense> wanted to
connect a full sized piano
keyboard to the card?
Connect the keyboard via MIDI or audio?
Does the keyboard have (class compliant) USB MIDI output?
If so, you won't even need to connect it to the audio interface, you can just
connect via USB MIDI directly to your computer (and the audio interface would
just be used to *output* sound but not for input).
If it has an old school MIDI connector, then you'd need an audio interface that
specifically has a MIDI input port.
If you're just talking getting audio from the keyboard (i.e. 1/4" jack), then a
class compliant audio interface with a 1/4" input is what you'd need... (but
MIDI would give you much more flexibility, even if you'd sometimes want to use
audio).
Anyways, otherwise may reply with more expertise, but HTH...
Blaise
8:22 a.m.
Hi Karen,
To make long story short, yes Debian is rock solid but it's a real time investmentto
turn it into an audio workstation, you might prefer to install something likeAVLinux,
it's Debian based with everything optimized for music.
Beside, question is "how many in/out ports do you need in the soundcard"?
And, what is the keyboard, do you own it yet?
Have a nice sunday,Fred
De : Karen Lewellen <klewellen(a)shellworld.net>
À : audio users linux <linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org>
Envoyé le : Dimanche 26 juillet 2015 3h31
Objet : [LAU] outfitting a computer for songwriting in linux?
Hi All,
I've been a reader on the list for a while, not a poster until now.
I am preparing to outfit a computer for songwriting in Linux.
I will be using the command line notation options, of which there are
rather
a few from Lillypond to muscript.
I am hoping that how I picture this will match the creative reality smiles.
My first question is this.
some high end soundcards that are supported in Debian? I know its been
updated, but I intend using squeeze for a start. Getting the floor solid
before say adding updated furniture.
While I know that four duplex cards are common, I want the best quality I
can find for the work.
say if you <hope this makes sense> wanted to connect a full sized piano
keyboard to the card?
Thanks in advance,
Karen
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
10:08 a.m.
New subject: outfitting a computer for songwriting in linux?
Hmm, Karen's original focus seemed to be on composing sheet music (vs
recording audio from the keyboard or other instruments) with the
keyboard intended as an input device for the sheet music engine?
I use Debian Sid, the software is frequently updated.
AVLinux has a pile of graphics, animation and video software that might
only clutter things up for anyone who doesn't use them.
Another option would be Musix 3.0, it's dedicated for music/audio work.
And its main brain hangs out on this list.
On 07/25/2015 08:22 PM, fred wrote:
Hi Karen,
To make long story short, yes Debian is rock solid but it's a real time
investment
to turn it into an audio workstation, you might prefer to install
something like
AVLinux, it's Debian based with everything optimized for music.
Beside, question is "how many in/out ports do you need in the soundcard"?
And, what is the keyboard, do you own it yet?
Have a nice sunday,
Fred
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*De :* Karen Lewellen <klewellen(a)shellworld.net>
*À :* audio users linux <linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org>
*Envoyé le :* Dimanche 26 juillet 2015 3h31
*Objet :* [LAU] outfitting a computer for songwriting in linux?
Hi All,
I've been a reader on the list for a while, not a poster until now.
I am preparing to outfit a computer for songwriting in Linux.
I will be using the command line notation options, of which there are
rather
a few from Lillypond to muscript.
I am hoping that how I picture this will match the creative reality
smiles.
My first question is this.
some high end soundcards that are supported in Debian? I know its been
updated, but I intend using squeeze for a start. Getting the floor
solid
before say adding updated furniture.
While I know that four duplex cards are common, I want the best
quality I
can find for the work.
say if you <hope this makes sense> wanted to connect a full sized
piano
keyboard to the card?
Thanks in advance,
Karen
--
David W. Jones
gnome(a)hawaii.rr.com
authenticity, honesty, community
http://dancingtreefrog.com
10:34 a.m.
Oops, send from the wrong account.
Begin forwarded message:
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 2015 10:31:01 +0200
From: Ralf Mardorf <ralf.mardorf(a)rocketmail.com>
To: linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
Subject: Re: [LAU] outfitting a computer for songwriting in linux?
Don't use USB for MIDI, it likely cause too much jitter. If Your
computer provides PCI, you could buy cheap second-hand cards and just
use the MIDI IOs. I don't know if there are already cheap PCIe cards
available too. Btw. perhaps you are already satisfied with the audio
quality of a cheap second-hand card. An envy24 second-hand prosumer card
with two audio IOs for around 30,- € not necessarily does sound less
good than a professional sound card for around 1000,- €. What card you
need depends to the other equipment you use. Professional microphones?
Professional 19" effect units? Do you need special interfaces, such as
ADAT or AES/EBU? IOW "best quality" is an elastic term, so regarding to
your request "I want the best quality I can find for the work", more
information is needed. At least don't use USB for MIDI, you might not
be able to notice the MIDI jitter, since this also is related to what
you want to do, but USB MIDI does not provide "best quality".
11:01 a.m.
