Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

PulseAudio 3.0 Released With New Sound Features

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

  • #16
    I acknowledge that PulseAudio provides better sound quality, even than better than Windows (this might be subjective).
    But Pulseaudio still not working properly. If the USB Headset support is important, so is that their hardware buttons affect the volume of the headset itself and not the master.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by newwen View Post
      I acknowledge that PulseAudio provides better sound quality, even than better than Windows (this might be subjective).
      But Pulseaudio still not working properly. If the USB Headset support is important, so is that their hardware buttons affect the volume of the headset itself and not the master.
      The hardware buttons on my headphones just send keyboard style volume down commands that get caught by my desktop environment. I don't think that this is an issue that PA or any other sound system can easily solve. (better to yell at logitech and the other manufacturers to ship linux drivers.)

      That being said, the headphones do have a separate master volume than the onboard sound card as they are a second device.

      Comment


      • #18
        I use PulseAudio on Fedora and have not had many problems. I have played countless games of varying ages, played music, videos, done some video editing, and have used Mumble for VOIP. Never had latency issues, and for the most part things have just worked. And I have used PulseAudio's features to get around problems quite a bit over the past six months. By the way, my computer is hardly a total beast of a machine either.

        Originally posted by LinuxRocks View Post
        One thing that Ubuntu has done is make it so most "Normal" people (Like my 75 year old mom) can use Linux without issue. Install and go! How many other Linux distros out there provide this? Yeah, thats what I though... NONE!
        How about... almost all of them?

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by LinuxRocks View Post
          One thing that Ubuntu has done is make it so most "Normal" people (Like my 75 year old mom) can use Linux without issue. Install and go! How many other Linux distros out there provide this? Yeah, thats what I though... NONE!
          All this was done by upstream projects and is not distrubtion specific. Ubuntu pushes Linux for non-technic people true but it pushes itself torwards Ubuntu OS and this a greater issue for Linux on the desktop than any other issue.

          Comment


          • #20
            PA support in various programs has improved immensely over the last half a year, even. Just a while ago there were issues with Skype and VLC, but no longer, they are now fixed (and it's actually an issue in those programs triggering some bugs, not PA itself). The only real remaining program that does not work that well with PA is Wine - but even its developers are working towards that (finally the out-of-tree maintainer of the PulseAudio driver for Wine and the mainline Wine devs got to a peaceful agreement).

            Comment


            • #21
              Typical

              Instead of complaining again and again (Unity, Pulseaudio, Gnome-Shell, systemd, etc.) DO something! We're mostly pretty technologically aware here. I'm sure more help with upstream would be appreciated, instead of just bitching.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by GreatEmerald View Post
                t (finally the out-of-tree maintainer of the PulseAudio driver for Wine and the mainline Wine devs got to a peaceful agreement).
                Link? I'd love to read what the agreement is, because Ive been waiting for that to happen haha

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Ericg View Post
                  Link? I'd love to read what the agreement is, because Ive been waiting for that to happen haha
                  Here you go:
                  http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10495#c393
                  Latest thread about it on the Wine mailing list:
                  http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine...er/098000.html
                  (in short, the driver is currently being tested to see if it is good enough already)

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by ShadowBane View Post
                    Pulseaudio doesn't copy the data at all...
                    "In a typical installation scenario under Linux, the user configures ALSA to use a virtual device provided by PulseAudio. Thus, applications using ALSA will output sound to PulseAudio, which then uses ALSA itself to access the real sound card."

                    thats one copy that dosent occur with alsa, wouldnt occur at all if pulseaudio was kernel-level

                    hmmm just been reading about how it was desinged
                    in theory it should be good, and with mr. Poettering orchestrating it it can achieve what it says

                    but when i see pulseaudio using 5% of my laptops cpu(could be just ubuntu ppl screwing it up again) to play a low sample rate sound from a youtube video, that tells me its either not there yet or its just doing a lot of useless stuff (5% of a cpu is a whole lot, lot more then people today think)

                    zero-copy is also a kernel thing that glibc can use, but still the page says that PA has a scheduler running all the time
                    all in all it can never achieve the efficiency of alsa (alsa with a ladspa plugin for a equaliser used ~1.5cpu to play a 44k mp3 on that shitty laptop)


                    and for all you talking about sound quality, please dont

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Well, thank god for that. Wine audio has been an issue for awhile now.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        PA has come a long way and may find its place as a fully useful tool

