Re: Audio Production
On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 12:33 PM, Da Rock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 11:50 +0200, marshc wrote: > > > > > > My only advice on this point is to subscribe to the multimedia list and > ask your questions there (I'll be watching this list too, have been for > some time now due to my htpc issues- I desperately want to use FreeBSD > for a/v, and I suffer the same issues you do in terms of multitasking in > the cpu level, but the main problem with BSD for me is the driver > problems). > > > >From my experience (and I use FreeBSD for many different needs), FreeBSD > can run a/v and multimedia programs, write to multiple components > simultaneously, serve a small amount services, run X, and still respond > happily to your hammering at the CPU while it serves you coffee! It is > mainly dependent on your hardware capabilities (dma, bus bandwidth, > buffers, etc), and obviously the quality of the programs you run. If you > run a shitty program that is poorly written then it won't go as well, > but still perform admirably. But most of the programs ported wouldn't > have been added if they were like that, so you're mostly safe. > > So for a/v I find it performs far better than linux. Linux I still have > trouble with, but it performs better than window$. Linux is a happy > medium in between, and I'll explain why; > > Driver support for the more advanced hardware is not always forthcoming > with FreeBSD, but it is for linux. Most manufacturers aren't very > supportive of open source, and if they do they usually gravitate toward > a linux base because of user popularity. On the upside, there is a > brilliant coder who is extending the linux compat base for hardware side > as well, but you do need to be nearly expert. It is controversial, but > you should be able to use the hardware until native drivers are written. > > Just to clarify, in the development side of FreeBSD there is some > mention of Hats (correct me of I'm wrong here guys), and so any side > projects are kept under a particular hat, the mailing list that relates > to your interest in FreeBSD will be monitored by those working under > these hats will be better able to guide you. This list is just a general > discussion and help list for newbies, but when you get in to more depth > like this you'll want to get to the experts on the subject who monitor a > particular list more closely. > > Have fun and good luck. > thanks, i subscribed to multimedia and move queries there in future and not bother folks here. i have been trying to reply to this but have been busy, and just like to recap briefly. in a nutshell, i am very new to bsd, not even a teenager in dog years, and have tried ever flavour these past months - (fbsd/pcbsd - i386/amd64 -- 6/7) and finally settled on 7.1 amd64. i still have some settings to go through/figure out, and have the occasional system freeze, but i don't have the sluggish/bad installs i had trouble with earlier. before you sent this post i had given up and moved to ubuntu studio, decided to give it another go, and got the best performance ever by installing pcbsd 1.5.1 amd64 (based on 6.3) and enabling ULE. so i got an idea of what fbsd was capable of on my machine with the right setup. (graphics driver aside, it even felt *smoother* than studio64). anyway. will be working on this from now on and my project over the next year, so we'll see what happens on multimedia mailing list. i was just putting together a list of packages and might port there sometime soon and close this from this list. thanks for this post ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Audio Production
On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 11:50 +0200, marshc wrote: > > > > I've just been following this thread and have remained silent until now, > > but the linux kernel from my experience is nowhere near as stable or as > > fast as the freebsd kernel. Another cool feature is you can build your > > own kernel, stripping out anything unnecessary and including any > > optimisations that you think will help. > > > Well thanks, because this was part of my original question. All I know > is that you can modify GENERIC for a custom kernel and i can remove what > hardware > i don't need there, and add ext3fs and vesa, and was asking whether > there were other settings > elsewhere to tweak, but i am begining to think it would involve diving > into the actual kernel > source code, and other such sinister hacking. I'm using studio64 now and > will eventually research > a little what it involves, but i had just asked here to find out if > there were any similar project or groups > doing that sort of stuff on fbsd. > > so at this point all i can ask is, are there other more in depth > settings somewhere? or should i forget about it? > i have almost concluded it is the latter. > My only advice on this point is to subscribe to the multimedia list and ask your questions there (I'll be watching this list too, have been for some time now due to my htpc issues- I desperately