On 07/26/2015 10:34 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
At least don't use USB for MIDI, you might not
be able to notice the MIDI jitter, since this also is related to what
you want to do, but USB MIDI does not provide "best quality".
In the meanwhile the whole planet is using USB for MIDI. Please explain
what is wrong with it, if possible with test results or something else
that confirms your assumption. I've never experienced any jitter issues,
not even with external MIDI gear.
Jeremy
11:42 a.m.
On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 11:01:46 +0200, Jeremy Jongepier wrote:
In the meanwhile the whole planet is using USB for
MIDI.
That's an assertion without substance.
Please explain what is wrong with it, if possible with
test results or
something else that confirms your assumption. I've never experienced
any jitter issues, not even with external MIDI gear.
Search the LAU and LAD mailing list archives or edit a
four-on-the-floor kick MIDI track. Play an external synth and make an
audio recording of that kick, record the kick again and you'll notice
that the kicks are never in sync, you'll hear an early reflection like
shift or a moving phasing. If you make syncopated or measure free music
this is a serious issue, but it already is an issue if you want to
sync four-on-the-floor kicks or similar. A lot of people claim that
MIDI is not good enough to record "hand made" music, it always suffers
from quantisation. To record really "hand made" music there's the need
to do audio recordings. That's not completely wrong, but MIDI isn't that
bad as many people nowadays think that it is. If you use a C64 or Atari
ST and sync by klick or by SMPTE to a tape recorder, you get perfect
sync.
I noticed that shift of MIDI events is related to the used audio
latency. The longer the latency is, the less precise is the timing of
the recorded MIDI events on audio tracks. I never was able to get less
audio latency than 5.3 ms (-r48000 -p256 -n2).
FWIW there's zero audible (and perhaps zero measurable) jitter when
using internal virtual synth. We don't know what exactly the OP want's
to do, but she seemingly does use external gear.
2:26 p.m.
On Sunday 26 July 2015 05:01:46 Jeremy Jongepier wrote:
On 07/26/2015 10:34 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
The jitter is, for some folks minor enough they do not notice it. It is
however, there. Those of us doing CNC machinery control are very aware
of it, primarily because when moving steppers at a decent rpm, excessive
jitter costs us considerable in motion speed. Stepper torque about 3 or
4 hundred rpm depends hugely on having the step signals at a steady
rate. A 10% jitter, at a 10 kilohertz step rate costs us 50% of the
motors power because the delayed pulse is equ to a stop of 10
milliseconds, & when the USB gets around to sending the next pulse, the
rotor speed is below the desired speed, and the motor then see's a large
acceleration it cannot do in a single full step, so it stalls instead.
Stalled motor = wrecked part & possibly broken cutting tooling at a
minimum cost in the 10 dollar area but can go up rapidly for some of the
fancier tooling. Not to mention the time & material waste when you have
to start on a new part from scratch.
If you think your music you write sounds ok now, go play it on a system
that does NOT use USB in the midi chain. If you have any sense of
rythm, I think the difference WILL be quite audible to your own ears.
Cheers, Gene Heskett
--
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>
At least don't use USB for MIDI, you might
not
be able to notice the MIDI jitter, since this also is related to
what you want to do, but USB MIDI does not provide "best quality".
In the meanwhile the whole planet is using USB for MIDI. Please
explain what is wrong with it, if possible with test results or
something else that confirms your assumption. I've never experienced
any jitter issues, not even with external MIDI gear.
Jeremy 
5:13 p.m.
On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 08:26:25AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote
The jitter is, for some folks minor enough they do not
notice it. It is
however, there. Those of us doing CNC machinery control are very aware
of it, primarily because when moving steppers at a decent rpm, excessive
jitter costs us considerable in motion speed. Stepper torque about 3 or
4 hundred rpm depends hugely on having the step signals at a steady
rate.
USB by itelf is not to blame here, the way it is used to deliver
these stepper signals is. After all USB can transmit 64 streams of
48 kHz audio samples (e.g. RME MADI-USB) reliably. This requires
some HW buffering of course, but so what ?
If you try to exactly control the timing of pulses by controlling
the time they are actually sent by the SW then of course this will
fail. You need an approach similar to how audio is transmitted over
USB.
It would be quite easy to use a standard audio interface to do this.
Take the analog output, apply a simple first order lowpass at 3 kHz
or so (to have a controlled FR, independent of the DA converter's
filter), then convert to square wave with a classical Schmitt trigger
circuit with minimal hysteresis (a small fraction of the analog signal
range).
This way you can easily generate pulses up to 10 kHz or more and
control each edge with microsecond accuracy (provided the edges
are at least one sample period apart). All that remains is to
generate the required audio signal. Not trivial, but not rocket
science either.
Ciao,
--
FA
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)
7:45 p.m.
On Sunday 26 July 2015 11:13:52 Fons Adriaensen wrote:
On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 08:26:25AM -0400, Gene Heskett
wrote
There is no buffering in a cnc setup. The computer expects to get
uptodate data from the machine which I have done at rates to 4,000 times
a second, but normal is 1,000/second. Ditto sending data back to the
machine, that data cannot lollygag around in a buffer someplace for 20
milliseconds while USB is searching for a suitable sock to put it in.
