-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> Hi :)
> 
> I'm ambivalent if I should waste my time or the time of any Linux coder.
> 
Your choice.

> The latest mails I got offlist because of my unwanted suggestions on 
> other mailing lists, e.g. JACK dev list, are not only discrediting me, 
> but also MIDI. I wonder if developer of important basics, that means for 
> the kernel, ALSA and JACK are interested in fixing Jitter. Another issue 

They will need to be able to reproduce it on their systems.  I know the
APIC in your motherboard has issues, so you will have to at the top of
your game when reporting bugs.

> is, that they still deceive their self that Linux should be 100% 
> professional for recording, mixing and mastering. Until now no OS or 

See, there you go with flame bait.  I would have thought that you would
have learned by now.

> digital stand alone equipment is 100% professional, there are still a 
> lot of studios using analogue equipment. Okay, I'm a blabber, but please 
> take a look at Wiki, e.g. at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mastering:
> 
A lot of stuff gets murdered in the final stages anyway, regardless of
the equipment:
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/lofiversion/index.php/t27691.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Gmex_4hreQ&annotation_id=annotation_836874&feature=iv
http://www.geekrants.com/articles/mastering.html

Just google for "mastering volume wars" to get more examples.

> "There are mastering engineers who feel that digital technology, as of 
> 2007, has not progressed enough in quality to supersede analog 
> technology entirely. Many top mastering studios, including Bernie 
> Grundman Mastering (which has mastered 37 Grammy-nominated albums), and 
> Gateway Mastering, still embrace analog signal processing (such as 
> analog equalization) within the mastering process. Additionally, the 
> latest advances in analog mastering technology include 120V signal rails 
> for previously unavailable headroom of 150dB as well as frequency 
> response ranging from 3 Hz to 300 kHz.[citation needed] In order to 
> duplicate this frequency response in digital domain, a sampling rate of 
> at least 600 kHz would be required, by the Nyquist�Shannon sampling 
> theorem. However, it is pertinent that the extremes in this frequency 
> range (3 Hz - 300 kHz), are effectively inaudible, existing outside the 
> range of both the human ear and most professional microphones."
> 
> This are the experiences I made when I was engineer for Brauner. I don't 
> think it's relevant for home-recording and I guess most of us will do 
> home-recording or semi-pro work, but facing the truth is important for 
> progress.

The "pros" screw up regularly as well (see above).  A bad tradesman
blames his tools.  The "truth" is, a gifted person could take flawed
tools and make something beautiful. I don't actually buy in to the
analogue vs digital debate.  Between the gratuitous use of autotune and
the volume wars, most of the "pro" produced stuff is crap IMO.
> 
> Another issue that makes me feel pissed is, that it's not wanted to have 
> many users, because Linux isn't proprietary, but not to have many users 
> is the reason why hardware companies don't take enough care to fit to Linux.
> 
It is actually way more complicated than this.  Also complicating things
is that a large number of ends users does not actually gain much in the
Open Source community since something of value rarely comes from this
group.  In the proprietary world they at least pay, but in the open
source world this does not occur with any regularity.  As I see it, the
only people who actually matter are contributers (coders, documenters,
testers, financiers, etc.).  This may piss you off, but I am a firm
believer in TANSTAAFL.  I know I said this earlier today, but I think it
is worth repeating.

> I wonder if
> 
> 1. there is an interest to include a working MIDI, even if MIDI is e.g. 

For my uses of MIDI to date over the past decade, it does indeed work.
Statements like this are inflammatory, but you know this.  The problem
is that you and I currently have a different definition of "working
MIDI".  You need to learn to engage others and get them to be excited
about your vision.

> "anachronistische Sondermuell" (anachronistical hazardous waste) like a 
> Linux coder wrote offlist.
> 
This means very little to me.  What I can say is that it seems that you
did a very poor job in enrolling this "Linux coder" (whatever that
means) in your cause.  Until you learn how to do this, expect failure as
this is how the world works, not just Open Source.

> 2. there is an interest in facing the truth abaout digital recording and 
> digital recording using Linux .
> 
What is this truth?  Arbitrarily limitations imposed by my software
(Cubase is 2.1, but Nuendo is 7.1, at least that was the situation when
 I left that world behind).  This argument cuts both ways.  Truth is a
pretty dangerous word.  It implies certainty which is a far more rare
thing than you might think.  I think you may have more success if you
stay away from polarizing statements like this.

Again, all you did is make some reference to some vague problem, and all
that will happen is that you piss someone off.  You may actually be
experiencing a real problem, but statements like this do absolutely
nothing except start flame wars, and get your reports ignored.  If your
goal is to get something fixed, *you* failed, not anyone else because
failure is the only possible outcome when you say things like this.  You
know this because this is something like the 5th or 6th time we have had
this exact conversation.  You are wasting time, and I *know* that you
can do better.

> 3. there is an interest in making Linux popular enough to make companies 
> taking care about Linux, to get drivers.
> 
All that can be done is being done here.  Greg Kroah-Hartman even has an
open invitation to hardware manufacturers offering to write drivers for
them, even under an NDA.  So, basically, he will find someone to write
the driver, at no cost, willing to sign an NDA.  No one else, not Apple,
not Microsoft, not Windriver, not QNX, will do this.  At the end of the
day the manufacturers get to make that choice, and we get to choose what
to buy.  The ball is in their court.

> *?*
> 
> Some people like e.g. Rui are interested in solving MIDI jitter, but I 
> got more emails offline, that I'm not wanted and that MIDI per se is 
> unwanted, they say e.g. jitter makes MIDI becoming more natural.
> 
In some cases this is actually true.  I add random jitter to my hydrogen
tracks.  I think the key here is that we want to choose and control this
as opposed to having it always present, unless of course the underlying
hardware is the fault.

> Is there a chance for Linux audio and MIDI?
> 
I am confidant that if there is a problem, it will get fixed.  Again,
you say things in exactly the wrong way if your goal is to actually help
make things better.

It is possible that no one is actually interested in fixing MIDI
problems.  I do not believe this to be the case, but the developers of
all these projects do get to choose what they work on.  If they make
choices different from what you would like, you have several choices
available to you, such as going elsewhere, offering a bounty for certain
goals/tasks/bugs, sweet talking a developer into changing their minds.
I am sure that someone as creative as you can think of even more.

> By the way, I also get a lot of emails offlist from users who still use 
> Linux for day-to-day work, but not for audio work any more, they changed 
> to Apple or Microsoft.
> 
Their choice.  Anecdotal evidence is not useful. If something is not
working for them, and they are not willing to put any effort in to
helping resolve the issue, then why should they expect someone else to
fix their problems for them?  Again remember that you want someone else
to make something work for you, for free, on their own time.  The key is
to get them to *want* to help you.  You have consistently failed in this
regard, and yes this failure is yours.  This is part of that
responsibility thing I keep telling you about.

> Why is there the need to talk about that offlist and keep up appearances 
> on the lists?
> 
I am willing to speak on the record.  I cannot say why others would
choose not to.  You would have to ask them.  I do not believe that
appearances are being kept as you put it.  More accurately I would say
that I see no evidence to suggest this.   If people are keeping their
thoughts to themselves, what do they expect?   Nothing is going to
change unless people participate.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAko+Oy8ACgkQwRXgH3rKGfNezwCeK+WwVj29s+n6KCLo96WYCKxP
8FkAoJsu8orSqqYAiD5DT7cClojr6sS6
=Flq9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
64studio-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.64studio.com/mailman/listinfo/64studio-users

Reply via email to