                        but i remember when it was young, back then putting java as a sound deamon would be of almost the same effect (15% cpu to play a mp3 )

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by gens View Post
                          "In a typical installation scenario under Linux, the user configures ALSA to use a virtual device provided by PulseAudio. Thus, applications using ALSA will output sound to PulseAudio, which then uses ALSA itself to access the real sound card."

                          thats one copy that dosent occur with alsa, wouldnt occur at all if pulseaudio was kernel-level

                          hmmm just been reading about how it was desinged
                          in theory it should be good, and with mr. Poettering orchestrating it it can achieve what it says

                          but when i see pulseaudio using 5% of my laptops cpu(could be just ubuntu ppl screwing it up again) to play a low sample rate sound from a youtube video, that tells me its either not there yet or its just doing a lot of useless stuff (5% of a cpu is a whole lot, lot more then people today think)

                          zero-copy is also a kernel thing that glibc can use, but still the page says that PA has a scheduler running all the time
                          all in all it can never achieve the efficiency of alsa (alsa with a ladspa plugin for a equaliser used ~1.5cpu to play a 44k mp3 on that shitty laptop)


                          and for all you talking about sound quality, please dont
                          Is there something wrong with Pulseaudio's sound quality? The main reason that it uses more CPU time than dmix does for the same job is that uses a better (and more computationally expensive) re-sampler when re-sampling is needed. Another thing that could cause extra cpu usage is doing more re-sampling than needed (setting alternate sample rates in pulse can help with this, if only one thing is running it will use a sample rate that is less expensive to use instead of the primary one.)

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by LinuxRocks View Post
                            TemplarGR, were you beat up as a kid (Or are you still a kid?). Lighten up a little . Its almost Christmas!!! Time of joy and peace....

                            One thing that Ubuntu has done is make it so most "Normal" people (Like my 75 year old mom) can use Linux without issue. Install and go! How many other Linux distros out there provide this? Yeah, thats what I though... NONE!

                            Joe
                            Funny...

                            I thought someone who states that something doesn't work without any proof would better fit your description about beaten childs...

                            As for 75 year old Moms, i bet you a million dollars that more of them can use Windows without an issue than Ubuntu... Linux is chosen on technical merits, not ease of use...

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by ShadowBane View Post
                              Is there something wrong with Pulseaudio's sound quality? The main reason that it uses more CPU time than dmix does for the same job is that uses a better (and more computationally expensive) re-sampler when re-sampling is needed. Another thing that could cause extra cpu usage is doing more re-sampling than needed (setting alternate sample rates in pulse can help with this, if only one thing is running it will use a sample rate that is less expensive to use instead of the primary one.)
                              the sound quality difference should be unnoticeable, if not the same (probably is the same)

                              im just saying for the people who think its any different, that its probably not
                              (unless the settings are bad, either in PA or the program using PA/alsa)

                              PS i used ladspa, not dmix

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Since we're saying random things about Pulse that have nothing to do with 3.0 I'll throw in my 2c.

                                On my media center, Pulse was a horrible experience that I ended up pulling off. The only way to make it work with my hdmi sound output was to replace the udev detection with loading a module specifically for 0,7 or whatever the proper output was. (HDMI would show up, but it would be trying to use 0,3 or something and not work at all). On top of that xbmc crashed frequently as the sound device would disappear - removed pulse and those crashes went away, and sound was consistent.

                                On my laptop on the other hand I use a USB headset and an external sound card depending on what I'm doing. Pulse makes all that incredibly seamless - far nicer experience than editing asoundrc files and using alsactl every time I want to switch.

                                As a result I have mixed feelings - I can see how it could cause very polarizing viewpoints depending on a person's hardware and common use cases. I'm curious to try it again on the media center with xbmc 12 and PulseAudio 3 and see if they've fixed up the rough edges.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X