Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Linux Audio Editing Is Better With Ardour 3.0

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

  • Linux Audio Editing Is Better With Ardour 3.0

    Phoronix: Linux Audio Editing Is Better With Ardour 3.0

    The high-end open-source audio workstation software Ardour is up to version 3.0. Ardour 3.0 features many improvements to this GPLv2+ software...

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

  • #2
    No KLANG support? Lol

    Comment


    • #3
      Too late but better than nothing

      It has been over a year since development work for 3.0 version started. This version packs many differences and improvements from the 2.x and has been long waited for. The release seems like a premature one (the buglist on the roadmap for 3.0 was %60 or so fixed) to attract more user feedback and possible developer contribution. So we may call it betaish. But I hope all remaining problems will be sorted out and we will have a fully stable ardour 3.x in the coming months. Good work ardour team!
      Last edited by glxextxexlg; 03-12-2013, 06:05 AM.

      Comment


      • #4
        I'm currently using Reaper and I'm afraid to use Ardour. What if they decide that VST support is not a good idea and decide to remove it? This will leave people in the cold after they've invested considerable time in their Ardour projects.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by glxextxexlg View Post
          It has been over a year since development work for 3.0 version started. This version packs many differences and improvements from the 2.x and has been long waited for. The release seems like a premature one (the buglist on the roadmap for 3.0 was %60 or so fixed) to attract more user feedback and possible developer contribution. So we may call it betaish. But I hope all remaining problems will be sorted out and we will have a fully stable ardour 3.x in the coming months. Good work ardour team!
          Who is that "we" that may call it betaish, and why are you talking for them?

          And btw, "over a year since development started"? You bet! MIDI tracks have been in the works since 2006. So it's safe to say that it's at least 7 years in the works It's also pretty stable.

          Originally posted by RealNC View Post
          I'm currently using Reaper and I'm afraid to use Ardour. What if they decide that VST support is not a good idea and decide to remove it? This will leave people in the cold after they've invested considerable time in their Ardour projects.
          Which VST support? There's Linux VST support that was added by a developer from linuxDSP who is a good friend of Paul. It's very stable and reliable. And then there's Windows VST support via WINE that's never going to be stable and hence isn't available by default. Make your choice.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by prokoudine View Post
            Which VST support? There's Linux VST support that was added by a developer from linuxDSP who is a good friend of Paul. It's very stable and reliable. And then there's Windows VST support via WINE that's never going to be stable and hence isn't available by default. Make your choice.
            Oh. I didn't know that it can't run Windows VSTs (I didn't even know that VSTs can be Linux-specific at all.) Well, not a choice at all then I guess. Sticking with Reaper.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by RealNC View Post
              Oh. I didn't know that it can't run Windows VSTs...
              You are an amazingly selective reader.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by prokoudine View Post
                You are an amazingly selective reader.
                No I'm not. If it's not official I'm not gonna use it since it's not guaranteed to stay. DAW applications do not support open formats (they don't exist, AFAIK) where I can switch to another software, like from MS Office to OO or LO, or from Photoshop to Gimp. If I produce something in a DAW, the project is locked there. If support for something goes away in the future, you're fucked. And if something is not official, people won't risk using it because, again, you can't switch later to another DAW.

                Currently, using a DAW is a vendor lock-in thingy. You stick with it if it looks like it provides long-term support for something you need. With some third-party, unofficial and unstable support for Windows VSTs you get zero long-term support guarantees.
                Last edited by RealNC; 03-14-2013, 02:18 AM.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by RealNC View Post
                  No I'm not. If it's not official I'm not gonna use it since it's not guaranteed to stay.
                  And that of course means it doesn't exist? Wow.

                  Originally posted by RealNC View Post
                  DAW applications do not support open formats (they don't exist, AFAIK)
                  There are open formats. Just like there is AATranslator for converting project data between DAWs.

                  Originally posted by RealNC View Post
                  Currently, using a DAW is a vendor lock-in thingy.
                  That, at least, is true to a certain extent.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    btw if this release opens the way to a native reaper release for linux then ardour will fulfill its duty. who cares about paul's monthly income from ardour being hardly enough to keep him developing and mindless zealots that follow him (while the development is soo slow?) development of ardour is slow because paul davis has set up a system that every donation or subscription is paid directly to him and not distributed among developers fairly. as a result no clever developer helps him finish the job only mindless zealots do

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by prokoudine View Post
                      And that of course means it doesn't exist? Wow.
                      Why would that mean that it doesn't exist? I don't get what you're trying to say. My point was that it's not going to be used by most people, that's all.

                      There are open formats. Just like there is AATranslator for converting project data between DAWs.
                      It's extremely limited at what it can do. To me, it's totally useless, as everything I do is 90% MIDI. But I guess it's better than nothing.

