Hi Moshe,
Yup recent convert to Arch here, its a very nice way of keeping on top of
your linux distro: All options are available to you, config files are
*very* well laid out, and documentation is extremely good. For
configuration its really flexible, but it does require a certain amount of
config before its running optimally in my experience.
That said, configuring it is very easy and rewarding, it just does what you
tell it to do, without trying to be smarter than you and changing stuff for
you.
AVLinux is a more "polished" solution and you'll no doubt need less effort
to get it running, but then you've lost some control over how it works, and
you'll have to pray its good.
TangoStudio is Ubuntu based, and I had a pretty good experience there...
not very RT performance, but stable @ 20ms or so. Here on Arch I'm pushing
to 5ms, and getting pretty good results :)
I'ma happy Arch user, but its definatly not the distro for everyone... as
some Arch people put it: Arch doesn't find you, Archers find Arch
-Harry
On , Moshe Werner <moshwe@email-addr-hidden> wrote:
> Hi Raffaele,
> thanks for the reply!
> My needs would be:
> Mainly tracking (by now up to 8 channels at given time).
> Mixing and monitoring - Yep
> Realtime fx - also yes.
> Tried AVlinux and found it to be pretty cool, but its 32 bit and till now
> I'm used to 64 bit and wouldlike to keep using the more advanced PC
> technology. (Finally when Protools 11 takes the leap into 64bit
> technology it would be sad to see my Linux system going backwards).
> Heard good things about Arch in audio use too. Anyone got experience with
> Arch use for pro audio?
> On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 5:05 PM, Raffaele Morelli
> raffaele.morelli@email-addr-hidden> wrote:
> 2012/1/9 Moshe Werner moshwe@email-addr-hidden>
> Hi everyone,
> after many years of studio work using the openSuse distro with the
> kernel-rt from Jan Engelhard it seems that he no longer continues his
> great work on rt kernels.
> Being more on the recording engineer side of things and not a Linux
> expert (user yes, expert no) I really fret at the thought of patching and
> compiling my own kernel package.
> I would like to hear your opinions on what distro is solid for audio work
> and has a reliable rt kernel.
> Also I would appreciate if you could explain the degree of difficulty and
> learning curve of the specific distro.
> debian lover since 2005 here :-) rock solid
> I won't try to explain debian learning curve because of too many if/then
> sentences to work with :-)
> A lot of work has been done since 2005 and actually AFAIK the features
> offered by the rt patch are being merged in the kernel mainline little by
> little and actually I can say that a debian stock kernel is really near
> the rt one... depending on your needs (record? mixing? both? +
> monitoring? + realtime fx? and how many tracks?...).
> BTW, there are several multimedia distros around and they do not require
> you to do tricky things on your system and some are debian based (eg. AV
> linux).
> PS I tried to use Ubuntu on the same machine I use openSuse 11.2 on and
> got pretty bad results regarding latency and x runs on jack 2.
> Don't know about openSuse but Ubuntu is debian with lipstick and
> makeup... too much IMHO :-)
> regards
> -r
> --
> L'unica speranza di catarsi, ammesso che ne esista una,
> resta affidata all'istinto di ribellione, alla rivolta non isterilita
> in progetti, alla protesta violenta e viscerale.
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-audio-user mailing list
> Linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden
> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Received on Mon Jan 9 20:15:02 2012
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Jan 09 2012 - 20:15:02 EET