want to use FreeBSD for a/v, and I suffer the same issues you do in terms of multitasking in the cpu level, but the main problem with BSD for me is the driver problems). > > I think jack is still possible on freebsd too (correct me if I'm wrong), > > so all in all I think your latency will not be as much of a problem on > > bsd as it was on linux. > > > > > jack is available on fsbd, yes. on my earlier post however, i was > rushing a reply before > going out and was trying to cover too much at once, and don't think i > explained myself properly. > I was trying to recap on my original question and explain the whole > purpose of what i was looking for, since i still am not > entirely clear till now. I was also trying to explain some basic areas, > thinking maybe it would also reach some _NON_-audio consious, > fsbd expert that might have some ideas, shed some light and point in the > some direction. > > I mean i am not really a latency freak, and not my main concern. It is > an unavoidable factor in audio production, > something you live with and can manage on way or the other, and i was > mentioning it trying to get to the big picture. > That is , more or less, that latency is an issue, but you can work with, > and what you really want is a computer that is > basically always ready for your orders and request, individed and at the > drop of a dime - " play this out there. that out that, > record this part, write it to disk, mix that i don't care how, just > do it and don't interrupt me". > > > I'm only just getting into this area myself, but I've been using freebsd > > for a while now and I'm extremely happy with it (bar some driver issues, > > particularly in multimedia- tv cards, etc- which may be rectified > > natively very soon, or using the linux support in the kernel). The > > multimedia list will be very helpful to you I'd say, and swapping notes > > is always good. > > > > Good luck. > > > > > I am very new outside windows and been on holidays spending alot of time > getting familiar with freebsd as an OS, not audio, > but it is an issue eventually. I wanted to know if it worth investing my time > in it with those future plans in sight, or if i should make > like a band aid and settle on ubuntu studio64 now. > > Like you mentioned, i was very happy with it as an os, but i had some basic > performance issues and couldn't make out why. I am pretty sure it was due to > my setup and lack of knowledge, basic settings/configs somewhere, but wanted > to know if fbsd could be further optimized with those issues solved. > > > dunno, this is ubuntu studio64 now and i have come to like it very mucch. it > is well build; but think i would switch to fbsd at the drop of a hat given > the choice. > I respect the fact that most pro/long time users of fbsd would be > network/server oriented, and you can't match fbsd there, but i also think the > bigger the community, the more likely new faces, new groups, new projects. > > p.s. > i haven't used jack much yet, but have known about it for a while, and going > on specs and capabilities, it should be the better system. It is like windows > ASIO and Rewire into one package. From what i heard it can route any signal > between any running audio program, even if they are not normally aware of > eachother, or build with that capability. > I don't know about other projects as such, FreeBSD runs under a different kind of protocol than the linux kernel in terms of development, but as I mentioned use the multimedia list and you'll find more geeks like us who understand and know what
Re: Audio Production
I've just been following this thread and have remained silent until now, but the linux kernel from my experience is nowhere near as stable or as fast as the freebsd kernel. Another cool feature is you can build your own kernel, stripping out anything unnecessary and including any optimisations that you think will help. Well thanks, because this was part of my original question. All I know is that you can modify GENERIC for a custom kernel and i can remove what hardware i don't need there, and add ext3fs and vesa, and was asking whether there were other settings elsewhere to tweak, but i am begining to think it would involve diving into the actual kernel source code, and other such sinister hacking. I'm using studio64 now and will eventually research a little what it involves, but i had just asked here to find out if there were any similar project or groups doing that sort of stuff on fbsd. so at this point all i can ask is, are there other more in depth settings somewhere? or should i forget about it? i have almost concluded it is the latter. I think jack is still possible on freebsd too (correct me if I'm wrong), so all in all I think your latency will not be as much of a problem on bsd as it was on linux. jack is available on fsbd, yes. on my earlier post however, i was rushing a reply before going out and was trying to cover too much at once, and don't think i explained myself properly. I was trying to recap on my original question and explain the whole purpose of what i