16 Mar
2018
16 Mar
'18
11:58 a.m.
I have an old problem (also posted in august) that I'l like some ideas how to solve.
I have two computers, a laptop and a desktop box running identical setups: Debian stretch
with 4.12.0-14.3-liquorix-686-pae kernel and jack version 1.9.10.
On the laptop my mtk22 works perfectly, on the box the first 16 channels are silent.
The laptop has two usb ports, one is blue (usb3 I guess) and one not blue (usb2 I guess),
the mtk22 works with all 24 channels on both ports.
The box has several usb ports, some build-in (usb2) and an usb3 PCI card I added. On all
usb ports the first 16 channels of the mtk22 are silent.
I'm led to believe that the problem is a software/configuration problem on the box,
due to:
1) the box worked perfectly with the mtk22 when I ran debian 8 (jessie)
2) the box doesn't work even with the build in usb ports
I'm suspecting "something" might be grabbing the first 16 channels of the
mtk22 somehow, tried disabling pulseaudio (sudo chmod -x usr/bin/pulseaudio and
rebooting), still doesn't work.
Obviously I tried with several usb cables, the results are the same: the laptop works, the
box doesn't.
Any ideas how to approach this, pointers, things to check/try out would be greatly
appreciated! I'm pretty lost...
Thanks in advance!
--
Atte
http://atte.dk http://a773.dk
16 Mar
16 Mar
5:57 p.m.
On Fri, 16 Mar 2018 10:58:36 +0100
Atte <atte(a)youmail.dk> wrote:
I have two computers, a laptop and a desktop box
running identical setups: Debian stretch with 4.12.0-14.3-liquorix-686-pae kernel and jack
version 1.9.10.
On the laptop my mtk22 works perfectly, on the box the first 16 channels are silent.
I don't understand what you mean by 'silent' here.
If you are taking an input signal and seeing it at your DAW but not hearing
output, check that the USB Return buttons on each channel are not pressed.
When pushed in, the mixer is expecting those channels to take their input
from the computer, which allows the use of plugins in a DAW to be used to
effect the 'live' output from the mixer.
You refer to "the first 16 channels". This raises the important question
of what happens on channels 17/18. The MTK22 has 14 mono channel strips,
followed by two that can accept either a mono XLR or 2 1/4" connections
(input channels 15/16 and 17/18, followed by one that only accepts one
or two 1/4" (input channels 19/20), then finally one that takes either 2 RCA
or a USB input (channels 21/22).
What are these upper channels (17-22) doing differently than the others
1) the box worked perfectly with the mtk22 when I ran
debian 8 (jessie)
2) the box doesn't work even with the build in usb ports
I'm suspecting "something" might be grabbing the first 16 channels of the
mtk22 somehow, tried disabling pulseaudio (sudo chmod -x usr/bin/pulseaudio and
rebooting), still doesn't work.
I can't speak to anything pulse related as I don't use it and don't
install it on my machines (Arch does not make it a dependency like other
distros).
It could be a JACK routing issue with some config persisting from something
else. Have you looked at the routing table, both at the JACK and at the DAW
levels?
--
======================================================================
Joe Hartley - UNIX/network Consultant - jh(a)brainiac.com
Without deviation from the norm, "progress" is not possible. - FZappa
6:21 p.m.
No idea if this is related. My MOTU Ultralite AVB has a problem with
capture. The USB audio driver gets confused about which channel is which,
and so channels 1-8 can get "mapped" as 16-24 or 24-32 (ditto for other
groups of channels). The remapping is random (it is different every time
the device is opened. It seems to affect only capture, not playback.
this is with: Advanced Linux Sound Architecture Driver Version
k4.9.0-3-rt-amd64.
On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 11:57 AM, Joe Hartley <jh(a)brainiac.com> wrote:
On Fri, 16 Mar 2018 10:58:36 +0100
Atte <atte(a)youmail.dk> wrote:
I have two computers, a laptop and a desktop box
running identical
setups: Debian stretch with 4.12.0-14.3-liquorix-686-pae kernel
and jack
version 1.9.10.
On the laptop my mtk22 works perfectly, on the box the first 16 channels
are
silent.
I don't understand what you mean by 'silent' here.
