Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

ALSA 1.0.25 Is Out With Many Linux Audio Changes

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • ALSA 1.0.25 Is Out With Many Linux Audio Changes

    Phoronix: ALSA 1.0.25 Is Out With Many Linux Audio Changes

    ALSA, the Advanced Linux Sound Architecture, last saw a major update in February of 2011. That changed this morning when ALSA 1.0.25 was released, which is a big feature release...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTA0ODA

  • #2
    Great. I really appreciate the Alsa team for bringing great audio quality drivers to linux!

    Comment


    • #3
      I guess there are still no independent volume controls for each application.
      How this doesn't seem to bother most people is completely beyond me. The ability to tune down a game slightly while playing some music with an audio player and still being able to clearly hear people talking on teamspeak or skype and not missing pidgin sound notifications is essential for me.

      But no, not the way alsa works, I have to use pulseaudio for that. Insanity if you ask me.

      Comment


      • #4
        I have a problem compiling alsa-utils 1.0.25. Here is the problem:

        Code:
        ./configure --prefix=/usr
        checking for a BSD-compatible install... /usr/bin/install -c
        checking whether build environment is sane... yes
        checking for a thread-safe mkdir -p... /bin/mkdir -p
        checking for gawk... gawk
        checking whether make sets $(MAKE)... yes
        checking whether NLS is requested... yes
        checking for msgfmt... /usr/bin/msgfmt
        checking for gmsgfmt... /usr/bin/msgfmt
        checking for xgettext... /usr/bin/xgettext
        checking for msgmerge... /usr/bin/msgmerge
        checking for style of include used by make... GNU
        checking for gcc... gcc
        checking whether the C compiler works... yes
        checking for C compiler default output file name... a.out
        checking for suffix of executables... 
        checking whether we are cross compiling... no
        checking for suffix of object files... o
        checking whether we are using the GNU C compiler... yes
        checking whether gcc accepts -g... yes
        checking for gcc option to accept ISO C89... none needed
        checking dependency style of gcc... gcc3
        checking build system type... x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
        checking host system type... x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
        checking for ld used by GCC... /usr/bin/ld
        checking if the linker (/usr/bin/ld) is GNU ld... yes
        checking for shared library run path origin... done
        checking for CFPreferencesCopyAppValue... no
        checking for CFLocaleCopyCurrent... no
        checking for GNU gettext in libc... yes
        checking whether to use NLS... yes
        checking where the gettext function comes from... libc
        checking for cross-compiler... gcc
        checking for gcc... (cached) gcc
        checking whether we are using the GNU C compiler... (cached) yes
        checking whether gcc accepts -g... (cached) yes
        checking for gcc option to accept ISO C89... (cached) none needed
        checking dependency style of gcc... (cached) gcc3
        checking whether ln -s works... yes
        checking for a sed that does not truncate output... /bin/sed
        checking for ALSA CFLAGS... 
        checking for ALSA LDFLAGS...  -lasound -lm -ldl -lpthread
        checking for libasound headers version >= 1.0.24... found.
        checking for snd_ctl_open in -lasound... yes
        checking for snd_ctl_elem_add_enumerated... no
        configure: error: No user enum control support in alsa-lib
        I check with google, and on a alsa mailing list it says to check if there is snd_ctl_elem_add_enumerated defined in /usr/include/alsa/control.h and there is. I don't know what can be the problem here.

        Can someone help me to get this thing working?

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by mazumoto View Post
          I guess there are still no independent volume controls for each application.
          How this doesn't seem to bother most people is completely beyond me. The ability to tune down a game slightly while playing some music with an audio player and still being able to clearly hear people talking on teamspeak or skype and not missing pidgin sound notifications is essential for me.

          But no, not the way alsa works, I have to use pulseaudio for that. Insanity if you ask me.
          Have you seriously not heard of PulseAudio?