Even 2 milliseconds will likely put the resultant part out of tolerance
bad enough its a mantle decorator.
The jitter is, for some folks minor enough they
do not notice it.
It is however, there. Those of us doing CNC machinery control are
very aware of it, primarily because when moving steppers at a decent
rpm, excessive jitter costs us considerable in motion speed.
Stepper torque about 3 or 4 hundred rpm depends hugely on having the
step signals at a steady rate.
USB by itelf is not to blame here, the way it is used to deliver
these stepper signals is. After all USB can transmit 64 streams of
48 kHz audio samples (e.g. RME MADI-USB) reliably. This requires
some HW buffering of course, but so what ?
If you try to exactly control the timing of pulses by controlling
the time they are actually sent by the SW then of course this will
fail. You need an approach similar to how audio is transmitted over
USB.
It would be quite easy to use a standard audio interface to do this.
Take the analog output, apply a simple first order lowpass at 3 kHz
or so (to have a controlled FR, independent of the DA converter's
filter), then convert to square wave with a classical Schmitt trigger
circuit with minimal hysteresis (a small fraction of the analog signal
range).
This way you can easily generate pulses up to 10 kHz or more and
control each edge with microsecond accuracy (provided the edges
are at least one sample period apart). All that remains is to
generate the required audio signal. Not trivial, but not rocket
science either.
Ciao,
Cheers, Gene Heskett
--
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>
10:33 p.m.
On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 01:45:42PM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
There is no buffering in a cnc setup. The computer
expects to get
uptodate data from the machine which I have done at rates to 4,000 times
a second, but normal is 1,000/second. Ditto sending data back to the
machine, that data cannot lollygag around in a buffer someplace for 20
milliseconds while USB is searching for a suitable sock to put it in.
Even 2 milliseconds will likely put the resultant part out of tolerance
bad enough its a mantle decorator.
Are you saying there is motion feedback from the machine and the
PC is supposed to 'close the loop' ? In that case indeed any delay
due to buffering would needs to be taken into account, or could
(depending on required closed loop BW) render things impossible.
But *none* of the machines I've ever driven (that includes all
sorts of milling machines, and tangential knife, laser and water
jet cutters) required feedback to control the motion of the tool
as function of time. They did only for things like changing tools
and/or workpiece, or to signal general state. If there were feedback
loops involved in controlling motion then these were local and
certainly not implemented in the controlling PC (which in those
times only had RS232 interfaces, orders of magnitude slower than
anything USB).
And anyway, what is the BW of any heavy piece of machinery ?
Probably at most 10 Hz or so, and that you can control using
a feedabck loop even with 5 or 10 ms of latency.
--
FA
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)
27 Jul
27 Jul
4:03 a.m.
On Sunday 26 July 2015 16:33:37 Fons Adriaensen wrote:
On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 01:45:42PM -0400, Gene Heskett
wrote:
That depends on how fast its moving, Fons. A 25k rpm spindle can move
and cut alu at 250 IPM if the coolant can carry away the chips. That
sort of motion is tracked and corrected in a 25 to 100 microsecond loop.
But we don't do floating point in that loop for obvious reasons.
Fellow in Cinci picked up one of the biggest mills Cinci ever made about
4 years back, some 220,000 lbs of scrap because the controller had died,
and so had the guy that designed it. So it got a retrofit to linuxcnc.
While tuning the servos, it got the Z axis into an oscillation at about
20 hz, with about a 1/2" motion either way. It took about 20 seconds to
lower the P in the PID module for that axis & stop it. The moving part
of the Z axis weighs 22 tons and carries a 50 horse motor. That 20
seconds was recorded on the seizmograph stuff across town at the UNI.
I've no clue what the x axis bed weighs, but its 26 feet long.
After calibration, the first job they threw at it was cutting a 16"
diameter bearing seat for an axel bearing in a 1000+ lb iron casting
that was going into a railroad locomotive. When the bearing seat was
measured, it was within .0001". So they set the bearing on 300lbs of
dry ice, brought the casting up to about 350F, picked up the bearing
with welders gloves and set it in the recess. It almost fell into the
pocket, but 15 seconds later as the temps equalized, it was a permanent
a part of that casting, way better than if they had welded it.
Cheers, Gene Heskett
--
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>
There is no buffering in a cnc setup. The
computer expects to get
uptodate data from the machine which I have done at rates to 4,000
times a second, but normal is 1,000/second. Ditto sending data back
to the machine, that data cannot lollygag around in a buffer
someplace for 20 milliseconds while USB is searching for a suitable
sock to put it in. Even 2 milliseconds will likely put the resultant
part out of tolerance bad enough its a mantle decorator.
Are you saying there is motion feedback from the machine and the
PC is supposed to 'close the loop' ? In that case indeed any delay
due to buffering would needs to be taken into account, or could
(depending on required closed loop BW) render things impossible.
