Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Making Music With Linux: We're Getting There ...

Posted by emmett on Fri Mar 17, 2000 08:47 AM
from the accidental-minor dept.
The recent 'Ask Slashdot' about MIDI support for Linux sparked some enlightening conversation about music, computers, and where Linux fits into the state of the art. Development of production-quality authoring, sequencing and notation software is moving ahead, but as in any artistic relationship, there's a symbiotic relationship between artists and the tools they use to ply their trade. Part I of a series.

Comparing music-authoring software on Linux with that available for other platforms isn't exactly a fair match-up. Dave Phillips, maintainer of the Sound and MIDI Software for Linux website, says "Don't bother with the odious comparisons: 'Rosegarden is no Cakewalk,' 'Brahms is no Cubase,' and so forth. We know. We're working on it, but we're working on better things, too."

I asked Dave about his current music set-up, and how he uses it with Linux. "MIDI-wise, there's not much you couldn't use. I have a Yamaha DMP11 MIDI-controllable mixer, two Yamaha TX802 synthesizers, an Alesis MIDIverb, and various other pieces. MIDI is MIDI.

Digital audio is another can of worms. Professional cards have only begun to see Linux support. Notable advances have been made by ALSA, particularly in the work led by Paul Barton-Davis. Digital audio boards from RME and MIDIman are now supported by ALSA, and OSS/Linux will be adding some more proprietary cards to their list later this year, I hope."

Free solutions are attractive to many musicians, who consider their music a labor of love, but can't spend money on equipment as if their music were a money-making venture. So, without big cash as a catalyst for the development of professional tools, how will we make that happen? Alex Young, digital composer and occasional musician, answers the question:

"We need competition. If you think about when the Amiga demo scene was big, different demo groups really competed to get the slickest code and the best tunes. As a side effect, many useful tools were produced. If Linux had a greater drive in multimedia than is commonly interpreted by onlookers onto the open source community, music tools would benefit. Maybe the increasing interest in Linux games will drive this, or maybe individuals interested in programming and music will. There are many things that could be done, maybe projects could even be funded by sales of music produced with such tools!

I think people need to be attracted to Linux itself. Considering that I still like using an Atari ST with Cubase, and some electronic musicians wouldn't give up their Atari even now, people don't see it as a platform for writing music. For that Aphex Twin sound, we need very advanced midi software. And for the kind of MoWax-style sound we need very good sample editors. I believe open source music software can be as good or if not better than the commercial counterparts, for the same reason as any other applications."

To many Linux-friendly musicians, how they license their music can be just as important as the music itself. I spoke to Jeff Alami, Linux.com editor-in-chief and weekend composer about this issue. "I'm not trying to make any money with my music. I may have to add some sort of license in the future if only to maintain that the music was originally created by me." The Design Science License has been developed by Michael Stutz as a method by which copyleft can be applied to things other than software. Written with a little help from Wendy Seltzer, an attorney at the Berkman Center at Harvard Law School, the DSL is a way of copylefting any work that is recognized by copyright law, including music and art. This is one tool you won't have to wait for; it's been available for the past few years. "From what I see right now," Jeff says, "the DSL would serve my needs, mainly because it works to maintain the attribution integrity."

It's true that Linux has no professional audio suite at present, but after speaking to some of the people who work with Linux as a music tool, the message is clear. We're getting there. Small bits and pieces of quality software are already available, but heavy hitters like Cakewalk and Mark of the Unicorn haven't made the cross-platform leap to Linux the way several big names in the graphics field recently have. A high-quality, open source audio suite is definitely high on the 'wish list' of Linux enthusiasts, and the increasing quality and openness of Linux sound-related device drivers is paving the way for Linux-based music production as more than hobby.