If you are taking an input signal and seeing it at your DAW but not hearing
output, check that the USB Return buttons on each channel are not pressed.
When pushed in, the mixer is expecting those channels to take their input
from the computer, which allows the use of plugins in a DAW to be used to
effect the 'live' output from the mixer.
You refer to "the first 16 channels". This raises the important question
of what happens on channels 17/18. The MTK22 has 14 mono channel strips,
followed by two that can accept either a mono XLR or 2 1/4" connections
(input channels 15/16 and 17/18, followed by one that only accepts one
or two 1/4" (input channels 19/20), then finally one that takes either 2
RCA
or a USB input (channels 21/22).
What are these upper channels (17-22) doing differently than the others
1) the box worked perfectly with the mtk22 when I
ran debian 8 (jessie)
2) the box doesn't work even with the build in usb ports
I'm suspecting "something" might be grabbing the first 16 channels of
the mtk22 somehow, tried disabling pulseaudio (sudo chmod -x
usr/bin/pulseaudio and rebooting), still doesn't work.
I can't speak to anything pulse related as I don't use it and don't
install it on my machines (Arch does not make it a dependency like other
distros).
It could be a JACK routing issue with some config persisting from something
else. Have you looked at the routing table, both at the JACK and at the
DAW
levels?
--
======================================================================
Joe Hartley - UNIX/network Consultant - jh(a)brainiac.com
Without deviation from the norm, "progress" is not possible. - FZappa
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
https://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
6:32 p.m.
On Fri, 16 Mar 2018 12:21:01 -0400
Paul Davis <paul(a)linuxaudiosystems.com> wrote:
No idea if this is related. My MOTU Ultralite AVB has
a problem with
capture. The USB audio driver gets confused about which channel is which,
and so channels 1-8 can get "mapped" as 16-24 or 24-32 (ditto for other
groups of channels). The remapping is random (it is different every time
the device is opened. It seems to affect only capture, not playback.
Hmmm. I can say that I've never had this issue with my MTK22, which I use
for capturing audio 95% of the time. It remains a question as to what Atte
means by silent, but this sort of issue could conceivably cause his problem.
If his ch1 input was coming up on ch17, that would be informative.
--
======================================================================
Joe Hartley - UNIX/network Consultant - jh(a)brainiac.com
Without deviation from the norm, "progress" is not possible. - FZappa
7:13 p.m.
On Fri, 16 Mar 2018 12:31:57 -0400
Joe Hartley <jh(a)brainiac.com> wrote:
If his ch1 input was coming up on ch17, that would be
informative.
It's now coming up anywhere, not even capture 23/24...
Cheers
--
Atte
http://atte.dk http://a773.dk
7:12 p.m.
On Fri, 16 Mar 2018 12:21:01 -0400
Paul Davis <paul(a)linuxaudiosystems.com> wrote:
No idea if this is related. My MOTU Ultralite AVB has
a problem with
capture. The USB audio driver gets confused about which channel is which,
and so channels 1-8 can get "mapped" as 16-24 or 24-32 (ditto for other
groups of channels). The remapping is random (it is different every time
the device is opened. It seems to affect only capture, not playback.
Is this reproducable across different computers?
I though about some USB driver issue. How can I investigate something along those lines. I
don't see anything odd in dmesg...
Cheers
--
Atte
http://atte.dk http://a773.dk
7:09 p.m.
On Fri, 16 Mar 2018 11:57:13 -0400
Joe Hartley <jh(a)brainiac.com> wrote:
On Fri, 16 Mar 2018 10:58:36 +0100
Atte <atte(a)youmail.dk> wrote:
Ok sorry for being unclear!
Let's say I have input going on all 22 channels. By "silent" I mean that if
I route any of the first 16 tracks in qjackctl to a recording program (while testing I
mostly used mhwaveedit) there's no input in the recording program, it's like they
are muted. Input on channel 17-24 (23-24 are master) pass through just fine. Basically it
behaves as if I didn't route those first 16 channels in qjackctl. Makes sense?
Just to make it clear! I can hear the audio, though my monitors connected to MST out.
I have two computers, a laptop and a desktop box
running identical setups: Debian stretch with 4.12.0-14.3-liquorix-686-pae kernel and jack
version 1.9.10.