But *none* of the machines I've ever driven (that includes all
sorts of milling machines, and tangential knife, laser and water
jet cutters) required feedback to control the motion of the tool
as function of time. They did only for things like changing tools
and/or workpiece, or to signal general state. If there were feedback
loops involved in controlling motion then these were local and
certainly not implemented in the controlling PC (which in those
times only had RS232 interfaces, orders of magnitude slower than
anything USB).
And anyway, what is the BW of any heavy piece of machinery ?
Probably at most 10 Hz or so, and that you can control using
a feedabck loop even with 5 or 10 ms of latency.
10:58 p.m.
On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 10:03:32PM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
High linear or angular speed does not by itself imply high bandwidth.
The required control loop BW (and hence acceptable latency) depends
on the highest frequency that the motion as a function of time is
supposed to contain, not on its amplitude or speed.
Anyway, isn't the whole point of stepper motors that they can be
used without feedback - that every step corresponds to a defined
motion ? Of course you need to plan the trajectory in terms of
acceleration and speed so that the combination of motor and load
stays within its limits and no steps are skipped. But you need
to do that anyway. And if any steps are missed you're in trouble
even with feedback.
If for any reason (e.g. precision) you do need feedback then DC
motors are a lot easier to control, and any advantage a stepper
would have seems to be lost.
On Sunday 26 July 2015 16:33:37 Fons Adriaensen wrote:
And anyway,
what is the BW of any heavy piece of machinery ?
Probably at most 10 Hz or so, and that you can control using
a feedabck loop even with 5 or 10 ms of latency.
That depends on how fast its moving, Fons. A 25k rpm spindle can move
and cut alu at 250 IPM if the coolant can carry away the chips. That
sort of motion is tracked and corrected in a 25 to 100 microsecond loop.
But we don't do floating point in that loop for obvious reasons. Fellow in Cinci picked up one of the biggest mills
Cinci ever made about
4 years back, some 220,000 lbs of scrap because the controller had died,
and so had the guy that designed it. So it got a retrofit to linuxcnc.
While tuning the servos, it got the Z axis into an oscillation at about
20 hz, with about a 1/2" motion either way. It took about 20 seconds to
lower the P in the PID module for that axis & stop it. The moving part
of the Z axis weighs 22 tons and carries a 50 horse motor. That 20
seconds was recorded on the seizmograph stuff across town at the UNI.
For a machine of that size I would *never* let a PC connected via a USB
cable control the motors directly. Just for safety's sake... This is a
job for an embedded controller running somewhat more reliable system
software and interfaces, and designed to be fail-safe.
I once worked on a cutter with a beam that could accelerate at 5g.
That means it could move a meter from stop to stop in 0.3 seconds.
It was not a really heavy machine and it didn't look dangerous.
But it could hit you without warning in a very nasty way...
Ciao,
--
FA
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)
26 Jul
26 Jul
4:26 p.m.
Hi,
I would much prefer the pci option than using USB for this, yes.
second I am going to put the computer together for this purpose, meaning
nothing has been chosen. Laughs on the soundblaster idea, but I am new
to this not realizing what good pci cards are supported by debian in
general.
Thanks,
Kare
On Sun, 26 Jul 2015, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
Oops, send from the wrong account.
Begin forwarded message:
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 2015 10:31:01 +0200
From: Ralf Mardorf <ralf.mardorf(a)rocketmail.com>
To: linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
Subject: Re: [LAU] outfitting a computer for songwriting in linux?
Don't use USB for MIDI, it likely cause too much jitter. If Your
computer provides PCI, you could buy cheap second-hand cards and just
use the MIDI IOs. I don't know if there are already cheap PCIe cards
available too. Btw. perhaps you are already satisfied with the audio
quality of a cheap second-hand card. An envy24 second-hand prosumer card
with two audio IOs for around 30,- € not necessarily does sound less
good than a professional sound card for around 1000,- €. What card you
need depends to the other equipment you use. Professional microphones?
Professional 19" effect units? Do you need special interfaces, such as
ADAT or AES/EBU? IOW "best quality" is an elastic term, so regarding to
your request "I want the best quality I can find for the work", more
information is needed. At least don't use USB for MIDI, you might not
be able to notice the MIDI jitter, since this also is related to what
you want to do, but USB MIDI does not provide "best quality".
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
5:53 p.m.
On Sun, 26 Jul 2015, Karen Lewellen wrote:
Hi,
I would much prefer the pci option than using USB for this, yes.
second I am going to put the computer together for this purpose, meaning
nothing has been chosen. Laughs on the soundblaster idea, but I am new to
this not realizing what good pci cards are supported by debian in general.
As you are only interested in MIDI, and audio is not needed. The
old ensoniq audio pci cards are one of the best solutions (using the "game
port") and they are known as one of the best quality 16bit cards. However,
PCI is not a forward looking solution so this and the delta1010 really are
obsolete. It is possible to find a computer with pci slots still, but it
does take some work. Almost all newer keyboards come with a USB port as
one of their outputs. Some are better than others I don't know if anyone
on the list can point to one that is better than just having a hw midi to
USB inside as a keyboard that is USB direct from CPU would be better.