If software development for Linux proceeds as fast as it has over the past year or so, it won't be long till the killer audio app appears. Until that time, we still have plenty to talk about. Next week, we dive once more into the creative process, and discuss high-end audio mastering, low-bandwidth sound transport and using Linux as a tool for good old-fashioned synthesis.See you then.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1) | 2 | 3
  • Making music. by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @03:57AM
  • Re:Microsoft by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @04:00AM
  • Music making and Linux go hand in hand by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @05:21AM
  • Sound Forge runs under Wine release 20000227 by Shiska (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @05:52AM
  • Re:Electronic Musician article by emerson (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @01:57PM
  • Software synthesis by dmiller (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @01:29PM
  • Sorry to feed the troll... by Enahs (Score:1) Friday March 24 2000, @12:56PM
  • Re:Aphex Twin?? by Enahs (Score:1) Friday March 24 2000, @12:58PM
  • Re:MPU-401and Linux Audio by acb (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @06:18AM
  • Re:Data not viewed as physical by bgue (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @11:57AM
  • Re:MPU-401and Linux Audio by Art Tatum (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @12:36PM
  • Uhm, Earth to Future Sound... by MikeV (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @06:29AM
  • Re:Uhm, Earth to Future Sound... by MikeV (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @08:18AM
  • Re:What we have today. by aphr0 (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @05:11AM
  • heh by aphr0 (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @04:16AM
  • Soundtracker? by Serf (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @04:59AM
  • Re:Perspective by Serf (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @07:22AM
  • Re:Professionality by Serf (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @05:52AM
  • Re:Professionality by Blue Lang (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @04:52AM
  • Hi. by Blue Lang (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @05:05AM
  • Re:sysex sux by Kismet (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @12:26PM
  • MIDI isn't MIDI by Kismet (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @06:42AM
  • Re: Professionality by freq (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @05:02AM
  • Re:Best existing software for Linux? by Forkenhoppen (Score:1) Friday March 24 2000, @07:35AM
  • Re:In music, timing is EVERYTHING by cantanker (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @08:16PM
  • Re:Perspective by cantanker (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @08:51PM
  • Linux Multimedia by davek (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @08:23AM
  • Re:"Professional" home musician I am not by atomly (Score:1) Friday March 24 2000, @07:25AM
  • In music, timing is EVERYTHING by ibodog (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @06:21AM
  • CSound by YoJ (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @06:29AM
  • Re:Data not viewed as physical by Kaa (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @09:14AM
  • Re:Data not viewed as physical by Kaa (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @11:48AM
  • Re:I have an idea. by ansa (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @06:33AM
  • Some cool programs, but not enough yet... by JoeyJoJo (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @04:24AM
  • Re:MPU-401and Linux Audio by DonkPunch (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @06:29AM
  • Cubase timing by DonkPunch (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @06:44AM
  • Re:One area where linux is -not- competing with MS by dickens (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @05:23AM
  • Re:You don't need any OS for that. by dickens (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @05:29AM
  • Re:Somewhat relevant... by Lejade (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @05:30AM
  • Linux Support? What about support for BeOS? by Cygnus v1 (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @05:01AM
  • Re:Linux Support? What about support for BeOS? by Cygnus v1 (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @07:12AM
  • "new compositional techniques"(Re:Troll accepted!) by DrRobin (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @06:30AM
  • Re:my ball and chain to MS.... by Platinum Dragon (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @07:31AM
  • Re:Buzz by nhowie (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @05:19AM
  • Aphex Twin?? by The Future Sound of (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @04:40AM
  • Re:Data not viewed as physical by DrMaurer (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @05:32AM
  • Re:Does anyone remember AMPLE? Anyone? by Battra (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @05:36AM
  • Sonic Foundry by mysta (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @02:30PM
  • Re:No reason why not... by steffl (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @10:27AM
  • Live audio with Max successor by mdanks (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @06:32AM
  • Re:Microsoft by slashdot-terminal (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @05:25AM
  • Broadcast2000 as sound recorder & editor by Artemis3 (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @11:30AM
  • Re:my ball and chain to MS.... by dial0g (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @06:57AM
  • Re:One area where linux is -not- competing with MS by nachoman (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @04:55AM
  • Gmurf by mcrandello (Score:1) Sunday March 19 2000, @06:12PM
  • vinyl ripping by mcrandello (Score:1) Sunday March 19 2000, @06:53PM
  • Re:Data not viewed as physical by chromie (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @04:27AM
  • Re:Data not viewed as physical by TheReverand (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @04:27AM
  • Re:Does anyone remember AMPLE? Anyone? by TheReverand (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @04:39AM
  • Re:Professionality by TheReverand (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @06:15AM
  • Mark of the Unicorn? (OT) by DrCode (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @07:03AM
  • Re:Microsoft by radish (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @06:21AM
  • Re:Microsoft, please no. by mazur (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @05:32AM
  • Linux is running on Atari 030's and clones by Troed (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @11:07PM
  • Re:Professionality by EatAtJoes (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @05:02AM
  • Re:Somewhat relevant... by EatAtJoes (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @05:11AM
  • Are you trying to be funny? by EatAtJoes (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @05:18AM
  • Re:Hi. by EatAtJoes (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @05:22AM
  • Be by Rand Race (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @04:53AM
  • SGI Anyone? by (void*) (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @05:13AM
  • Re:Does anyone remember AMPLE? Anyone? by Midnight Ryder (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @09:27AM
  • Re:my ball and chain to MS.... by rjamestaylor (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @04:50AM
  • Re:Sonic Foundry by paulbd (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @07:08PM