                      I do like Ardour a lot. I didn't mean to criticize it as being a bad DAW. What I'm saying is that without thorough Windows VST support, it's not going to be used much.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by RealNC View Post
                        Why would that mean that it doesn't exist? I don't get what you're trying to say.
                        Welcome to the brilliant world of English modal verbs, where "cannot" means "unable to". Here is what you stated, literally:

                        "I didn't know that it can't run Windows VSTs"

                        It can run those. You just choose not to use it. That's a whole different situation.

                        Originally posted by RealNC View Post
                        What I'm saying is that without thorough Windows VST support, it's not going to be used much.
                        That's not Ardour's problem. If you spend some time looking at bug reports in WINE's bug tracker, you'll see that there's a bunch of VST-related reports from the previous decade that haven't been even opened.

                        In my personal experience, Windows VSTs run well with some sorry exceptions. For instance, the only few plug-ins I couldn't run were the ones shipped with my Focusrite interface. At the same time, Roland's VSTi that was also part of the bundle Just Worked (tm). So really, it's matter of building a library of tools that have proved to work. Much like on Windows.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by prokoudine View Post
                          That's not Ardour's problem.
                          I know. It's mine. And I'm saying that Ardour is not suitable for solving it.

                          Originally posted by prokoudine View Post
                          If you spend some time looking at bug reports in WINE's bug tracker, you'll see that there's a bunch of VST-related reports from the previous decade that haven't been even opened.
                          At least one of them is mine. No one seems to be even remotely interested even in crasher bugs (the VST just crashes WINE on startup.) One would think that at least crashers would be given actual attention.
                          Last edited by RealNC; 03-14-2013, 10:39 AM.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by prokoudine View Post
                            Which VST support? There's Linux VST support that was added by a developer from linuxDSP who is a good friend of Paul. It's very stable and reliable. And then there's Windows VST support via WINE that's never going to be stable and hence isn't available by default. Make your choice.
                            Not to mention that if you want Windows VST support in Ardour, the build must be 32-bit. Which kind of sucks when you are running a 64bit OS. i've only toyed around with ardour-VST, but i find it easier to just run Windows VSTs outside of / into Ardour-3.0. It's a little extra setup, but not much. (midi-out from ardour channel -> VSTi + VSTi audio into ardour channel). ~ this also gives the benefit where if a VST did crash, this has zero effect on Ardour. but generally, i won't use any buggy VSTs.

                            As far as stability of (windows) VSTs, as long as wine can run them - they generally tend to be pretty stable, with a couple of caveats; 1. not all VSTs are created equal, thus some are buggy 2. not all VSTs run well in wine 3. upstream wine isn't well-suited for proaudio for various reasons.... for the best stability / performance vanilla/upstream wine really isn't all that suitable, you need to be using various other patchsets with it and/or wine-l-pa. ~ generally, the VSTi's that i tend to use are as good (if not WAY better) than any 'native' VSTs available for linux. and by better, i mean in terms of stability, features, sound engine, flexibility, reliability.

                            Originally posted by RealNC View Post
                            I do like Ardour a lot. I didn't mean to criticize it as being a bad DAW. What I'm saying is that without thorough Windows VST support, it's not going to be used much.
                            You do realize that you can just run windows VSTs outside of Ardour-3.0, right? (but still use Ardour to control / process audio).

                            One of Jack's biggest features is interoperability between applications. I use N.I kontakt 5 for most of my drum sounds (loading my battery 3 kits, mostly) and map my (multi-)channels from kontakt into Ardour. it works great. Likewise, when i feel like recording some 'keys', i just load up XYZ VSTi, setup my channel in Ardour ~ and record...In my case, i am using FSThost to wrap .dll/vst into a standalone app. FSThost supports jack_session, so it's not like you can't save your sessions/routing/settings for recall (for a project) later. (likewise, i am sure Non-session-manager could work well for this too).

                            but i can also appreciate why people use Reaper - since it is an easier setup / just one app. I have Reaper to, but mostly just use it for testing purposes with wine-l-pa.

                            cheerz

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by RealNC View Post
                              At least one of them is mine. No one seems to be even remotely interested even in crasher bugs (the VST just crashes WINE on startup.) One would think that at least crashers would be given actual attention.
                              give examples? (specific VSTs).

                              The problem with _some_ vsts isthat they implement things which Wine does not, which tend to be the one's that don't work at all. imho, it is better to focus on the one's that 'almost work', maybe just have a few rough edges that can be fixed. So i am not surprised that one's that just crash wine badly don't get looked at... although, i must say ~ i have never found one that crashes wine ~ although i have obviously seen many that crash/don't run... although, these days more and more seem to run well.

                              sometimes, software in Wine will crash just because you haven't installed XYZ dll or have an 'override' that you shouldn't (or vice versa) too.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X