The computer side: Use an Intel CPU. The person setting it up should be
willing to find out which of the USB ports on the computer should be used
for this (have their own irq) and which usb ports should therefore never
be used for anything else (often two usb ports are on an internal hub).
I have assumed so far the keyboard has it's own audio section (creates
sound) and the computer will not do so. But probably it may be nice to
continue working on the computer even if the keyboard is not available. So
the distro should be fitted with a lowlatency kernel. Your tech will have
to find out which other things need to be turned off for glitch free sound
(some wifi setups for example... many are just fine)
Probably any of the core series cpu will work just fine if you are using
just a GM softsynth for the user to hear their work. For just listening,
latency is not an issue, but you ever decide to play the keyboard and hear
audio from the computer's softsynth, it is a must. As you do not want any
external boxes... you are left with PCIe cards if the Intel internal audio
is not satifactory (generally audio output is quite good, audio input is
not good enough for anything other than skype).
--
Len Ovens
www.ovenwerks.net
6:06 p.m.
Hi,
The card choice is settled. i am hunting for the m-audio card Fred
suggested.
Additionally, I followed enough of that USB midi discussion to decide I
will pass.
I am not the sort of computer user to decide that I am aiming for the next
best upgrade. I choose for stability, like a pencil.
I have no reason for example to pub wifi on this box, Ethernet is just fine.
Thanks for your take,
Karen
On Sun, 26 Jul 2015, Len Ovens wrote:
On Sun, 26 Jul 2015, Karen Lewellen wrote:
Hi,
I would much prefer the pci option than using USB for this, yes.
second I am going to put the computer together for this purpose, meaning
nothing has been chosen. Laughs on the soundblaster idea, but I am new
to this not realizing what good pci cards are supported by debian in
general.
As you are only interested in MIDI, and audio is not needed. The old ensoniq
audio pci cards are one of the best solutions (using the "game port") and
they are known as one of the best quality 16bit cards. However, PCI is not a
forward looking solution so this and the delta1010 really are obsolete. It is
possible to find a computer with pci slots still, but it does take some work.
Almost all newer keyboards come with a USB port as one of their outputs. Some
are better than others I don't know if anyone on the list can point to one
that is better than just having a hw midi to USB inside as a keyboard that is
USB direct from CPU would be better.
The computer side: Use an Intel CPU. The person setting it up should be
willing to find out which of the USB ports on the computer should be used for
this (have their own irq) and which usb ports should therefore never be used
for anything else (often two usb ports are on an internal hub).
I have assumed so far the keyboard has it's own audio section (creates sound)
and the computer will not do so. But probably it may be nice to continue
working on the computer even if the keyboard is not available. So the distro
should be fitted with a lowlatency kernel. Your tech will have to find out
which other things need to be turned off for glitch free sound (some wifi
setups for example... many are just fine)
Probably any of the core series cpu will work just fine if you are using just
a GM softsynth for the user to hear their work. For just listening, latency
is not an issue, but you ever decide to play the keyboard and hear audio from
the computer's softsynth, it is a must. As you do not want any external
boxes... you are left with PCIe cards if the Intel internal audio is not
satifactory (generally audio output is quite good, audio input is not good
enough for anything other than skype).
--
Len Ovens
www.ovenwerks.net
6:46 p.m.
Len Ovens <len(a)ovenwerks.net> writes:
On Sun, 26 Jul 2015, Karen Lewellen wrote:
For Midi (not audio), I think the problems of USB have been greatly
exagerated. It's true that USB has some problems with being on time.
However, unless you're doing some kind of sequenced techno where
absolutely solid as granite note intervals are wanted, I really doubt
you're going to notice the lag much. For manual keyboard playing,
you're really, really not going to notice.
USB is by far the most convenient way to get Midi connectivity on a
modern Linux PC. I use it for sequenced music driving many external
hardware devices, and on the occasion that I actually do hear some lag,
it's because I'm the one producing it, and I really doubt anyone else
actually notices. Sometimes the lag even turns out to sound (to me)
more musical than robotic time would have, even in sequenced music.
(Then again, I like analog synthesizers that aren't always strictly in
tune all the time either, so I kind of like that sort of thing.)
I would much prefer the pci option than using USB
for this, yes.
second I am going to put the computer together for this purpose,
meaning nothing has been chosen. Laughs on the soundblaster idea,
but I am new to this not realizing what good pci cards are supported
by debian in general.
As you are only interested in MIDI, and audio is not needed. The old
ensoniq audio pci cards are one of the best solutions (using the "game
port") and they are known as one of the best quality 16bit
cards. However, PCI is not a forward looking solution so this
and the
delta1010 really are obsolete. It is possible to find a computer with
pci slots still, but it does take some work.
This took me by surprise, as it's been a long time since I've done this
shoping for myself. (I'm all setup, so I haven't looked in awhile.)
You're right, almost all the pro PCI audio recording (not Midi)
solutions seem to be pretty much gone! I did expect that regular
classic PCI cards would have gone away, since 32-bit PCI is basically
Stone Age technology at this point, but...I have RME's PCI-E card
connecting to a Multiface II external box, and to my shock, you can't
even get PCI-E cards anywhere either? Why?? 64-bit PCI-E is the best
solution, and not obsolete hardware at all!