On the laptop my mtk22 works perfectly, on the box the first 16 channels are silent.
I don't understand what you mean by 'silent' here. If you are taking an input signal and seeing it at
your DAW but not hearing
output, check that the USB Return buttons on each channel are not pressed.
They are not pressed. I've been testing this back and forth between the laptop (works
perfectly) and box (not working) for hours yesterday (and when I installed stretch in
august and occationally when I got sufficiently annoyed time times in between) and the
mixer is not touched, just move the USB cable from box to laptop, laptop works, box
doesn't.
When pushed in, the mixer is expecting those channels
to take their input
from the computer, which allows the use of plugins in a DAW to be used to
effect the 'live' output from the mixer.
I'm aware of that...
You refer to "the first 16 channels". This
raises the important question
of what happens on channels 17/18.
They work as expected. Whatever I connect to input 17 can be routed in qjackctl from
capture_17 and the program it gets routed to "hears" the audio (again it's
like audio on capture 1-16 are just muted.
There's something to that number 16 that smells like software...
What are these upper channels (17-22) doing
differently than the others
Passing the audio through capture 17-22
It could be a JACK routing issue with some config
persisting from something
else. Have you looked at the routing table, both at the JACK and at the DAW
levels?
Could you elaborate on "routing table"? I left any DAW out of these tests
(obviously I discovered the problem in my DAW), the problem is before that. The two pieces
of software I used for these tests are mhwaveedit and renoise, manually connected in
qjackctl.
Cheers
--
Atte
http://atte.dk http://a773.dk
7:32 p.m.
On Fri, 16 Mar 2018, Atte wrote:
Let's say I have input going on all 22 channels.
By "silent" I mean that
if I route any of the first 16 tracks in qjackctl to a recording program
(while testing I mostly used mhwaveedit) there's no input in the
recording program, it's like they are muted. Input on channel 17-24
(23-24 are master) pass through just fine. Basically it behaves as if I
didn't route those first 16 channels in qjackctl. Makes sense?
The one thing I can think of that I don't think has been mentioned... a
lot of the linux systems save the ALSA setup on a per device basis and
then when that device shows up it sets that device the same as it was the
last time. so the question is if there are any alsa controls that the
laptop has set one way and the box the other. Do you see any controls at
all with alsamixer? The QAS utilities has a GUI QasHctl that may be useful
for comparing.
I do know that some USB devices do not have any alsa controls at all, but
I do not know what the case is with the MTK22.
For a comandline aproach, alsactl is the tool to use, it should be able to
output a list of all settings which you may be able to run diff on if they
are saved to a file from both computers.
--
Len Ovens
www.ovenwerks.net
8:55 p.m.
On Fri, 16 Mar 2018 10:31:56 -0700 (PDT)
Len Ovens <len(a)ovenwerks.net> wrote:
The QAS utilities has a GUI QasHctl that may be useful
for comparing.
Yes!!!!!
The first 16 channels had capture volume turned down on the box, turned them up and
there's audio through as expected.
Seems to be a minor issue with my beatstep pro and the mtk22 fighting over the same usb
id, but I think I can solve that.
Thanks a bunch, I'll be forever grateful!!!!!
Cheers
--
Atte
http://atte.dk http://a773.dk
9:13 p.m.
Now that the possible bug/malfunction issue has been worked out and we
know it works well with Linux... How do you like the sound of the MTK22?
(Making notes regarding my options if my Multiface II ever died...which
I'm sure it will someday...)
--
- Brent Busby + ===============================================
+ With the rise of social networking
-- Studio -- + sites, computers are making people
-- Amadeus -- + easier to use every day.
----------------+ ===============================================
9:35 p.m.
On Fri, 16 Mar 2018 14:13:56 -0500
Brent Busby <brent(a)keycorner.org> wrote:
Now that the possible bug/malfunction issue has been
worked out and we
know it works well with Linux... How do you like the sound of the MTK22?
I'm very happy with the sound of mine. As a mixer for live music, I like
the channel strips a lot. The limiters on the first 8 channels are great
for drums or inconsistent vocalists. The EQ sounds great, but I
occasionally need to remind myself that since it's asymmetric, there's
a wide Q when I boost and a narrower Q when I cut, but it's not at all
hard to deal with and sounds great. The Ghost preamps are nice and quiet,
and the routing is really flexible.