was looking for, since i still am not entirely clear till now. I was also trying to explain some basic areas, thinking maybe it would also reach some _NON_-audio consious, fsbd expert that might have some ideas, shed some light and point in the some direction. I mean i am not really a latency freak, and not my main concern. It is an unavoidable factor in audio production, something you live with and can manage on way or the other, and i was mentioning it trying to get to the big picture. That is , more or less, that latency is an issue, but you can work with, and what you really want is a computer that is basically always ready for your orders and request, individed and at the drop of a dime - " play this out there. that out that, record this part, write it to disk, mix that i don't care how, just do it and don't interrupt me". I'm only just getting into this area myself, but I've been using freebsd for a while now and I'm extremely happy with it (bar some driver issues, particularly in multimedia- tv cards, etc- which may be rectified natively very soon, or using the linux support in the kernel). The multimedia list will be very helpful to you I'd say, and swapping notes is always good. Good luck. I am very new outside windows and been on holidays spending alot of time getting familiar with freebsd as an OS, not audio, but it is an issue eventually. I wanted to know if it worth investing my time in it with those future plans in sight, or if i should make like a band aid and settle on ubuntu studio64 now. Like you mentioned, i was very happy with it as an os, but i had some basic performance issues and couldn't make out why. I am pretty sure it was due to my setup and lack of knowledge, basic settings/configs somewhere, but wanted to know if fbsd could be further optimized with those issues solved. dunno, this is ubuntu studio64 now and i have come to like it very mucch. it is well build; but think i would switch to fbsd at the drop of a hat given the choice. I respect the fact that most pro/long time users of fbsd would be network/server oriented, and you can't match fbsd there, but i also think the bigger the community, the more likely new faces, new groups, new projects. p.s. i haven't used jack much yet, but have known about it for a while, and going on specs and capabilities, it should be the better system. It is like windows ASIO and Rewire into one package. From what i heard it can route any signal between any running audio program, even if they are not normally aware of eachother, or build with that capability. good luck to you too, ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Audio Production
On Sun, 2008-09-21 at 08:21 -0400, marshc wrote: > Nash Nipples wrote: > > > > > >>> m cassar schrieb: > >>> > >>> > Does anyone here use freebsd for serious > > >> audio/video production work? or > >> > know if there is some kind of community? > > > >>> Didn't try it, but http://ardour.org/ looks like > >>> > >> what you are looking for. > >> > >>> See http://www.freshports.org/audio/ardour/ > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Timm > >>> > >>> > >> thanks but this wasn't exactly what i was asking about > >> in the original post. > >> ardour *is* in ports, as with most other good open-source > >> audio applications > >> ( and propbably the best program out there - though i'm > >> new) but what i was > >> looking for is related to custom/optimizted kernels either > >> known as > >> low-latency or real-time kernels in linux; to help reduce > >> recording > >> latencies, audio dropouts, etc. like studio 64 rt-kernel on > >> ubuntu, planet > >> ccrma on fedora. > >> > >> what i was trying to find out is whether there is such > >> projects on freebsd, > >> or more importantly, if freebsd kernel had the potential to > >> be similarly > >> optimized. (not that i myself have any expertise, [hence my > >> question]) > >> > >> on the other hand, if you are interested in audio programs, > >> ardour is good, > >> hydrogen is good and fun. not to mention easy. > >> > > > > i have experienced a delay when i was recording voice and sort of laying it > > on a track. but removing a few miliseconds off the beginning didnt make a > > big trouble for me and thats when i have discovered this phenomenom but > > thought it was rather because my sound card is old. is this any close to > > something that you mean? > > > it is related, but what you mentiioned is a slightly different area in > computer audio than what i mean with respect to kernels. > > An old card is likely to produce greater delays under any setup, but > that is more a factor of its capabilities and quality of its parts than > just purely because it is old. If you were using JACK (linux) or ASIO > (windows) the delay could be minimized to some extent, but no miracles > there, and that is about the most you can do. > > i'm only at entry level on audio engineering, but in a nutshell here is > an overview to explain your delay, (latency) and my kernel related question. > > first of all, computers are always prone to latencies, or delays, > because