Nontheless, it looks like you're right... Everybody's going USB, even
though I think everyone used to pretty much agree that given the choice
of PCI(E), Firewire, or USB, that USB was pretty much the worst possible
option. (I've been on here long enough to remember that, so no one tell
me that's wrong all of a sudden... If I had a nickel for every thread
on here warning people to stay away from USB if they have a choice...)
Now, it looks like USB recording interfaces are all we have, so we don't
have a choice. That ain't good at all.
The computer side: Use an Intel CPU. The person
setting it up should
be willing to find out which of the USB ports on the computer should
be used for this (have their own irq) and which usb ports should
therefore never be used for anything else (often two usb ports are on
an internal hub).
Why would it matter if it was AMD?
available. So the distro should be fitted with a
lowlatency
kernel. Your tech will have to find out which other things need to be
turned off for glitch free sound (some wifi setups for example... many
are just fine)
That may or may not be necessary on recent kernels. I'm running a
regular Linus kernel with full pre-emption turned on, and I seldom get
an xrun. I'd only go for an RT kernel if your system isn't behaving
without it.
--
+ Brent A. Busby + "We've all heard that a million monkeys
+ Sr. UNIX Systems Admin + banging on a million typewriters will
+ University of Chicago + eventually reproduce the entire works of
+ James Franck Institute + Shakespeare. Now, thanks to the Internet,
+ Materials Research Ctr + we know this is not true." -Robert Wilensky
9:53 p.m.
De : Brent Busby <brent(a)keycorner.org>
À : linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
Envoyé le : Dimanche 26 juillet 2015 18h46
Objet : Re: [LAU] outfitting a computer for songwriting in linux?
USB is by far the most convenient way to get Midi connectivity on a
modern Linux PC.
>>> MIDI connector is DEFINITLY the best way
to use MIDI!!!
Now, it looks like USB recording interfaces are all we have, so we don't
have a choice. That ain't good at all.
>>> iS IT A POSSIBILITY THAT ALL OF US aLWAYS
HAVE A CHOICE: NOT BUY WHAT WE DON'T WANT????
The computer side: Use an Intel CPU. The person
setting it up should
be willing to find out which of the USB ports on the computer should
be used for this (have their own irq) and which usb ports should
therefore never be used for anything else (often two usb ports are on
an internal hub).
>>> Sorry for all these capital letters before, you must use RTIRQ scriptto
achieve this behaviour of IRQ (important point)
That may or may not be necessary on recent kernels. I'm running a
regular Linus kernel with full pre-emption turned on, and I seldom get
an xrun. I'd only go for an RT kernel if your system isn't behaving
without it.
>>> As said by Brent, RT kernel is not needed
anymore, RTIRQ scriptworks with regular ones..
--
+ Brent A. Busby + "We've all heard that a million monkeys
+ Sr. UNIX Systems Admin + banging on a million typewriters will
+ University of Chicago + eventually reproduce the entire works of
+ James Franck Institute + Shakespeare. Now, thanks to the Internet,
+ Materials Research Ctr + we know this is not true." -Robert Wilensky
>>>> Some of us have heard about the 100th
monkey, some of usSEARCH him!!! PEACE
27 Jul
27 Jul
12:04 a.m.
fred <f.rech(a)yahoo.fr> writes:
De : Brent Busby <brent(a)keycorner.org>
À : linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
Envoyé le : Dimanche 26 juillet 2015 18h46
Objet : Re: [LAU] outfitting a computer for songwriting in linux?
USB is by far the most convenient way to get Midi connectivity on a
modern Linux PC.
>>>> MIDI connector is DEFINITLY the best way to use MIDI!!!
I wasn't talking about the plug type. I use mostly 80's analog and
early digital instruments, and I only owm one Midi device (Behringer
BCR2000) that has a real USB port on it, so for the most part, I am
using Midi connectors since that's all I can use. I'm still getting
Midi in and out of the computer through an Edirol UM-3EX USB interface,
which works great in Linux.
Now, it looks like USB recording interfaces are all we
have, so we don't
have a choice. That ain't good at all.
>>>> iS IT A POSSIBILITY THAT ALL OF US aLWAYS HAVE A CHOICE: NOT BUY WHAT WE
DON'T WANT????
Well, if all manufacturers begin selling only USB interfaces, that will
leave us with a choice of buying USB or going back to tape. That's not
a very good choice.
I suppose we're in the same predicament as the Windows and Mac users who
will have the same situation -- and they wouldn't have made this
decision if it was going to lead to impossible working situation for
users in commercial production on those platforms (where the money and
their reputation is). Hopefully the thing that makes USB work nicely
for those users isn't going to come down to some trick accomplished in
their closed drivers that we can never share in.
--
+ Brent A. Busby + "We've all heard that a million monkeys
+ Sr. UNIX Systems Admin + banging on a million typewriters will
+ University of Chicago + eventually reproduce the entire works of
+ James Franck Institute + Shakespeare. Now, thanks to the Internet,
+ Materials Research Ctr + we know this is not true." -Robert Wilensky
26 Jul
26 Jul
4:17 p.m.