  • Re:MPU-401and Linux Audio by paulbd (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @06:08AM
  • but oh yes, yes! by phossie (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @11:51AM
  • CoolEdit Pro is just that by DrSkwid (Score:1) Friday March 24 2000, @08:05AM
  • Re:Professionality by bad-badtz-maru (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @10:47AM
  • Perspective by nanode (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @05:22AM
  • Re:my ball and chain to MS.... by jallen02 (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @07:48AM
  • Unix by Dungeon Dweller (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @05:03AM
  • Re:Music and Linux by cavalamar (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @09:15AM
  • Re:Soundtracker? by Farq Fenderson (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @08:35AM
  • Re:Music and Linux by David.O'Toole (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @09:53AM
  • OCTAL by David.O'Toole (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @11:33AM
  • Re:Microsoft by TomV (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @05:20AM
  • Re:Aphex Twin?? by Pihkal (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @05:29AM
  • CSound, Linux, and Musical Composition by cybin (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @11:07AM
  • Re:Computr muzic sux by cybin (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @11:19AM
  • Re:problems.. by latcarf (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @04:38AM
  • Re:Computr muzic sux by Academomancer (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @09:36PM
  • Don't forget LilyPond by Sri Lumpa (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @05:20AM
  • proprietary software must try to have a headstart by Sri Lumpa (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @05:26AM
  • Re:You don't need any OS for that. by uebernewby (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @01:10PM
  • Get the shareware/freeware windows guys in by uebernewby (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @02:13PM
  • Re:Microsoft by LordDracula (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @05:14AM
  • The Promised-Land of Linux Music Apps... by Denizen (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @06:05AM
  • Penguin's Voice Breaks Windows - Film at Eleven by Morbid Curiosity (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @04:23AM
  • Re:No reason why not... by zond (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @05:36AM
  • Re:Computr muzic sux by soxhlet (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @03:11PM
  • No reason why not... by CaptainAlbert (Score:1) Friday March 17 2000, @04:22AM
  • Re:Buzz by gjenkins (Score:1) Friday March 24 2000, @05:50AM
  • Re:Buzz by gjenkins (Score:1) Friday March 24 2000, @05:54AM
  • Re:Electronic Musician article by farrellj (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @06:19AM
  • Bingo, got it in one by Chris Johnson (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @01:04PM
  • No MIDI for me, thanks. by Kev Vance (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @10:20AM
  • Re:Microsoft by bluGill (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @04:48AM
  • Making it in the Linux world is different than in by heroine (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @06:22AM
  • "Professional" home musician I am not by Sludge (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @05:11AM
  • AudioMulch by acb (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @06:22AM
  • CSound! by isaac (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @07:29AM
  • Re:Professionality by clifyt (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @05:32AM
  • Re:Professionality by Serf (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @05:19AM
  • Re:Buzz by Serf (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @05:29AM
  • Re:CSound, Linux, and Musical Composition by YoJ (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @11:26AM
  • What we have today. by Ratface (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @04:54AM
  • Re:Data not viewed as physical by Kaa (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @05:38AM
  • Re:Data not viewed as physical by Kaa (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @06:00AM
  • Re:Microsoft by Rupert (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @04:49AM
  • Re:You fed the troll! by Rupert (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @09:51AM
  • Re:What's really going on by fReNeTiK (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @06:22AM
  • Somewhat relevant... by Lejade (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @04:55AM
  • problems.. by Zurk (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @03:57AM
  • Re:Professionality by gribbly (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @12:29PM
  • USB Midi & Audio Support by johnrpenner (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @08:20AM
  • Broadcast 2000 by Eponymous, Showered (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @04:21AM
  • This will be better than Windows by motardo (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @03:58AM
  • Re:Broadcast 2000 (screenshots) by G27 Radio (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @04:53AM
  • Re:You don't need any OS for that. by G27 Radio (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @05:15AM
  • Re:Microsoft by G27 Radio (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @04:33AM
  • Re:You don't need any OS for that. by CausticPuppy (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @06:06PM
  • Re:yuck! by CausticPuppy (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @06:16PM
  • You don't need any OS for that. by CausticPuppy (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @04:59AM
  • Re:"new compositional techniques"(Re:Troll accepte by CausticPuppy (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @08:11AM
  • Troll accepted! by CausticPuppy (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @05:41AM
  • Re:You don't need any OS for that. by CausticPuppy (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @05:59AM
  • Re:You don't need any OS for that. by CausticPuppy (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @06:19AM
  • Re:Best existing software for Linux? by testcase (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @05:23AM
  • Re:Data not viewed as physical by TheCarp (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @05:38PM
  • Re:Data not viewed as physical by TheCarp (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @06:42AM
  • Re:Microsoft by TheCarp (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @05:32AM
  • Re:Microsoft by TheCarp (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @05:39AM
  • Re:Data not viewed as physical by TheCarp (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @05:51AM
  • Re:Data not viewed as physical by TheCarp (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @10:59AM
  • Music licenses by Gurlia (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @05:04AM
  • Data not viewed as physical by 348 (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @04:05AM
  • Re:my ball and chain to MS.... by jallen02 (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @07:06AM
  • Sample Editors & Trackers by Farq Fenderson (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @04:40AM
  • bad multitrack sound card support by TheGratefulNet (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @10:46AM
  • Re:You don't need any OS for that. by TheGratefulNet (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @10:52AM
  • Re:Microsoft by TheGratefulNet (Score:2) Friday March 17 2000, @10:57AM
  • Music and Linux (Score:3)

