Re: [LAD] So what do you think sucks about Linux audio ?

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Fons Adriaensen <fons@...>, linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org <linux-audio-dev@...>
Date: Thursday, February 7, 2013 - 11:47 pm

--1298779297-761314771-1360280864=:81418
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

=0A>> Inconsistent support for VST/VSTi plugins.=0A=0A> Paul Davis has alre=
ady pointed out that this can mean two=0A> different things. If someone's w=
orkflow *really* depends on=0A> native Windows plugins - repeat *if* repeat=
*really* - then=0A> why on earth should such a person want to use Linux ?=
=0A> As regards 'native Linux' VST, I don't see the point of it.=0A=0AI'll =
counter your question with another one; regardless of a user's workflow, wh=
y *wouldn't* we, as LAD's, want to enable as many different kinds of plugin=
s to work on Linux as possible? From a user's perspective, having more choi=
ce is just better, and there are *tons* of quality DSP tools out there in t=
he VST format; there's absolutely no down side.=0A=0AMichael=0A=0A=0A=0A___=
_____________________________=0A From: Fons Adriaensen =0ATo: linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org =0ASent: Thursday, February 7,=
2013 5:08 PM=0ASubject: Re: [LAD] So what do you think sucks about Linux a=
udio ?=0A =0AOn Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 09:58:14AM -0500, Dave Phillips wrote:=
=0A=0A> Too many distros.=0A> Too many audio-optimized distros.=0A=0AWhat s=
hould be the problem here ? Natural selection will deal=0Awith this. Those =
that 'work' will survive.=0A=0A> Confusion re: desktops, and GUI toolkits.=
=0A=0AThat's actually two issues. Regarding GUI toolkits, you use=0Aeither =
Gtk, or Qt, or a thin layer on top of X11 as I'm =0Adoing. All three of the=
m will be available in any distro,=0Aso I don't see a problem with those. =
=0A=0ADesktops are another issue. IMHO any app that depends on a=0Aparticul=
ar desktop environment to work (or fully work) is=0Ajust broken. There's a =
lot of those around, but fortunately=0Amost of them are not audio related.=
=0A=0A> Too difficult to set up audio system.=0A> JACK is a pain.=0A=0AIt c=
ertainly was in its first years and for a large part that=0Awas due to limi=
ted system support, immature real-time libs,=0Aetc. Since longer than I can=
remember it 'just works'. =0A=0AAssuming you want a system meant to produc=
e music or process=0Aaudio, once you have Jack working that's more or less =
it.=0AAnd that hasn't been a problem (for me at least) for a long=0Atime. I=
t's years since I have compiled patched kernels, or=0Ahad to install Jack f=
rom source.=0A=0AFact is that the introduction of PA into mainstream system=
s has=0Acreated a lot a trouble - Jack and PA serve really different=0Apurp=
oses and don't go together easily. =0A=0AAnother problem is that there are =
still lots of apps around that=0Ahave no native Jack support, or broken sup=
port usually provided=0Aby some 'cross platform' toolkit. Just dump those. =
Refuse to use=0Athem. Don't advertise them.=0A=0A> Not enough native plugin=
s, esp. instruments.=0A=0ASome things are missing. But why on earth should =
an instrument=0Abe a plugin ? 'Real' instruments are not plugins, they prov=
ide=0Aan input signal to whatever SW you use.=0A=0A> Inconsistent support f=
or VST/VSTi plugins.=0A=0APaul Davis has already pointed out that this can =
mean two=0Adifferent things. If someone's workflow *really* depends on=0Ana=
tive Windows plugins - repeat *if* repeat *really* - then=0Awhy on earth sh=
ould such a person want to use Linux ?=0AAs regards 'native Linux' VST, I d=
on't see the point of it.=0A=0A> Too many unstable/unfinished applications.=
=0A=0AAgree 100%, not just apps but also plugins - there are lots=0Aof thos=
e either don't do the thing they are supposed to do,=0Aor do it very poorly=
, or crash when you give them the right=0Ainputs. Basic lack of care for qu=
ality, ignorance, incompetence=0Aor any combination of those. Just let them=
die and be forgotten.=0A=0A> Too many=A0 "standards" (esp. wrt plugins).=
=0A=0ANone of them being really standard, nor really up to the task.=0AWhic=
h means there will even be more. I wouldn't really want to=0Asee any of the=
existing ones becoming the only choice. Also,=0AIMHO there's nothing wrong=
with an ad-hoc plugin standard, one=0Atailor-made for a particular app. Si=
nce it won't try to be=0Aeverything to everyone, it would probably be a lot=
simpler and=0Aeasier to use than one that does. I'm currently developing t=
wo=0Aapp that will have plugins. They won't have a common standard.=0ABut e=
ach of them will be easy to port your code to.=0A=0A> Poor support for cert=
ain modes of composition (think Ableton Live).=0A=0AI really couldn't care =
less. If someone wants to indulge in those=0A'modes of composition', he/she=
should just use the tools that define=0Athem. I do not buy the idea that L=
inux should offer free clones of=0Awhatever exists in the commercial world.=
=0A=0A> Too much conflict/fragmentation within the development community.=
=0A=0AGood. We are not a religion or a sect. People will disagree, compete=
=0Aor just do their own thing and even then share their work anyway,=0Aleav=
ing you with the choice.=0A=0A> Poor external/internal session management.=
=0A> Lack of support for contemporary hardware.=0A=0AThose are real concern=
s. =0A=0ACiao,=0A=0A-- =0AFA=0A=0AA world of exhaustive, reliable metadata =
would be an utopia.=0AIt's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, ner=
d hubris=0Aand hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow)=
=0A=0A_______________________________________________=0ALinux-audio-dev mai=
ling list=0ALinux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org=0Ahttp://lists.linuxaudio.=
org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
--1298779297-761314771-1360280864=:81418
Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