Hi everyone,
let me tighten this Post a bit.
No, I do not own the keyboard yet, will allow that based on what will best
let me do the following.
1 let me connect directly to the card or computer, no interface.
2 work well with the midi functionality provided only by the command line
programs in Debian.
I am going to staff someone to write the scripts for me, solving the
configuring factor.
I do not wish to do full on audio production with this setup, I have other
tools for this actually.
instead my goal is to play via the keyboard and instrumentation the
parts for my pieces, and then use something like lillypond or muscript to
create printed music for live performance.
is that a touch more clear?
Karen
On Sun, 26 Jul 2015, fred wrote:
Hi Karen,
To make long story short, yes Debian is rock solid but it's a real time investmentto
turn it into an audio workstation, you might prefer to install something likeAVLinux,
it's Debian based with everything optimized for music.
Beside, question is "how many in/out ports do you need in the soundcard"?
And, what is the keyboard, do you own it yet?
Have a nice sunday,Fred
De : Karen Lewellen <klewellen(a)shellworld.net>
À : audio users linux <linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org>
Envoyé le : Dimanche 26 juillet 2015 3h31
Objet : [LAU] outfitting a computer for songwriting in linux?
Hi All,
I've been a reader on the list for a while, not a poster until now.
I am preparing to outfit a computer for songwriting in Linux.
I will be using the command line notation options, of which there are
rather
a few from Lillypond to muscript.
I am hoping that how I picture this will match the creative reality smiles.
My first question is this.
some high end soundcards that are supported in Debian? I know its been
updated, but I intend using squeeze for a start. Getting the floor solid
before say adding updated furniture.
While I know that four duplex cards are common, I want the best quality I
can find for the work.
say if you <hope this makes sense> wanted to connect a full sized piano
keyboard to the card?
Thanks in advance,
Karen
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
4:49 p.m.
De : Karen Lewellen <klewellen(a)shellworld.net>
À : fred <f.rech(a)yahoo.fr>
Cc : Linux-audio-user <linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org>
Envoyé le : Dimanche 26 juillet 2015 16h17
Objet : Re: [LAU] outfitting a computer for songwriting in linux?
Hi everyone,
let me tighten this Post a bit.
No, I do not own the keyboard yet, will allow that based on what will best
let me do the following.
1 let me connect directly to the card or computer, no interface.
Hi Karen,
this card will never deceive you, I used it for years and it's rock solid!
http://www.m-audio.com/products/view/audiophile-2496#.VbTyhDnWRhE
For the keyboard, you surely will have advices from other persons on the list,(I use an
USB one!!!)
Happy sunday,Fred
5:20 p.m.
Prince Fred,
thank you for rocking my Sunday.
Card chosen!
will build the unit around this one.
I might even buy two, those features are fantastic!
Much appreciation,
Kare
On Sun, 26 Jul 2015, fred wrote:
De : Karen Lewellen <klewellen(a)shellworld.net>
À : fred <f.rech(a)yahoo.fr>
Cc : Linux-audio-user <linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org>
Envoyé le : Dimanche 26 juillet 2015 16h17
Objet : Re: [LAU] outfitting a computer for songwriting in linux?
Hi everyone,
let me tighten this Post a bit.
No, I do not own the keyboard yet, will allow that based on what will best
let me do the following.
1 let me connect directly to the card or computer, no interface.
Hi Karen,
this card will never deceive you, I used it for years and it's rock solid!
http://www.m-audio.com/products/view/audiophile-2496#.VbTyhDnWRhE
For the keyboard, you surely will have advices from other persons on the list,(I use an
USB one!!!)
Happy sunday,Fred
9:29 p.m.
Yes, this is a good card, I have one myself. The problem
though is that M-Audio stopped making them and Karen will
have to find one used.
fred <f.rech(a)yahoo.fr> wrote:>
this card will never deceive you, I used it for years and it's rock solid!
http://www.m-audio.com/products/view/audiophile-2496#.VbTyhDnWRhE
9:38 p.m.
New subject: outfitting a computer for songwriting in linux?
Hey hey Karen,
I have owned the M-Audio Delta 1010LT for years and now own two of them. They
have more I/Os and are just as well supported.
As for keyboards, I think practically any MIDI master keyboard will do. I've
played M-Audio keystation keyboards and found them comfortable. They come in
different
sizes, the 88 keys version has hammer action keys, if you prefer that to
synth action keyboards.
But you should be alright searching your favourite music shop for a master
keyboard with MIDI and/or USB. If you see something, which says direct
so-and-so control, DAW integration or similar, but otherwise seems perfect,
best ask again though. Not sure how they'd behave as USB-interfaces.
If you run a standard system, there won't even be anything to configure. I run
several MIDI keyboards and a few synthesizers directly connected via USB and
they work straight out of the box.