    by acb (2797) on Friday March 17 2000, @04:50AM (#1196020) Homepage
    The hardware side of music (MIDI and such) will be the easy part. Linux supports traditional MIDI cards (such as the MPU-401, and the low-performance joystick-MIDI interfaces on most sound cards), and you can work with that. I used to use Jazz (the XView version, if you remember that) and a MPU-401. Professional audio is the next major issue. If you're doing professional music, a game-quality soundcard with lousy frequency response, an imprecise A/D converter and lots of RF noise is about as useful as a chocolate teapot.

    The software side will be harder. The greatest strength of systems such as Cubase VST is the number of interlocking programs. You have your effects plug-ins (ranging from homebrewed compressors and flangers to expensive proprietary DSP wizardry), soft synths (including ReBirth and the new VST 2.0 plug-ins such as Neon and LM-4), sample loop/phrase editors (i.e. ReCycle) and the like. FX plug-ins, for one, are incredibly useful. A Linux-based digital recording/sequencing application that only has a few basic reverb and echo plug-ins will look pretty poorly compared to Cubase or Logic.

    On one hand, there are a lot of free (though not quite open-source) DSP plug-ins for Cubase VST, and the SDK is available. The interface has a small C++ class library to wrap it; if a compatible API could be written, a lot of plug-ins could be ported. On the other hand, maybe (just maybe) it would be possible to run some Windows VST plug-ins (i.e., DLLs with functions for doing stuff to buffers) using part of WINE.
  • by DonkPunch (30957) on Friday March 17 2000, @05:39AM (#1196021) Homepage Journal
    With all due respect, even MPU-401 support for Linux is not 100%. It's fine if you want your Linux box to always be your clock source but, in the real world, that's just not always the case. People using standalone digital recorders, for example, may want the recorder to be the clock source.

    When I downloaded Jazz++, I found that it came with a code patch to allow my MPU-401 to operate in Intelligent mode (external sync). Unfortunately, the patch did not compile on my system. A quick check of the code led me to believe that it was written for older libraries. I don't think anyone is maintaining it.

    Sorry, but the vast majority of Linux "audio" software seems targeted at guys with semi-pro soundcards who want to goof around with sequencers and maybe a loop or two. FWIW, BeOS, with all it's "media OS" claims, is in the same boat. (Yes, I know Logic is "coming". Where is it now?)

    The market for professional audio software is small enough without targeting an operating system that is still very much in the minority. This kind of software is very time-consuming and difficult to write (I *have* considered it). That's why even the Windows versions cost so much. There's also a culture barrier -- Linux users are accustomed to Free Software while Steinberg, Logic Audio, etc. are most definitely trying to get every dime they can from their products.
  • ... is the same thing that a few other posters have named: high-quality recording.