>> Inc=
onsistent support for VST/VSTi plugins.> Paul Davis has already =
pointed out that this can mean two> different things. If someone's w=
orkflow *really* depends on> native Windows plugins - repeat *if* re=
peat *really* - then> why on earth should such a person want to use =
Linux ?> As regards 'native Linux' VST, I don't see the point of it.=
I'll counter your question with another one; rega=
rdless of a user's workflow, why *wouldn't* we, as LAD's, want to enable
as many different kinds of plugins to work on Linux as possible? From a us=
er's perspective, having more choice is just better, and there are *tons* o=
f quality DSP tools out there in the VST format; there's absolutely no down=
side.Michael =
From: Fons Adriaensen <fons=
@linuxaudio.org> To: linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org Sent: Thursday, February 7, 2013 5:08 PM Subject: Re: [LAD] So what do you =
think sucks about Linux audio ? =0AOn Tue, Feb 05, 2=
013 at 09:58:14AM -0500, Dave Phillips wrote:> Too many distros.=

m here ? Natural selection will dealwith this. Those that 'work' will s=
urvive.> Confusion re: desktops, and GUI toolkits.That's=
actually two issues. Regarding GUI toolkits, you useeither Gtk, or Qt,=
or a thin layer on top of X11 as I'm doing. All three of them will be =
available in any distro,so I don't see a problem with those. De=
sktops are another issue. IMHO any app that depends on aparticular desk=
top environment to work (or fully work) isjust broken. There's a lot of=
those around, but fortunatelymost of them are not audio related.> Too difficult to set up audio system.> JACK is a pain.It certainly was in its first years and for a large part thatwas due t=
o limited system support, immature real-time
libs,etc. Since longer than I can remember it 'just works'. As=
suming you want a system meant to produce music or processaudio, once y=
ou have Jack working that's more or less it.And that hasn't been a prob=
lem (for me at least) for a longtime. It's years since I have compiled =
patched kernels, orhad to install Jack from source.Fact is that=
the introduction of PA into mainstream systems hascreated a lot a trou=
ble - Jack and PA serve really differentpurposes and don't go together =
easily. Another problem is that there are still lots of apps around=
thathave no native Jack support, or broken support usually providedby some 'cross platform' toolkit. Just dump those. Refuse to usethem. =
Don't advertise them.> Not enough native plugins, esp. instrumen=
ts.Some things are missing. But why on earth should an instrumentbe a plugin ? 'Real' instruments are not plugins, they
providean input signal to whatever SW you use.> Inconsisten=
t support for VST/VSTi plugins.Paul Davis has already pointed out t=
hat this can mean twodifferent things. If someone's workflow *really* d=
epends onnative Windows plugins - repeat *if* repeat *really* - thenwhy on earth should such a person want to use Linux ?As regards 'nativ=
e Linux' VST, I don't see the point of it.> Too many unstable/un=
finished applications.Agree 100%, not just apps but also plugins - =
there are lotsof those either don't do the thing they are supposed to d=
o,or do it very poorly, or crash when you give them the rightinputs=
. Basic lack of care for quality, ignorance, incompetenceor any combina=
tion of those. Just let them die and be forgotten.> Too many&nbs=
p; "standards" (esp. wrt plugins).None of them being really standar=
d, nor really up to the task.Which means there will even be
more. I wouldn't really want tosee any of the existing ones becoming t=
he only choice. Also,IMHO there's nothing wrong with an ad-hoc plugin s=
tandard, onetailor-made for a particular app. Since it won't try to be<=
br>everything to everyone, it would probably be a lot simpler andeasier=
to use than one that does. I'm currently developing twoapp that will h=
ave plugins. They won't have a common standard.But each of them will be=
easy to port your code to.> Poor support for certain modes of c=
omposition (think Ableton Live).I really couldn't care less. If som=
eone wants to indulge in those'modes of composition', he/she should jus=
t use the tools that definethem. I do not buy the idea that Linux shoul=
d offer free clones ofwhatever exists in the commercial world. =
br>Good. We are not a religion or a sect. People will disagree,
competeor just do their own thing and even then share their work anywa=
y,leaving you with the choice.> Poor external/internal sessi=
on management.> Lack of support for contemporary hardware.Th=
ose are real concerns. Ciao,-- FAA world of exh=
austive, reliable metadata would be an utopia.It's also a pipe-dream, f=
ounded on self-delusion, nerd hubrisand hysterically inflated market op=
portunities. (Cory Doctorow)_______________________________________=
________Linux-audio-dev mailing listLinux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.orghttp://lists.linu=
xaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev