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by mazumoto View Post
            I guess there are still no independent volume controls for each application.
            How this doesn't seem to bother most people is completely beyond me. The ability to tune down a game slightly while playing some music with an audio player and still being able to clearly hear people talking on teamspeak or skype and not missing pidgin sound notifications is essential for me.

            But no, not the way alsa works, I have to use pulseaudio for that. Insanity if you ask me.
            Maaaaybe because most games have their own volume controls...? As do most non-game apps in general... Really, the ability to control individual app volume isn't all that necessary. It's just a small perk.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by cumulus007 View Post
              Have you seriously not heard of PulseAudio?
              Of course I have heard of pulseaudio. In fact, if you read my last sentence from the original post, it states that I indeed use pulseaudio. But that doesn't change my opinion that for something as basic as proper volume control I should not need to use a complex sound server. I think that is just ridiculous and it's not even that well supported with all apps (yes, I know you can route alsa output through pulseaudio an then back to alsa - which is even more insane).

              Additionally, pulseaudio is only around for a few years now. Before that the situation was just as awful and without a possible workaround. I remember hearing about dmix and really looking forward to it back then - but that was a disappointment as well.

              It just doesn't fit into my brains that in 2012 it is impossible to have a simple, usable linux sound architecture that actually does what users need (I don't think I'm special in using 2 or 3 programs with sound output at once).

              Originally posted by TheBuzzSaw View Post
              Maaaaybe because most games have their own volume controls...? As do most non-game apps in general... Really, the ability to control individual app volume isn't all that necessary. It's just a small perk.
              Games shouldn't need own volume controls (except for mixing their own different outputs, but I believe even that capability should be handled by a sane sound system). And I definitely do not see it as a "small perk" and "not all that necessary". It's not just games, it's listening to music and being able to adjust it's volume without changing the volume of notification sounds (pidgin, konversation, etc) at the same time. But oh well, as I said before, apparently most users don't view it that way, it must be just me who goes nuts when not being able to turn down music volume when watching a short youtube clip.



              PS: Oh, a nice anecdote btw: when I first tried to get pulseaudio working, I asked some questions in a channel on freenode - and they couldn't believe I wanted to use pulseausio, they asked at least 5 times if I really really really want to do this - but of course they didn't know another solution for my needs either.
              Last edited by mazumoto; 01-25-2012, 12:17 PM.

              Comment


              • #8
                anyone knows which kernel version this alsa release will be built in?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by mazumoto View Post
                  Of course I have heard of pulseaudio. In fact, if you read my last sentence from the original post, it states that I indeed use pulseaudio. But that doesn't change my opinion that for something as basic as proper volume control I should not need to use a complex sound server. I think that is just ridiculous and it's not even that well supported with all apps (yes, I know you can route alsa output through pulseaudio an then back to alsa - which is even more insane).

                  Additionally, pulseaudio is only around for a few years now. Before that the situation was just as awful and without a possible workaround. I remember hearing about dmix and really looking forward to it back then - but that was a disappointment as well.

                  It just doesn't fit into my brains that in 2012 it is impossible to have a simple, usable linux sound architecture that actually does what users need (I don't think I'm special in using 2 or 3 programs with sound output at once).



                  Games shouldn't need own volume controls (except for mixing their own different outputs, but I believe even that capability should be handled by a sane sound system). And I definitely do not see it as a "small perk" and "not all that necessary". It's not just games, it's listening to music and being able to adjust it's volume without changing the volume of notification sounds (pidgin, konversation, etc) at the same time. But oh well, as I said before, apparently most users don't view it that way, it must be just me who goes nuts when not being able to turn down music volume when watching a short youtube clip.



                  PS: Oh, a nice anecdote btw: when I first tried to get pulseaudio working, I asked some questions in a channel on freenode - and they couldn't believe I wanted to use pulseausio, they asked at least 5 times if I really really really want to do this - but of course they didn't know another solution for my needs either.