    MIDI is cool, but I don't know much about nor use it. My musical gene is stunted;) What I /am/ interested in is recording miked sources -- a school choir, a friend playing guitar, my grandmother's voice, interesting environments ...

    There are some audio-recording utilities for Linux (audiograb), but none that offer the functionality of a simple personal audio workstion like the Akai DPS12 [akaipro.com].

    In fact, this could be a money maker for anyone who wants to sell it: I would really like to find a professional-quality card featuring two XLR inputs (perhaps on a breakout box) and GPLd software to access them, saving into a non-proprietary format. Better, make the interface to the computer a USB connection, and a decent laptop can become a much better tool than my DPS12.

    timothy
  • by Mr. Slippery (47854) <tms AT infamous DOT net> on Friday March 17 2000, @05:01AM (#1196023) Homepage
    I may have to add some sort of license in the future if only to maintain that the music was originally created by me." The Design Science License has been developed by Michael Stutz as a method by which copyleft can be applied to things other than software.
    Check out Ram Samudrala's Free Music Philosophy [twisted-helices.com].
  • by Weezul (52464) on Friday March 17 2000, @07:02AM (#1196024) Homepage
    Haskore [haskell.org] is a really interesting music notation which is implemented in the functional langauge Haskell [haskell.org]. The introduction [haskell.org] to the tutorial [haskell.org] dose a good job of describing it:

    Haskore is a collection of Haskell modules designed for expressing musical structures in the high-level, declarative style of functional programming. In Haskore, musical objects consist of primitive notions such as notes and rests, operations to transform musical objects such as transpose and tempo-scaling, and operations to combine musical objects to form more complex ones, such as concurrent and sequential composition. From these simple roots, much richer musical ideas can easily be developed.

    Haskore is a means for describing music---in particular Western Music---rather than sound. It is not a vehicle for synthesizing sound produced by musical instruments, for example, although it does capture the way certain (real or imagined) instruments permit control of dynamics and articulation.

    Haskore also defines a notion of literal performance through which observationally equivalent musical objects can be determined. From this basis many useful properties can be proved, such as commutative, associative, and distributive properties of various operators. An algebra of music thus surfaces.


    You would probable find that Haskore offers more ability to extend your musical ntation then AMPLE because flexable notation is one of the things functional langauges like Haskell are good at.
  • by G27 Radio (78394) on Friday March 17 2000, @04:19AM (#1196025) Homepage
    This a great topic. I've been waiting for the opportunity to ask some questions. At this point I need tools for recording, mixing, and realtime visualization of line input.

    I've been using Goldwave for recording. It's a great shareware program despite only being available for Windows. The problem, other than my aversion to Windows, is that when Windows crashes the entire segment I was recording is lost. This is a definately a problem when it's live performances that you are recording.

    Gmurf [epita.fr] (open source) has a lot of potential but needs more development. The primary thing I'm looking for right now is software that allows me to record and does realtime visual analysis of the input. This is critical for adjusting the recording level to prevent clipping. The second thing I need is a nice open source mixer--one that allows me to adjust recording and playback levels at the same time. As far as the actual recording goes, SoX [sprynet.com] does an excellent job of recording and uses very little overhead.

    My question is: What are the best open source packages for realtime visualization, the mixer, and wave editing?

    numb
  • Check freshmeat (Score:3)

    by slashdot-terminal (83882) on Friday March 17 2000, @05:10AM (#1196026) Homepage
    The market is not a very stable one. My Father purchased a copy of Encore from Passport. It was a fairly well know notation software program and the company well belly-up. It would be great to get some to port existing code such
    as encore, fix the bugs and open the source...


    Check on freshmeat [freshmeat.net] in the last few days/weeks. I was almost positive I found a package that did musical notation that you are describing there.

    I just found Mup at:
    http://www.freshmeat.net/appindex/1998/07/01/899 283854.html

    MuX2d is in the works:
    http://www.freshmeat.net/appindex/2000/01/04/946 988873.html

    As well as the very interesting Rosegarden:
    http://www.freshmeat.net/appindex/1998/05/06/894 447917.html

    Brahms:
    http://www.freshmeat.net/appindex/1999/09/30/938 706537.html

    Those should get you started.
  • This seems like one of the areas in which we actually arent competing with microsoft. Sure, theres cakewalk and stuff, but a lot of cool stuff is on amigas, ataris, etc. That doesn't make it any easier to advance in the field really, but I cant imagine that any professional sound engineers would use windows.