of the time it takes the cpu to process the audio data, > read/write from disks, convert between audio signals and digital data, > etc, etc. All take up cycles and valuable milliseconds. > > when playing normal music like mp3s in itunes and such, you wouldn't > notice any delay because the data is simply read from disk and output > thru speackers as they come, though technically there would be a short > period between the time the data was read off disk and then heard out > the speakers. in audio production that slight delay, or latency, is > everything, especially when you have multi-track recording and syncing > with external gear. (latencies range from under 10ms to over 100ms) > > Latency would be more noticeable, say when recording, and would sound > like an echo if you were talking into a mic and listening thru > headphones or speakers, on an average setup at least. roughly becase of > the time needed to process the signal. > > Also, If you were to use a midi controller/keyboard connected via midi > to play a software instrument, you would notice a delay between the time > you hit a key on the keyboard and when you actually heard the sound. The > key press transmittes midi data to the software instrument, the software > triggers the desired sound immediately, but there is that slight delay > to create the sound and push it out the speakers. > > Audio interfaces can have a latency around 5ms, which is very good, yet > may still be faintly noticable, and that also depends on the power of > the pc and the actual load ( number of tracks, effects, instruments > playing), and latency is still a *phenomenon* and something you *have to > live with* in computer audio production; as opposed to hardware gear > like samplers, drum machines, synths, etc. and short of buying a $10K > protools "soundcard". a _hobbyist_ audio interface can be decent with > latencies under 20ms. > > In application, multi-track recording programa like Cubase, Logic, > Ardour, Ableton, Cakewalk etc, do fairly well (with a good setup) when > all material is confined within the computer and not communicating with > the outside world. When you are recording say a vocalist, chances are > you're playing back all the other tracks (drums, bass, etc) at the same > time for the vocalist to listen and sing to, plus possible playing back > the vocalist with added effects likde reverb; a mixture of delays going > in, and the same amount go
Re: Audio Production
Nash Nipples wrote: i have experienced a delay when i was recording voice and sort of laying it on a track. but removing a few miliseconds off the beginning didnt make a big trouble for me and thats when i have discovered this phenomenom but thought it was rather because my sound card is old. is this any close to something that you mean? it is related, but what you mentiioned is a slightly different area in computer audio than what i mean with respect to kernels. An old card is likely to produce greater delays under any setup, but that is more a factor of its capabilities and quality of its parts than just purely because it is old. If you were using JACK (linux) or ASIO (windows) the delay could be minimized to some extent, but no miracles there, and that is about the most you can do. i'm only at entry level on audio engineering, but in a nutshell here is an overview to explain your delay, (latency) and my kernel related question. first of all, computers are always prone to latencies, or delays, because of the time it takes the cpu to process the audio data, read/write from disks, convert between audio signals and digital data, etc, etc. All take up cycles and valuable milliseconds. when playing normal music like mp3s in itunes and such, you wouldn't notice any delay because the data is simply read from disk and output thru speackers as they come, though technically there would be a short period between the time the data was read off disk and then heard out the speakers. in audio production that slight delay, or latency, is everything, especially when you have multi-track recording and syncing with external gear. (latencies range from under 10ms to over 100ms) Latency would be more noticeable, say when recording, and would sound like an echo if you were talking into a mic and listening thru headphones or speakers, on an average setup at least. roughly becase of the time needed to process the signal. Also, If you were to use a midi controller/keyboard connected via midi to play a software instrument, you would notice a delay between the time you hit a key on the keyboard and when you actually heard the sound. The key press transmittes midi data to the software instrument, the software triggers the desired sound immediately, but there is that slight delay to create the sound and push it out the speakers. Audio interfaces can have a latency around 5ms, which is very good, yet may still be faintly noticable, and that also depends on the power of the pc and the actual load ( number of tracks, effects, instruments playing), and latency is still a *phenomenon* and something you *have