I've done a lot of live shows on boards ranging from high end to pure
shite, and there's nothing about the MTK22 I dislike. On the recording
side, you're limited to 48k/24 bit, but I never saw the need to do 96k
even with my Delta1010, which supports it. I'm very happy with the
recordings I get from it. I would buy this mixer again in a heartbeat.
--
======================================================================
Joe Hartley - UNIX/network Consultant - jh(a)brainiac.com
Without deviation from the norm, "progress" is not possible. - FZappa
11:01 p.m.
Den 2018-03-16 kl. 20:35, skrev Joe Hartley:
On Fri, 16 Mar 2018 14:13:56 -0500
Brent Busby <brent(a)keycorner.org> wrote:
The same here. Although I bought the smaller one, MTK12. It was your
positive review of it here on LAU that convinced me of the MTK and I'm
really glad I bought one.
Cheers,
--
/bengan
Now that the possible bug/malfunction issue has
been worked out and we
know it works well with Linux... How do you like the sound of the MTK22?
I'm
very happy with the sound of mine.
10:13 p.m.
On Fri, 16 Mar 2018 14:13:56 -0500
Brent Busby <brent(a)keycorner.org> wrote:
Now that the possible bug/malfunction issue has been
worked out and we
know it works well with Linux... How do you like the sound of the MTK22?
I love it, been using it since it came out about 1½ years ago. I use it with my eurorack
system, have done a few albums on it, even brought it to a few live shows.
The sound is crisp and clean, although still warm.
Cheers
--
Atte
http://atte.dk http://a773.dk
18 Mar
18 Mar
12:20 a.m.
On Fri, 16 Mar 2018 14:13:56 -0500
Brent Busby <brent(a)keycorner.org> wrote:
Now that the possible bug/malfunction issue has been
worked out and we
know it works well with Linux...
Ok, everything works great now, but I can't get things running over usb3 (at least on
the box). What really surprises me is that I seem to be able to record 24 tracks with 11
ms latency over usb2. Everything is super smooth.
atte@skagen:~$ cat .jackdrc
/usr/bin/jackd -dalsa -dhw:MTK,0 -r44100 -p256 -n2
Since it works, maybe I should just leave it there, but I'm wondering what I'm
missing out on, compared to when interfacing with the mtk22 over usb3.
Cheers
--
Atte
http://atte.dk http://a773.dk
12:52 a.m.
On Sat, 17 Mar 2018 23:20:20 +0100
Atte <atte(a)youmail.dk> wrote:
Since it works, maybe I should just leave it there,
but I'm wondering what I'm missing out on, compared to when interfacing with the
mtk22 over usb3.
Nothing, it's a USB2 device.
--
======================================================================
Joe Hartley - UNIX/network Consultant - jh(a)brainiac.com
Without deviation from the norm, "progress" is not possible. - FZappa
1:23 a.m.
On Sat, 17 Mar 2018 18:52:37 -0400
Joe Hartley <jh(a)brainiac.com> wrote:
On Sat, 17 Mar 2018 23:20:20 +0100
Atte <atte(a)youmail.dk> wrote:
Wow, how did I miss that? Major bummer!
And why was I under the impression that usb2 could care much fewer channels?
Thanks!
--
Atte
http://atte.dk http://a773.dk
Since it works, maybe I should just leave it
there, but I'm wondering what I'm missing out on, compared to when interfacing
with the mtk22 over usb3.
Nothing, it's a USB2 device. 
1:47 a.m.
On Sun, 18 Mar 2018 00:23:50 +0100
Atte <atte(a)youmail.dk> wrote:
On Sat, 17 Mar 2018 18:52:37 -0400
Joe Hartley <jh(a)brainiac.com> wrote:
I think a lot of people greatly under-estimate USB2 capabilities.
--
Will J Godfrey
http://www.musically.me.uk
Say you have a poem and I have a tune.
Exchange them and we can both have a poem, a tune, and a song.
On Sat, 17 Mar 2018 23:20:20 +0100
Atte <atte(a)youmail.dk> wrote:
Wow, how did I miss that? Major bummer!
