Re: [LAU] 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:
> > 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:
> >>
> >>> 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]
> > 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.
>
> 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."

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

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Received on Sun Feb 10 20:15:04 2013