    (Mainly because my friends & I had such a hassle recording a few songs [metaphase.org] using windows)

  • by TuRRIcaNEd (115141) on Friday March 17 2000, @04:23AM (#1196028)
    Certainly the hardware exists to equip an x86 box to do an awful lot of MIDI stuff, if so desired. The lack of Linux software is a shame, because many musicians who are not almost permanently contracted are forced to shell out heavily for Windows+Cubase+SoundForge+Insertsoftwareofchoice. An Open-source project would be wonderful, but anyone contemplating it would need to know exactly what was needed.

    The author mentions the Tracker music as used in the Amiga demo scene. The trackers were wonderful, in that they allowed people with talent and vision, but little musical expertise to produce tunes that sounded nigh-on professional at times, nad best of all, the software was generally free, or at the very worst, shareware. However, in the late '80s and early '90s, 8-bit 22Khz sampling was perfectly acceptable for release, as cassette was the primary means of distribution outside of the computer. What sounded professional 10 years ago would be laughed out of the studio now. There already exist several trackers in the public domain for most OS's, but they serve more as a doodling pad than anything else. So there are more complex options (Cubase, Cakewalk etc......)

    It doesn't say a lot for Windows and MacOS that an awful lot of musicians would rather die than let go of their ST's, simply for stability reasons. TOS was admittedly crap, but it rarely needed patching, and there were no service pack. The TOS that came with your machine would be the one it stayed with until it died, for the most part. BSOD/GPF's are bad enough for coders, but imagine what it'd be like to have to reassemble the music if one crops up! You may never get that sound again, unless you made copious notes on the settings, and let's face it, one of the points of doing it on computer was to alleviate writing every little detail down. MacOS these days is almost as bad....and that's before we come to the astronomical prices charged for the latest versions of the software. I'm aware that the software is WAY more advanced than the ST/Amiga days, but the price shouldn't be hiked as high as it has been.

    So we come to Linux. Stable? yes. Capable of performance? yes. Lots of developers around the world? YES! It is an acknowledged fact that many coders also have an affinity for music, so... Musicians, what do YOU want from a Linux-based music program? Musician/Coders, what do YOU want from a Linux based music program? Coders, what can we GIVE them in a Linux based music program?

    Answers on a Post Form!

  • by emerson (419) on Friday March 17 2000, @04:00AM (#1196029) Homepage
    I wrote an article for Electronic Musician [emusician.com] magazine that was published in the 06/99 dead-tree issue, titled "The Penguin's Song," about the state of music hardware and software support for Linux as of Spring of last year.

    Unfortunately, the 06/99 issue seems to be the only one that's not archived on EM's very kludgy website. I've pestered the parent company, Intertec [intertec.com], a couple of times about this, and they keep alleging they're going to fix it.

    The article's aimed at musicians looking at Linux, not at Linux geeks looking to music, so the focus might seem a bit strange to some of the Slashdot crowd, but I'm really rather proud of it.

    Unfortunately, if you'd like to see the final version of this article, you'll either have to buy the back issue or pester EM's parent company to get the 06/99 issue into the archives. Or maybe I'll post the draft version if Intertec's too clueless to post the final one.

    --
  • Buzz (Score:4)

    by Serf (11805) on Friday March 17 2000, @04:05AM (#1196030)
    Mmm.... Oskari (the sole developer) isn't too friendly to requests to open-source Buzz or to port it to Linux, and neither is the mailing list - the topic is taboo due to a past mailing list meltdown. Buzz does run under WINE, though, quite well, but with a few significant bugs.

    There is currently an effort to produce a Buzz-alike for *nix called Octal. It's in its extreme infancy (first code release last weekend), but we desperately need coders. Check the project out at http://www.gnu.org/software/octal/octa l.html [gnu.org] and contact the project maintainer or myself if you're interested in helping out.
  • by CausticPuppy (82139) on Friday March 17 2000, @05:25AM (#1196031) Homepage
    Good question.
    I don't want to run a Linux-based program solely for the sake of running a Linux-based program.
    I want to concentrate on the MUSIC.

    I don't want to be sitting there thinking "I wish this program would do such-and-such, but that's OK because I'm running on a better OS."

    Right now, believe it or not, Windows98 handles all my music needs flawlessly. The software I use (Cakewalk Pro Audio) isn't the highest-end software there is, but it's matured over 9 versions and I've used it since version 2.0 for DOS.