Ta-ta
----
Ffanci
* Homepage: https://freeshell.de/~silvain
* Twitter: http://twitter.com/ffanci_silvain
* GitHub: https://github.com/fsilvain
9:45 p.m.
New subject: outfitting a computer for songwriting in linux?
Good luck finding one of those as well. Seriously, am I the only
one who has noticed that M-Audio has stopped making PCI interfaces?
F. Silvain <silvain(a)freeshell.de> wrote:
I have owned the M-Audio Delta 1010LT for years and now own two of them. They
have more I/Os and are just as well supported.
9:56 p.m.
New subject: outfitting a computer for songwriting in linux?
On Sun, 26 Jul 2015, Ivan K wrote:
Good luck finding one of those as well. Seriously, am
I the only
one who has noticed that M-Audio has stopped making PCI interfaces?
Interestingly enough, m-audio still has the pages there with no label to
tell you that. There are, however, some of the PCI IFs sitting around in
dealerships still in the box. I would not count on it though. These are
E-bay buys with no waranty.
--
Len Ovens
www.ovenwerks.net
10:29 p.m.
New subject: outfitting a computer for songwriting in linux?
On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 19:45:04 +0000 (UTC), Ivan K wrote:
Good luck finding one of those as well. Seriously, am
I the only
one who has noticed that M-Audio has stopped making PCI interfaces?
Second hand! My recommendation would be Envy24, aka ice1712, usually
named 2496 or 24/96 too.
I used TerraTecs for audio and today I use them for MIDI only. I don't
know how the converters of the TerraTec compare to the M-Audio.
[rocketmouse@archlinux ~]$ amidi -l
Dir Device Name
IO hw:0,0 HDSPMx579bcc MIDI 1
IO hw:1,0 TerraTec EWX24/96 MIDI
IO hw:2,0 TerraTec EWX24/96 MIDI
IO hw:3,0,0 USB Device 0x170b:0x11 MIDI 1
IO hw:4,0,0 nanoKONTROL MIDI 1
On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 11:20:25 -0400 (EDT), Karen Lewellen wrote:
I might even buy two, those features are fantastic!
For MIDI this seems to be a good idea, for audio it's likely tricky to
sync the two cards.
Since I also own two Envy24 cards for MIDI, I must mention a minor
drawback. Since the MIDI ports of the two cards have the same name,
MIDI connections can't be saved and automatically restored, you need to
do it manually.
6:56 p.m.
On 07/26/2015 03:31 AM, Karen Lewellen wrote:
I know its been updated, but I intend using squeeze
for a start.
Hello Karen,
Debian Squeeze is EOL and only receives security updates from the
community driven squeeze-lts (Long Term Support) repositories. I'd
recommend to go for Debian Jessie unless there are really compelling
reasons not do so.
Jeremy
8:40 p.m.
Thanks,
I have a number of compelling reasons not to do so just now.
Once things are established with the system I have disks for, then I will
upgrade.
Karen
On Sun, 26 Jul 2015, Jeremy Jongepier wrote:
On 07/26/2015 03:31 AM, Karen Lewellen wrote:
I know its been updated, but I intend using
squeeze for a start.
Hello Karen,
Debian Squeeze is EOL and only receives security updates from the
community driven squeeze-lts (Long Term Support) repositories. I'd
recommend to go for Debian Jessie unless there are really compelling
reasons not do so.
Jeremy
8:58 p.m.
Karen Lewellen wrote:
I have a number of compelling reasons not to [upgrade
to Jessie] just now.
I believe that terminal applications will be less
in need of the latest upgrades than GUI apps.
Once things are established with the system I have
disks for, then I will
upgrade.
Karen
--
Joel Roth
31 Jul
31 Jul
12:40 a.m.
New subject: outfitting a computer for songwriting in linux?
On Sat, Jul 25, 2015 at 6:31 PM, Karen Lewellen <klewellen(a)shellworld.net>
wrote:
I've been a reader on the list for a while, not a poster until now.
I am preparing to outfit a computer for songwriting in Linux.
I will be using the command line notation options, of which there are
rather a few from Lillypond to muscript.
You might want to look at MUP for notation
http://www.arkkra.com/
I find it much easier than lilypond, but others disagree :) I also find it
has been output.
As part of the writing process (as well as performance, but that isn't your
question) I also use my MMA software to generate MIDI:
http://mellowood.ca/mma/index.html
Quite often I will generate MIDI from MUP and import that into MMA to check
note conflicts and just to make sure things "sound" like I think they
should.
Hope this helps,
--
**** Listen to my FREE CD at http://www.mellowood.ca/music/cedars ****
Bob van der Poel ** Wynndel, British Columbia, CANADA **
EMAIL: bob(a)mellowood.ca
WWW: http://www.mellowood.ca
3405
days inactive
3409
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
30 comments
14 participants
participants (14)
-
Blaise Alleyne -
Bob van der Poel -
Brent Busby -
david -
F. Silvain -
Fons Adriaensen -
fred -
Gene Heskett -
Ivan K -
Jeremy Jongepier -
Joel Roth -
Karen Lewellen -
Len Ovens -
Ralf Mardorf