to live with* in computer audio production; as opposed to hardware gear like samplers, drum machines, synths, etc. and short of buying a $10K protools "soundcard". a _hobbyist_ audio interface can be decent with latencies under 20ms. In application, multi-track recording programa like Cubase, Logic, Ardour, Ableton, Cakewalk etc, do fairly well (with a good setup) when all material is confined within the computer and not communicating with the outside world. When you are recording say a vocalist, chances are you're playing back all the other tracks (drums, bass, etc) at the same time for the vocalist to listen and sing to, plus possible playing back the vocalist with added effects likde reverb; a mixture of delays going in, and the same amount going out. Simillarly, if you had one or more audio tracks, (playing back audio recordings or samples off hard disk), and had any midi track there being sent to external hardware like a drum machine ,to play drum parts from there, or a hardware synth playing a bass or pad track, then the practice is to compensate for latency by having the midi track play or transmit with a 5ms delay, to give the computer that little time to process the audio, and so the whole mix would sound in sync (since midi to external gear to sound heard would be instant). 5ms for a sytem with 5ms latency, 20ms would require 20, 100 would require 100, etc. There is a lot more to computer audio production, but basically the efforts are always, or mainly, to reduce that latency as much as possible. Better audio interfaces not only have better components and AD/DA converters, they are also intented to take as much load off the cpu as possible, and handle what they can themselves. Also, the more power a computer has never eliminates latency or delay completely, it just generally means you can play more tracks at once and use low latencies more comfortable without dropouts, glitches, clicks and pops. ( Latency is more or less adjustable by configuring the audio buffer size and the number of said buffers to find the best setting on your system. That is, you stop at the lowest setting that works without glitches and gaps in the music playback or recording. The best way to demonstrate or understand that is by using prope
Re: Audio Production
> > i have experienced a delay when i was recording voice > and sort of laying it on a track. but removing a few > miliseconds off the beginning didnt make a big trouble for > me and thats when i have discovered this phenomenom but > thought it was rather because my sound card is old. is this > any close to something that you mean? > > > it is related, but what you mentiioned is a slightly > different area in > computer audio than what i mean with respect to kernels. > > An old card is likely to produce greater delays under any > setup, but > that is more a factor of its capabilities and quality of > its parts than > just purely because it is old. If you were using JACK > (linux) or ASIO > (windows) the delay could be minimized to some extent, but > no miracles > there, and that is about the most you can do. > > i'm only at entry level on audio engineering, but in a > nutshell here is > an overview to explain your delay, (latency) and my kernel > related question. > > first of all, computers are always prone to latencies, or > delays, > because of the time it takes the cpu to process the audio > data, > read/write from disks, convert between audio signals and > digital data, > etc, etc. All take up cycles and valuable milliseconds. > > when playing normal music like mp3s in itunes and such, you > wouldn't > notice any delay because the data is simply read from disk > and output > thru speackers as they come, though technically there would > be a short > period between the time the data was read off disk and then > heard out > the speakers. in audio production that slight delay, or > latency, is > everything, especially when you have multi-track recording > and syncing > with external gear. (latencies range from under 10ms to > over 100ms) > > Latency would be more noticeable, say when recording, and > would sound > like an echo if you were talking into a mic and listening > thru > headphones or speakers, on an average setup at least. > roughly becase of > the time needed to process the signal. > > Also, If you were to use a midi controller/keyboard > connected via midi > to play a software instrument, you would notice a delay > between the time > you hit a key on the keyboard and when you actually heard > the sound. The > key press transmittes midi data to the software instrument, > the software > triggers the desired sound immediately, but there is that > slight delay > to create the sound and push it out the speakers. > > Audio interfaces can have a latency around 5ms, which is > very good, yet > may still be faintly noticable, and that also depends on > the power of > the pc and the actual load ( number of tracks, effects, > instruments > playing), and latency is still a *phenomenon* and something > you *have to > live with* in computer audio production; as