    Can new software be designed from the ground up with the same functionality for Linux? Sure, if it's designed by people who know what musicians/composers actually need to do.
    But the hardware support has to be there first. So there are some obstacles to overcome here, and eventually, I'll bet that there will be linux ports of the most popular professional packages. I'm in no hurry though... there was a time when Windows sucked at anything multimedia.

  • by tjwhaynes (114792) on Friday March 17 2000, @04:20AM (#1196032)

    Every now and then you stumble across something which is an interesting fusion of several interests. One such find was around the late 80's, I bought a Music 500 system (like a Hybrid Music 5000) for my BBC B microcomputer. Basically this was an RM, FM synth linked into the system via a 1MHz port with 16 voices. What was interesting about this system was the method of driving it - it came with it's own Forth-like language - AMPLE (Advanced Music Programming Language Environment) for writing music, building sound sets (by combining voices together, using ring-modulation), controling volume and stereo position, and of course it also came with programming control structures such as loops, conditional execution and other such wonders.

    While today's technology far outstrips the equipment that I used then, the AMPLE language provided a interesting (to a programmer who plays keyboard and oboe, anyway) method of creating and playing music, and not necessarly just playing music using conventional tools. The letters A-G represented notes, with capital letters implying go up and lowercase mean go down the scale, note lengths were easily specified (48, implies a crotchet, 24, implies a quaver and so forth), ties and slurs could be implemented and chords could be played on. As an example, a bar of music for one voice including chords might look like

    24,C(48,ge)b~48,a(fc)96,C(ac)

    which equates to quavers playing notes C down to B while G and E below are played and held, with the B quaver tied to a crotchet chord AFC and semibreve CAC to end the bar.

    Several times I saw suggestions that the language should be revived and tied in to some modern MIDI or sample-based system, but to my knowledge nobody has ever taken up the challenge. If anyone knows differently, I like to hear from them!

    Cheers,

    Toby Haynes

  • Professionality (Score:5)

    by clifyt (11768) <[moc.liamg] [ta] [rettamkinos]> on Friday March 17 2000, @04:22AM (#1196033) Homepage
    I'm gonna get slammed on this, but what the Hacker culture here doesn't understand is what professionals want to need. Heck, this could sum up the reason why Linux is going to be a hard sell to replace the desktop of any platform.

    Shit, this is one of the problems with all the shareware apps on the Win side. All the little bedroom 'musicians' grab a free groovebox type application and think they are a real musician. It's the whole DJ philosophy, let someone else do my work for me. Grab a few musicians aside, and ask what is the most important thing to them. Get real people involved and go at it.

    You know what would just rock my world as a musican...a good free multitrack recorder. The software timing and latency issues would be practically nothing within Linux. Give me something that I can configure under X and then run simply using a serialported LCD, with Midi controls for most of the functions. Get support for a few of the multitrack cards (unfortunately the Echo line has stated they will never open their drivers to the public to maintain quality). Build this, get support for even one card, so that if someone wants to build a DAW cheaply and easily they can. Someone could add features and functions and make a killing off of this simply for the Hardware...

    If you are interested in the stuff as a musician, please visit Sonikmatter.com [slashdot.org]. We are a group of forward thinking professional musicians. We have represenatives from several major corporations, both hardware and software and my co-admins are consultants for many of these companies. Heck, we'd even think about setting up a dedicated Linux forum if their was enough call for it.

    Enough shameless selfpromotion, anyways, if ya want musicians to use your software, ya need to work with them, not just say I got this and now use it (hmmm...that seems to be my way of programming as well...doh!). If ya want to know what the non-tech challenged musician os thinking visit us and out forums.

    thanks

    clif
  • by levl289 (72277) on Friday March 17 2000, @04:04AM (#1196034) Homepage
    This is by far, the biggest thing that's keeping me chained to using windows.

