Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

PulseAudio 2.0 Is Set To Be Released Very Soon

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

  • phoronix
    started a topic PulseAudio 2.0 Is Set To Be Released Very Soon

    PulseAudio 2.0 Is Set To Be Released Very Soon

    Phoronix: PulseAudio 2.0 Is Set To Be Released Very Soon

    While many Linux desktop enthusiasts still have nightmares concerning the early days of PulseAudio, the developers behind this common open-source audio server are planning to do a major 2.0 release before month's end...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTA3MTU

  • fuzz
    replied
    Originally posted by Chewi View Post
    Not that it excuses PulseAudio but on Gentoo, my Minecraft package builds the dependencies from source and as such, OpenAL will use PulseAudio directly if you wish. I have definitely not heard any pops.
    Same here. In fact, the only time I've ever had the problem was with Skype. And that's likely more due to Skype than pulse.

    Leave a comment:


  • Chewi
    replied
    Originally posted by silenceoftheass View Post
    • When a new stream is opened with different latency requirements, an audible pop is heard in the output stream as pulseaudio adjusts it's buffers and wakeup timing. It may just be the app / protocol (minecraft, alsa) that causes this. I should investigate a little further but time... is fleeting...
    Not that it excuses PulseAudio but on Gentoo, my Minecraft package builds the dependencies from source and as such, OpenAL will use PulseAudio directly if you wish. I have definitely not heard any pops.

    Leave a comment:


  • silenceoftheass
    replied
    Pro-audio perspective on pulseaudio

    Pulseaudio (comments based on current version on Fedora 16 - 0.9.23)

    The good:
    • Wakeup based audio mixing platform to linux desktop. Major benefits for power saving / CPU and unifying a lot of the mess that was Linux audio servers.
    • Dynamic audio device plugging done correctly
    • Userland tools - finally some GUI tools in "User head space" that are natural
    • Forcing the ALSA drivers to correctly report buffer fill levels for timing



    The bad:
    • Yet another linux sound server... (although with it's adoption, it's rapidly becoming the server of choice). The XKCD strip about "standards" springs to mind.
    • Doesn't solve any pro-audio use-cases (and the pulseaudio guys acknowledge this). It's not pulseaudio's remit to compete with jack, but it does illustrate that maybe the solution isn't quite there...
    • When a new stream is opened with different latency requirements, an audible pop is heard in the output stream as pulseaudio adjusts it's buffers and wakeup timing. It may just be the app / protocol (minecraft, alsa) that causes this. I should investigate a little further but time... is fleeting...
    • Introducing a new "plugin" format. To do any stream processing (echo cancellation / reverb etc) pulseaudio should be using existing plugin standards (LADSPA/LV2)



    Coming in V2:
    • Virtual sound sink / Effects - this one is telling for me, and smells a bit like Pulseaudio is starting to go down the route of being a sound graph (with effects and other bits too). This is starting to encroach on Jack territory...



    So what's my real opinion?

    Well don't get me wrong, I think we're going in the right direction with Pulseaudio, I just can't escape the feeling that it does about 80% (value pulled from ass) of needed audio requirements, whilst punting on some things it could do.

    In my ideal world, pulseaudio would be _the_ sound server and audio graph host for the linux desktop (ala apple's audio units and core-audio). We could then finally move on from having multiple tools and servers for all this stuff and focus on this one engine to rule them all.

    Jack itself has certain issues - e.g. only one global namespace for connections, no nesting of graphs, no adaptive latency control, applications don't run their audio units inside the server process (which would take us to latency perfection).

    I'm wishing I know, and a lot of my gripes stem from a pro-audio perspective - but some of the normal real world applications have similar requirements to pro-audio (think rhythm games, adding desktop wide reverb / eq ).

    Cheers

    Leave a comment:


  • rajafarian
    replied
    Originally posted by DanL View Post
    I can easily hear the difference between my M-Audio Revo and my onboard ALC892 using the same headphones. The M-Audio cost < $70 when I bought it 7 years ago and it was worth every penny.


    Funny thing is, I know a lot of people that like to think of themselves as audiophiles with music collections full of 128kb mp3's...

    Right on, dude. I used to have a Revo 5.1 but wanted to experiment with Pulseaudio more and the Revo would only work with the timer-based scheduling off so I replaced it with an HT Omega Claro Halo. The Revo with Klipsh ProMedia Ultra 5.1 were unbelievable, certainly better than any other computer I had heard before. I've slowly moved to replace all my music to flac.

    Leave a comment:


  • frie2
    replied
    The Azalia. I've never tried the hdmi audio actually.

    Leave a comment:


  • allquixotic
    replied
    Originally posted by frie2 View Post
    I don't think my hardware is all that rare. And no, I don't have an X-fi. I wouldn't touch creative with 10ly pole.

    http://www.alsa-project.org/db/?f=9b...c147cf475deeb9
    Which of your sound cards are you using that crackles? The HDMI audio on the Radeon, or the Azalia codec on the motherboard?

    Leave a comment:


  • frie2
    replied
    I don't think my hardware is all that rare. And no, I don't have an X-fi. I wouldn't touch creative with 10ly pole.

    http://www.alsa-project.org/db/?f=9b...c147cf475deeb9

    Leave a comment:


  • allquixotic
    replied
    Originally posted by frie2 View Post
    WOW. I really should proofread. Let me try again below.

    Your sharp reasoning prompted me to try pulseaudio again. I removed my dmix asound.conf, reinstalled alsa, and then installed pulseaudio. I'm sorry to report, but pulseaudio still crackles loudly and consistently on both of my machines. I'm going to stick to dmix for another year or so before I try again.
    Hi,

    "crackles loudly" is not going to help anyone resolve the problem. Chances are that so few people use your sound hardware that you might be the only one who would care to report the issue. Once it's reported, it can probably be fixed.

    Most likely this is not pulseaudio's fault, but your ALSA drivers. One downside of using pulseaudio is that crappy audio drivers that don't properly implement the full ALSA API are simply not acceptable anymore. So it's been a HUGE wakeup call for the ALSA developers to have to support pulseaudio on all kinds of hardware, and as a result, the quality of all the audio drivers -- whether using PA or not -- has improved drastically since PA started pushing that angle.

    Don't believe me? Check out all the patches contributed to ALSA by PulseAudio developers, or patches suggested at a high level by a PulseAudio developer, then developed by an ALSA maintainer in response. 2007 - 2010 saw a tremendous amount of work along these lines.

    Chances are, if you try again in a year without taking any action, nothing is going to be better. So report the problem! PulseAudio has a mailing list. They're very responsive. Be prepared to provide your alsa-info.sh results: http://git.alsa-project.org/?p=alsa-...s/alsa-info.sh

    You don't happen to have a Creative X-Fi, do you?

    Leave a comment:


  • frie2
    replied
    WOW. I really should proofread. Let me try again below.

    Your sharp reasoning prompted me to try pulseaudio again. I removed my dmix asound.conf, reinstalled alsa, and then installed pulseaudio. I'm sorry to report, but pulseaudio still crackles loudly and consistently on both of my machines. I'm going to stick to dmix for another year or so before I try again.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X