                  I still don't see why you don't want to use Pulseaudio. Just because some dudes on IRC told you not to?
                  Seriously, I use Pulseaudio since it was first integrated in Fedora, and I never had a problem with it. I know there were rough edges at the beginning (specially on Ubuntu) but most of the bugs have been sorted out.
                  Also, I think it's a cleaner design to leave drivers to alsa, and mixing/routing to Pulseaudio. As you said, dmix turned out to be a disappointment, ask yourself why.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Just in case you're not aware, OSS4 has per-app volume control.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by r1348 View Post
                      I still don't see why you don't want to use Pulseaudio. Just because some dudes on IRC told you not to?
                      Seriously, I use Pulseaudio since it was first integrated in Fedora, and I never had a problem with it. I know there were rough edges at the beginning (specially on Ubuntu) but most of the bugs have been sorted out.
                      Also, I think it's a cleaner design to leave drivers to alsa, and mixing/routing to Pulseaudio. As you said, dmix turned out to be a disappointment, ask yourself why.
                      I do use pulseaudio :-)
                      But I don't think it should be necessary to use pulseaudio for something as basic as sane volume control. Of course you are right that it's a clean approach to leave the drivers to alsa and the rest to pulseaudio. But then alsa should be stripped down to be just a thing hardware abstraction layer with a well-defined interface for sound servers, and shouldn't be used directly by anything but a sound server. And since that won't happen, I think they should provide an out-of-the-box usable system with alsa alone. Of course "usable" is debatable here.
                      On another note, pulseaudio still isn't trouble free, especially not for apps only supporting alsa output. It works well enough at the moment, though.

                      So my point basically is that they really should get together (alsa, pulseaudio, jack, etc) and decide which project does what and provide good standardized interfaces, easy setup and consistent behaviour. There have been some articles here on phoronix about game developers calling the linux sound situation insane and unprogrammable in a general way ... and still nothing happens to resolve those issues.


                      Originally posted by curaga View Post
                      Just in case you're not aware, OSS4 has per-app volume control.
                      I know, but OSS v4 is not an option with a vanilla linux kernel afaik.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by r1348 View Post
                        I still don't see why you don't want to use Pulseaudio. Just because some dudes on IRC told you not to?
                        Seriously, I use Pulseaudio since it was first integrated in Fedora, and I never had a problem with it. I know there were rough edges at the beginning (specially on Ubuntu) but most of the bugs have been sorted out.
                        Also, I think it's a cleaner design to leave drivers to alsa, and mixing/routing to Pulseaudio. As you said, dmix turned out to be a disappointment, ask yourself why.
                        I do use pulseaudio :-)
                        But I don't think it should be necessary to use pulseaudio for something as basic as sane volume control. Of course you are right that it's a clean approach to leave the drivers to alsa and the rest to pulseaudio. But then alsa should be stripped down to be just a thing hardware abstraction layer with a well-defined interface for sound servers, and shouldn't be used directly by anything but a sound server. And since that won't happen, I think they should provide an out-of-the-box usable system with alsa alone. Of course "usable" is debatable here.
                        On another note, pulseaudio still isn't trouble free, especially not for apps only supporting alsa output. It works well enough at the moment, though.

                        So my point basically is that they really should get together (alsa, pulseaudio, jack, etc) and decide which project does what and provide good standardized interfaces, easy setup and consistent behaviour. There have been some articles here on phoronix about game developers calling the linux sound situation insane and unprogrammable in a general way ... and still nothing happens to resolve those issues.


                        Originally posted by curaga View Post
                        Just in case you're not aware, OSS4 has per-app volume control.
                        I know, but OSS v4 is not an option with a vanilla linux kernel afaik.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Has anyone seen the addition of 256 subdevices for x-fi chips?

                          Two Hundred Fifty Six hardware mixing channels. For each output. Fuck yea.

                          aplay -l output is now looooong:

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Adriano, I'm sure you'd have a field day with all those subdevices

                            Now can audacity take advantage of all that?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              This is for games. On Windows. But since this is Linux, all those mixer channels are useless

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X