opposed to > hardware gear > like samplers, drum machines, synths, etc. and short of > buying a $10K > protools "soundcard". a _hobbyist_ audio > interface can be decent with > latencies under 20ms. > > In application, multi-track recording programa like > Cubase, Logic, > Ardour, Ableton, Cakewalk etc, do fairly well (with a good > setup) when > all material is confined within the computer and not > communicating with > the outside world. When you are recording say a vocalist, > chances are > you're playing back all the other tracks (drums, bass, > etc) at the same > time for the vocalist to listen and sing to, plus possible > playing back > the vocalist with added effects likde reverb; a mixture of > delays going > in, and the same amount going out. > > Simillarly, if you had one or more audio tracks, (playing > back audio > recordings or samples off hard disk), and had any midi > track there being > sent to external hardware like a drum machine ,to play drum > parts from > there, or a hardware synth playing a bass or pad track, > then the > practice is to compensate for latency by having the midi > track play or > transmit with a 5ms delay, to give the computer that little > time to > process the audio, and so the whole mix would sound in sync > (since midi > to external gear to sound heard would be instant). 5ms for > a sytem with > 5ms latency, 20ms would require 20, 100 would require 100, > etc. > > There is a lot more to computer audio production, but > basically the > efforts are always, or mainly, to reduce that latency as > much as > possible. Better audio interfaces not only have better > components and > AD/DA converters, they are also intented to take as much > load off the > cpu as possible, and handle what they can themselves. Also, > the more > power a computer has never eliminates latency or delay > completely, it > just generally means you can play more tracks at once and > use low > latencies more comfortable without dropouts, glitches, > clicks and pops. > > ( Latency is more or less adjustable by configuring the > audio buffer > size and the number of said
Re: Audio Production
Nash Nipples wrote: m cassar schrieb: Does anyone here use freebsd for serious audio/video production work? or know if there is some kind of community? Didn't try it, but http://ardour.org/ looks like what you are looking for. See http://www.freshports.org/audio/ardour/ -- Timm thanks but this wasn't exactly what i was asking about in the original post. ardour *is* in ports, as with most other good open-source audio applications ( and propbably the best program out there - though i'm new) but what i was looking for is related to custom/optimizted kernels either known as low-latency or real-time kernels in linux; to help reduce recording latencies, audio dropouts, etc. like studio 64 rt-kernel on ubuntu, planet ccrma on fedora. what i was trying to find out is whether there is such projects on freebsd, or more importantly, if freebsd kernel had the potential to be similarly optimized. (not that i myself have any expertise, [hence my question]) on the other hand, if you are interested in audio programs, ardour is good, hydrogen is good and fun. not to mention easy. i have experienced a delay when i was recording voice and sort of laying it on a track. but removing a few miliseconds off the beginning didnt make a big trouble for me and thats when i have discovered this phenomenom but thought it was rather because my sound card is old. is this any close to something that you mean? it is related, but what you mentiioned is a slightly different area in computer audio than what i mean with respect to kernels. An old card is likely to produce greater delays under any setup, but that is more a factor of its capabilities and quality of its parts than just purely because it is old. If you were using JACK (linux) or ASIO (windows) the delay could be minimized to some extent, but no miracles there, and that is about the most you can do. i'm only at entry level on audio engineering, but in a nutshell here is an overview to explain your delay, (latency) and my kernel related question. first of all, computers are always prone to latencies, or delays, because of the time it takes the cpu to process the audio data, read/write from disks, convert between audio signals and digital data, etc, etc. All take up cycles and valuable milliseconds. when playing normal music like mp3s in itunes and such, you wouldn't notice any delay because the data is simply read from disk and output thru speackers as they come, though technically there would be a short period between the time the data was read off disk and then heard out the speakers. in audio production that slight delay, or latency, is everything, especially when you have multi-track recording and syncing with external gear. (latencies range from under 10ms to over 100ms) Latency would be more noticeable, say when recording, and would sound like an echo if you were talking into a mic and listening thru headphones or speakers, on an average setup at least. roughly becase of the