Re: [linux-audio-user] Re: dssi-vst

osbusters@email-addr-hidden wrote:
> Russell Hanaghan writes:
>>>
>> Try http://rpm.nyvalls.se
>> I never had any luck with dssi-vst mainly because of it's inability
>> to interpret long file names or segmented / deprecated name.
>> R
>
> I don't mean to pester, but this is my first serious attempt at
> creating a DAW in Linux, after years of recording in Windows.
> Is there any good DAW's for Dummies type book I could check out? From
> what I can tell, Rosegarden is not to difficult for anyone familiar
> with Cubase, Sonar or Logic...but without the capacity to run Virtual
> Synths, it's mostly of no use to me.
> Thx for your patience. If I can get this sorted I'll be up to speed in
> no time (i hope).
> From what I can tell in the /usr/lib/dssi folder...the dssi virtual
> synth format had a .so "library" file and a folder containing the
> virtual synth-extension something like _qt. What do I use to convert
> my .dll files to this format?
> Is this what happens? and is this how Rosegarden identifies these
> files as synths (as it now does with the "trivials")?
> Thanks
>
Your not pestering. At least, not NEARLY as much as I did when I
started! Ask Dave Phillips how relentless *my* whining was when I tried
in vane to make vst's work in Linux! :D He was one of many great folks
here that helped me out.

Bottom line (IMHO)...There's a tad more effort to linux audio than
"point <--> click '.exe. <---> learn software traits and personality!
You have to learn an entirely new OS too (if you have no previous
experience with unix / linux). It's not a quick, simple thing. Lots of
reading, hours messing with software, etc. BUT, the trade off for ease
in Windows is that it robs resources and horse power from your machine.
WIn XP wont even run on older boxes with its thirst fro RAM. And theres
little to nothing you can do to change it. Not so with Linux! You can
run lighter window managers in the Xserver for example that leave more
memory and resources for music. Its generally totally taylorable to your
personal needs and the biggest difference is the latency you can achieve
with the patched kernels!

Check some of these links;

http://quicktoots.linuxaudio.org/

http://linux-sound.org/

Read up on the vst stuff but also on realtime kernels and some of the
major differences between Windows and Linux (found by our great lord of
websites "Google")

And back to Vst topic;

My take is this...yes, there's an element of purity to keeping it all
native to Linux by utilizing LADSPA fx. Some of them are really nice!
But I also like many of my VST's too. And one as an example, is a
softsynth called HyperCanvas by Roland (Edirol). It is a software
version of a GM2 128 voice midi synth module and the sounds (Drums,
bass, all regular GM2 spec instruments) just kick ass! Theres a VERY
nice reverb that is free called "Ambience" and a multi fx called
LFX1310. I have found the midi synth VERY useful with RoseGarden and
Muse. Getting it to run was a pain but it works. For other midi sound
modules, your next best bet is Qsynth (Front end GUI for Fluidsynth)
which you can load sound fonts such as those utilized in Soundblaster
soundcards.
I say, do whatever works best for you. I have no ethical problem running
windows stuff (in music production) in Linux while the apps that are out
there come up in both quality and quantity. Its a "do whatever sounds
good to you" thing AFAIC. And the evolution of Linux audio has been
swift and strong in the last few years so there is much progress.

Don't give up. Google until your eyes bleed and read, read, read! I
promise it *will* be worth it.

Cheers!

Russell

P.S. It *may* be better to not do this when your sick! It requires
patience! :)
Received on Thu Jan 4 08:15:03 2007