--1298779297-761314771-1360280864=:81418--

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[LAD] So what do you think sucks about Linux audio ?, Dave Phillips, (Tue Feb 5, 2:58 pm)
Re: [LAD] So what do you think sucks about Linux audio ?, Jörn Nettingsmeier, (Sun Feb 10, 11:26 am)
Re: [LAD] So what do you think sucks about Linux audio ?, Fons Adriaensen, (Thu Feb 7, 11:08 pm)
Re: [LAD] So what do you think sucks about Linux audio ?, Michael Bechard, (Thu Feb 7, 11:47 pm)
Re: [LAD] So what do you think sucks about Linux audio ?, Fons Adriaensen, (Fri Feb 8, 12:06 am)
Re: [LAD] So what do you think sucks about Linux audio ?, Michael Bechard, (Fri Feb 8, 12:25 am)
Re: [LAD] So what do you think sucks about Linux audio ?, Fons Adriaensen, (Fri Feb 8, 1:02 am)
Re: [LAD] So what do you think sucks about Linux audio ?, Fons Adriaensen, (Fri Feb 8, 10:15 pm)
Re: [LAD] So what do you think sucks about Linux audio ?, Harry van Haaren, (Sat Feb 9, 1:41 pm)
Re: [LAD] So what do you think sucks about Linux audio ?, Fons Adriaensen, (Sat Feb 9, 12:08 pm)
Re: [LAD] So what do you think sucks about Linux audio ?, Louigi Verona, (Sat Feb 9, 11:21 am)
Re: [LAD] So what do you think sucks about Linux audio ?, David Robillard, (Thu Feb 7, 3:25 am)
Re: [LAD] So what do you think sucks about Linux audio ?, Thijs van severen, (Thu Feb 7, 12:30 pm)
Re: [LAD] So what do you think sucks about Linux audio ?, David Robillard, (Fri Feb 8, 2:32 am)
Re: [LAD] So what do you think sucks about Linux audio ?, Dominique Michel, (Wed Feb 6, 3:28 am)
Re: [LAD] So what do you think sucks about Linux audio ?, Julien Claassen, (Tue Feb 5, 7:07 pm)
Re: [LAD] So what do you think sucks about Linux audio ?, Jostein Chr. Andersen, (Tue Feb 5, 4:55 pm)
Re: [LAD] So what do you think sucks about Linux audio ?, Florian Paul Schmidt, (Wed Feb 6, 4:42 am)
Re: [LAD] So what do you think sucks about Linux audio ?, Jostein Chr. Andersen, (Tue Feb 5, 5:43 pm)
Re: [LAD] So what do you think sucks about Linux audio ?, Thorsten Wilms, (Tue Feb 5, 4:19 pm)
Re: [LAD] So what do you think sucks about Linux audio ?, Pedro Lopez-Cabanillas, (Tue Feb 5, 7:09 pm)
Re: [LAD] So what do you think sucks about Linux audio ?, Johannes Kroll, (Tue Feb 5, 4:07 pm)
Re: [LAD] So what do you think sucks about Linux audio ?, Michael Bechard, (Tue Feb 5, 3:47 pm)