Subject: Re: [linux-audio-user] Rewrite sfxload for native ALSA
From: Robert Jonsson (robert.jonsson_AT_dataductus.se)
Date: Thu Dec 04 2003 - 09:42:55 EET
Hi,
LinuxMedia wrote:
>>> I don't know... maybe I'm always thinking in terms of being able to set
>>> up "audio studios" for other People. The irony is that I haven't set up
>>> one computer for a friend yet (I've offered though).
>
>
>> I feel very much the same and would love to see some sort of
>> "reference" system evolve where out of all the fine apps that
>> are becoming highly usable, by mere mortals, that some guide as to
>> which ones are most suitable would really help new users.
>
>
> I've been working with Linux/Audio for about 4 years and I am still
> working out the "complete" studio. And it's always in My mind that it
> will be the "template" for other studios. I've gone a long way by
> avoiding a lot of "middle men" by using MuSE which allows both Audio and
> Midi to be synced. This also eliminates the need to deal with the snags
> (and extra work) that Jack introduces (even though i really respect what
> Jack does).
>
> I hit another delay because the new version of MuSE requires so many
> upgrades to my system
It does? I didn't know the requirements had changed so much?
Or are you talking about the other MuSE ?
If you are talking about (and I believe you are) lmuse.sf.net then it
should be spelled MusE. Tragically there is another project in the linux
audio arena (related to streaming I think) that is named MuSE.
> that I just ordered SuSE 9.0 instead of trying to
> find all these files.
This is probably a good upgrade anyway. I find that refreshing your
system once in a while helps keep track of things, not to mention new
features of distribution.
Anyways, If I find that the new version of MuSE
> will *record* audio then I've eliminated *yet* another "middle man".
I welcome you to the lmuse user-mailinglist for further discussions (if
you are not there already). Recording in MusE has been working for
months if not years. I use it all the time.
>
> Obvious, I believe in keeping it simple. I've managed to get it down to
> just a couple of easy to use (and effective) programs. Now there's less
> "stuff" to install, maintain, upgrade, learn, master. I included the
> term "master" because look how complex *every* program is, and how much
> time one *could* put in *any* one of these programs. Keep in mind that
> as soon as You learn one, there's (usually) an upgrade and then new
> features to install/set-up/learn. And if I'm really going to be able to
> contribute to the Linux/Audio community (by setting up computers for
> People), then it would be too much to be doing this with a lot of
> programs. And I've spent a lot of time testing programs until I came to
> choose what I've choosen.
>
> Well, so far, I have it down to ecasound, MuSE, Timidity and Smurf
> (sound font edior). I probly missed a few. But these are the main ones.
> And as much as I *love* ecasound, if MuSE can record a "live" track,
> then I will be down to 3 main programs that are (to Me) a "complete
> studio" (I still say ecasound and Jack are great programs though).
Just for the record, muse is due for a release soon, the last in the 0.6
series, after that 0.7 will follow (when it's ready), 0.7 will require
Jack so you will have to get used to installing Jack I guess ;).
>
>> My thoughts are to try and create a reasonable piece of music
>> that *I* find listenable and not too embarrasing, mainly so there
>> are no copyright issues, and create some oggs then write up
>> (heh, sure pal) a HOWTO and how I created the end result (that
>> will never be "ended" because it could always be reused and
>> re-released as another version).
>
>
> If You're referring to explaining the software and tecniques You used,
> I've kind of resigned Myself to adding what I can (when I can) on this
> list (and other places). But I guess I wont ever really be able to
> contribute *completly* until I'm actually setting up (and possibly
> maintaining) systems for People. Unfortunatly, I'm more "creative
> minded" than I am "technical minded" so I will choose hardware that
> works and that will be the "template". This way, I could use "dd" to
> create an exact copy of My drive, put it in the same hardware as I have
> then the rest of the time can be spent on teaching People how to use the
> software. I was working with a (hardware) guy a few towns over but He
> moved away.
>
> Actually, there's much more to it than the above stuff. Of course,
> there's the ongoing building of soundfonts and the extra stuff like
> that. In fact, there's a lot of things like that I'm doing in along with
> the above to keep inproving the situation. But aren't we all (-:
>
> Rocco
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Thu Dec 04 2003 - 09:46:13 EET