10 Feb
2013
10 Feb
'13
2:52 p.m.
On Sun, 2013-02-10 at 12:06 +0000, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 12:17:34PM +0100, Jörn
Nettingsmeier wrote:
That's why calibration at home usually is limited to premagnetisation.
Another issue for hobby engineers is to get the service manual.
However, for some humans it's hard to spend much time with the computer,
but it's easy for them to use stand alone devices.
I guess the original comparison (8 track analog vs a Linux computer) is
about the difference between a computer and (analog + digital) stand
alone devices.
Regards,
Ralf
and if you want to include the setup and
configuration of a
bare-bones machine, then please also include the soldering iron and
oscilloscope :)
And a calibrated test tape [snip] 
10 Feb
10 Feb
4:21 p.m.
New subject: So what do you think sucks about Linux audio ?
On 02/10/2013 08:52 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
On Sun, 2013-02-10 at 12:06 +0000, Fons Adriaensen
wrote:
One glaring difference is that with analog equipment, it is fast and
easy to get sound recorded. You can unbox it, and you will be able to
record and playback almost immediately. It may take you time to learn
how to get GOOD sounds recorded, but that is a different topic. He can
learn about degaussing at a later time. He can learn head alignment at
his leisure. He can still record, just maybe not at the highest quality
yet.
With computer audio, and Linux more than some, even if you follow one of
the step by step instructions which can be found on the net, it still
may not work. You may have a different kernel than were used in the
instructions. Pulse Audio may not work the way the instructions say it
will (if at all). Your device names will all be different than what is
in the instructions. Your sound card may not work with the version of
alsa used as an example. Systemd and dbus may be causing problems which
weren't an issue in the 5 year old instructions. Your choice of distro
and version can make a huge impact. Inevitably, your jack parameters
will be different than what are given in various examples - and often
with no apparent logic as to why that is so. Until ALL of those things
are solved, the recording environment is unusable.
In other words, even if someone is an experienced audio person, and has
tried to search out various HOW-TOs to get his computer set up, it still
may not work. At all.
An experienced linux person will likely be more able to get things
running quickly, but if the goal is to get 'end-users' to use audio on
linux, then the target market must be "people who want to perform audio
tasks" and NOT "people who already use linux."
--
---
My bands, CD projects, music, news, and pictures:
http://www.lateralforce.com
My blog, with commentary on a variety of things, including audio,
mixing, equipment, etc, is at:
http://audioandmore.wordpress.com
Staat heißt das kälteste aller kalten Ungeheuer. Kalt lügt es auch;
und diese Lüge kriecht aus seinem Munde: 'Ich, der Staat, bin das Volk.'
- [Friedrich Nietzsche]
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 12:17:34PM +0100, Jörn
Nettingsmeier wrote:
That's why
calibration at home usually is limited to premagnetisation.
Another issue for hobby engineers is to get the service manual.
However, for some humans it's hard to spend much time with the computer,
but it's easy for them to use stand alone devices.
I guess the original comparison (8 track analog vs a Linux computer) is
about the difference between a computer and (analog + digital) stand
alone devices. and if you want to include the setup and
configuration of a
bare-bones machine, then please also include the soldering iron and
oscilloscope :)
And a calibrated test tape [snip]
4:48 p.m.
New subject: So what do you think sucks about Linux audio ?
On Sun, 2013-02-10 at 10:21 -0500, Al Thompson wrote:
On 02/10/2013 08:52 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
Full ACK. But it's not analog vs digital. You could buy a pre-build
computer, but it anyway would not be that comfortable for some users, as
a stand alone digital (or analog) device + even a pre-build computer
tends to fail more often, than stand alone devices do, even if it's
caused by the user.
Some on this list perhaps know how to set up some 19" reverbs and how to
set up reverbs on a PC or Mac, independent of the OS.
19" reverbs won't add load to another effect processor or synth, even
for heavy reverb settings, of much higher quality than all software
reverbs I know. So for some usages stand alone gear has real advantages,
also for skilled engineers and for sure they are easier to use for
unskilled people.
Regards,
Ralf
On Sun, 2013-02-10 at 12:06 +0000, Fons
Adriaensen wrote:
One glaring difference is that with analog equipment, it is fast and
easy to get sound recorded. You can unbox it, and you will be able to
record and playback almost immediately. It may take you time to learn
how to get GOOD sounds recorded, but that is a different topic. He can
learn about degaussing at a later time. He can learn head alignment at
his leisure. He can still record, just maybe not at the highest quality
yet.
With computer audio, and Linux more than some, even if you follow one of
the step by step instructions which can be found on the net, it still
may not work. You may have a different kernel than were used in the
instructions. Pulse Audio may not work the way the instructions say it
will (if at all). Your device names will all be different than what is
in the instructions. Your sound card may not work with the version of
alsa used as an example. Systemd and dbus may be causing problems which
weren't an issue in the 5 year old instructions. Your choice of distro
and version can make a huge impact. Inevitably, your jack parameters
will be different than what are given in various examples - and often
with no apparent logic as to why that is so. Until ALL of those things
are solved, the recording environment is unusable.
In other words, even if someone is an experienced audio person, and has
tried to search out various HOW-TOs to get his computer set up, it still
may not work. At all.
An experienced linux person will likely be more able to get things
running quickly, but if the goal is to get 'end-users' to use audio on
linux, then the target market must be "people who want to perform audio
tasks" and NOT "people who already use linux." On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 12:17:34PM +0100, Jörn
Nettingsmeier wrote:
That's why
calibration at home usually is limited to premagnetisation.
Another issue for hobby engineers is to get the service manual.
However, for some humans it's hard to spend much time with the computer,
but it's easy for them to use stand alone devices.
I guess the original comparison (8 track analog vs a Linux computer) is
about the difference between a computer and (analog + digital) stand
alone devices. and if you want to include the setup and
configuration of a
bare-bones machine, then please also include the soldering iron and
oscilloscope :)
And a calibrated test tape [snip] 
5:43 p.m.
New subject: So what do you think sucks about Linux audio ?
On Sun, February 10, 2013 7:21 am, Al Thompson wrote:
One glaring difference is that with analog equipment,
it is fast and
easy to get sound recorded. You can unbox it, and you will be able to
record and playback almost immediately. It may take you time to learn
how to get GOOD sounds recorded, but that is a different topic. He can
learn about degaussing at a later time. He can learn head alignment at
his leisure. He can still record, just maybe not at the highest quality
yet.
With computer audio, and Linux more than some, even if you follow one of
the step by step instructions which can be found on the net, it still
may not work.
Apples to apples.... For what most people expect out of Linux The analog
side would include not just a tape machine, but also at least a 24channel
mixer, a stack of effects boxes as high as your head, an empty rack with a
pile of bits all of which require wiring of some sort, Setting each piece
of equipment to the correct level (default)... even the mixing console a
lot of people used to use required wiring (soldering) before you ever even
hit the power switch.
To compare linux to what your example of analog, install just about any
linux distro, plug a mic into the internal sound card and speakers into
the audio out, start audacity, hit record and go. No jack, no ardour, no
learning... good clean sound. The user can learn about jack and ardour
later, but he can record sound right now. Instead of going and finding a
tape machine which when analog was big would be hundreds of dollars (even
for cassette based setups), they only need a mic... $30
--
Len Ovens
www.OvenWerks.net
4306
days inactive
4306
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
3 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Al Thompson -
Len Ovens -
Ralf Mardorf