And why was I under the impression that usb2 could care much fewer channels?
Thanks! Since it works, maybe I should just leave it
there, but I'm wondering what I'm missing out on, compared to when interfacing
with the mtk22 over usb3.
Nothing, it's a USB2 device. 
3:07 a.m.
On 18/03/18 10:47, Will Godfrey wrote:
On Sun, 18 Mar 2018 00:23:50 +0100
Atte <atte(a)youmail.dk> wrote:
Indeed. I record 48 channels at 48k/24 bit from a Digico UB MADI which
is a USB2 device. Main bottleneck is disk I/O which is solved by
recording to SSD.
On Sat, 17 Mar 2018 18:52:37 -0400
Joe Hartley <jh(a)brainiac.com> wrote:
I think a lot of people greatly under-estimate USB2 capabilities.
On Sat, 17 Mar 2018 23:20:20 +0100
Atte <atte(a)youmail.dk> wrote:
Wow, how did I
miss that? Major bummer!
And why was I under the impression that usb2 could care much fewer channels?
Thanks! Since it works, maybe I should just leave it
there, but I'm wondering what I'm missing out on, compared to when interfacing
with the mtk22 over usb3.
Nothing, it's a USB2 device. 
7:07 a.m.
On Sun, 18 Mar 2018 12:06:59 +1100, Roger wrote:
On 18/03/18 10:47, Will Godfrey wrote:
I didn't follow this thread, perhaps nobody linked against
https://support.focusrite.com/hc/en-gb/articles/208095469-USB-2-0-vs-USB-3-0
or similar until now. I experience much more issues with my
professional PCIe card, than with my prosumer USB device ;). OTOH USB
could be tricky. You might need to unbind USB ports and/or to test all
available USB ports (unbinding sometimes is impossible), an USB slot
bracket might be required to do this.
On Sun, 18 Mar 2018 00:23:50 +0100
Atte <atte(a)youmail.dk> wrote:
Indeed. I record 48 channels at 48k/24 bit from a Digico UB MADI which
is a USB2 device. Main bottleneck is disk I/O which is solved by
recording to SSD. On Sat, 17 Mar 2018 18:52:37 -0400
Joe Hartley <jh(a)brainiac.com> wrote:
I think a lot of people greatly under-estimate USB2 capabilities.
On Sat, 17 Mar 2018 23:20:20 +0100
Atte <atte(a)youmail.dk> wrote:
> Since it works, maybe I should just leave it there, but I'm
> wondering what I'm missing out on, compared to when interfacing
> with the mtk22 over usb3.
Nothing, it's a USB2 device.
Wow, how did I miss that? Major bummer!
And why was I under the impression that usb2 could care much fewer
channels?
Thanks!
7:21 a.m.
On Sun, 18 Mar 2018 06:07:13 +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
I didn't follow this thread, perhaps nobody linked
against
https://support.focusrite.com/hc/en-gb/articles/208095469-USB-2-0-vs-USB-3-0
or similar until now. I experience much more issues with my
professional PCIe card, than with my prosumer USB device ;). OTOH USB
could be tricky. You might need to unbind USB ports and/or to test all
available USB ports (unbinding sometimes is impossible), an USB slot
bracket might be required to do this.
Oops, half-truth, unbinding an USB port is one thing, but could be much
irrelevant, even if it should be possible. Testing all available USB
ports is useful, but again, keep in mind that getting access to all
USB ports might require at least one USB slot bracket.
10:34 a.m.
On Sun, 18 Mar 2018 12:06:59 +1100
Roger <gurusonic(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 18/03/18 10:47, Will Godfrey wrote:
Ok, great!
Thanks all for chiming in, I'm a happy puppy over here!!!
Cheers
--
Atte
http://atte.dk http://a773.dk
I think a lot of people greatly under-estimate
USB2 capabilities.
Indeed. I record 48 channels at 48k/24 bit from a Digico UB MADI which
is a USB2 device. Main bottleneck is disk I/O which is solved by
recording to SSD.
2495
days inactive
2497
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
20 comments
9 participants
participants (9)
-
Atte -
Bengt Gördén -
Brent Busby -
Joe Hartley -
Len Ovens -
Paul Davis -
Ralf Mardorf -
Roger -
Will Godfrey