    Quake3 is out for linux, Pine's great for e-mail, Communicator is acceptable as a browser, but there is an emtpy void where the multi-media apps come in. I haven't been able to find anything for wav file editting like Sound Forge [sonicfoundry.com], or a sequencing program as good as VST [com.com], or a multitracker as good as SAW [iqsoft.com].
    (all of these are personal preference I'm sure).
    Plus, from my understanding, there's no plug-in architecture like MS's DirectX that allows for effects plugins to be compatible with virtually all of these programs (well, except for SAW)...
    When these apps are carried over to Linux like Photoshop was (Gimp), MS will be a distant memory...the likeliness of this however is a sign that I'll be using MS stuff for a while to come :(

    -lev
  • by paulbd (118132) on Friday March 17 2000, @05:25AM (#1196035) Homepage
    It was good to see Dave Phillips being quoted here, since he's probably the most well-informed source on this subject, and, since Dave himself is an active developer of any projects, a fairly independent and honest source at that. Its a bit depressing to see so many comments thus far show little knowledge of whats actually going on in the Linux audio/MIDI/music development community. First off all, as the article mentioned, we do now have support for high end ("professional") interfaces, including the amazing RME Hammerfall and devices built around the ICE1712 chip such as the Delta101 from Midiman. The Hammerfall is a potentially revolutionary card, bringing 26 input channels and 26 output channels into your system for around $500. Its all digital, and so all the stuff mentioned here about RF noise is null and void. Secondly, from a technical standpoint, Linux is a much better platform for multimedia than almost any other operating system, including BeOS. With Ingo Molnar's low latency patches for the 2.2 kernels, and almost without patches in the 2.3 series, Linux can support sustained, essentially guaranteed sub-5msec latency regardless of system load. This is truly impressive. Its too bad that Linus doesn't seem to care too much about this, but plenty of others do. In addition to this almost-dedicated-h/w level of performance, we can provide high performance, stable, reliable libraries for networking, database operations, multi user facilities, high end graphics cards, and big disk arrays. Finally, companies like Dell, Compaq and Gateway now sell Linux preinstalled. One might have hoped that such a platform would have companies like Steinberg running to us, but alas, not yet. That said, we *are* talking to Steinberg, and they are considering the possibility of an open source implementation (probably not by them) of a VST host. This would be an exciting development. VST (1 or 2) is not by any means a particularly superb specification for a plugin API from a technical point of view, but its widespread support by the industry makes it important. Since we in the Linux world tend to prefer technically superior solutions to mere marketing strategies, there is also work going on a mailing list that any developers reading this should know about: the linux-audio-dev list (send a message containing "subscribe linux-audio-dev" to majordomo@ginette.musique.umontreal.ca [mailto]. On that list, we have been discussing two related API's, one called LADSPA (the Linux-Audi-Dev Simple Plugin API) and one called MuCoS (not its final name, we hope). LADPSA is intended as an initial plugin API standard that offers about the same functionality as VST1.0 (and indeed, could be used to support VST1.0). MuCoS is a much more advanced system designed to support sample accurate, low latency, high performance plugins. LADSPA is getting close to a final definition. There are also people (I am one of them) who *are* working with musicians to make sure that we are developing pro-quality, studio-ready tools rather than bedroom toys. I am actively engaged in writing multichannel recording software designed to replace racks of Alesis M20 ADAT recorders, for example, and work with a commercial pro studio to make sure that what I'm doing works in a real studio setting. However, this is not simple work. When your goals are to do things at least as well as ProTools, a program under development for at least 5 or 6 years, and used by most major studios, its not a matter of a long weekend hacking late into the night. There are many careful and tricky design questions to be answered. The solutions are not the same for all categories of programs (e.g. HDR systems place a different kind of stress on a system than synthesizers/trackers do). Its slow hard work, quite different from web programming, database work or kernel hacking because of the real-time nature of the task. So yeah, we're getting there, and nobody that I know on linux-audio-dev is under illusion that we've written ProTools yet. But there is no single "killer app" for audio/music/MIDI work, just a series of tools that all need to be developed. That said, there is way too much duplication of effort. I'm all for the GNOME/KDE split, because I think that having multiple strands of development/experimentation is a good thing. But given that we don't have a single soundfile editor capable of doing a lot of what even the most rudimentary commercial Windows/Mac apps can do, let alone handle a 24 track 24/48 recording, it seems crazy to me that we have at least a half dozen projects working on "the GIMP for audio". The comparison seems like a good one to me, because I recently read about issues that the GIMP has with CMYK color, a required feature for professional printing purposes. Its a good analogy with many Linux soundfile editing programs, which are slowly adding plugin architectures, neat FX etc. but are (mostly) fundamentally written around a stereo assumption - completely inadequate for studio work. OK, I've written enough here. Come join us on linux-audio-dev if you're serious about Linux and audio.
  • 85 replies beneath your current threshold.
(1) | 2 | 3