time needed to process the signal. Also, If you were to use a midi controller/keyboard connected via midi to play a software instrument, you would notice a delay between the time you hit a key on the keyboard and when you actually heard the sound. The key press transmittes midi data to the software instrument, the software triggers the desired sound immediately, but there is that slight delay to create the sound and push it out the speakers. Audio interfaces can have a latency around 5ms, which is very good, yet may still be faintly noticable, and that also depends on the power of the pc and the actual load ( number of tracks, effects, instruments playing), and latency is still a *phenomenon* and something you *have to live with* in computer audio production; as opposed to hardware gear like samplers, drum machines, synths, etc. and short of buying a $10K protools "soundcard". a _hobbyist_ audio interface can be decent with latencies under 20ms. In application, multi-track recording programa like Cubase, Logic, Ardour, Ableton, Cakewalk etc, do fairly well (with a good setup) when all material is confined within the computer and not communicating with the outside world. When you are recording say a vocalist, chances are you're playing back all the other tracks (drums, bass, etc) at the same time for the vocalist to listen and sing to, plus possible playing back the vocalist with added effects likde reverb; a mixture of delays going in, and the same amount going out. Simillarly, if you had one or more audio tracks, (playing back audio recordings or samples off hard disk), and had any midi track there being sent to external hardware like a drum machine ,to play drum parts from there, or a hardware synth playing a bass or pad track, then the practice is to compensate for latency by having the midi track play or transmit with a 5ms delay, to give the computer tha
Re: Audio Production
> > m cassar schrieb: > > > >> Does anyone here use freebsd for serious > audio/video production work? or > >> know if there is some kind of community? > >> > > > > Didn't try it, but http://ardour.org/ looks like > what you are looking for. > > See http://www.freshports.org/audio/ardour/ > > > > -- > > Timm > > > thanks but this wasn't exactly what i was asking about > in the original post. > ardour *is* in ports, as with most other good open-source > audio applications > ( and propbably the best program out there - though i'm > new) but what i was > looking for is related to custom/optimizted kernels either > known as > low-latency or real-time kernels in linux; to help reduce > recording > latencies, audio dropouts, etc. like studio 64 rt-kernel on > ubuntu, planet > ccrma on fedora. > > what i was trying to find out is whether there is such > projects on freebsd, > or more importantly, if freebsd kernel had the potential to > be similarly > optimized. (not that i myself have any expertise, [hence my > question]) > > on the other hand, if you are interested in audio programs, > ardour is good, > hydrogen is good and fun. not to mention easy. i have experienced a delay when i was recording voice and sort of laying it on a track. but removing a few miliseconds off the beginning didnt make a big trouble for me and thats when i have discovered this phenomenom but thought it was rather because my sound card is old. is this any close to something that you mean? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Audio Production
On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 9:18 AM, Timm Wimmers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > m cassar schrieb: > >> Does anyone here use freebsd for serious audio/video production work? or >> know if there is some kind of community? >> > > Didn't try it, but http://ardour.org/ looks like what you are looking for. > See http://www.freshports.org/audio/ardour/ > > -- > Timm > thanks but this wasn't exactly what i was asking about in the original post. ardour *is* in ports, as with most other good open-source audio applications ( and propbably the best program out there - though i'm new) but what i was looking for is related to custom/optimizted kernels either known as low-latency or real-time kernels in linux; to help reduce recording latencies, audio dropouts, etc. like studio 64 rt-kernel on ubuntu, planet ccrma on fedora. what i was trying to find out is whether there is such projects on freebsd, or more importantly, if freebsd kernel had the potential to be similarly optimized. (not that i myself have any expertise, [hence my question]) on the other hand, if you are interested in audio programs, ardour is good, hydrogen is good and fun. not to mention easy. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Audio Production
m cassar schrieb: Does anyone here use freebsd for serious audio/video production work? or know if there is some kind of community? Didn't try it, but http://ardour.org/ looks like what you are looking for. See http://www.freshports.org/audio/ardour/ -- Timm smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Audio Production
I forgot to add: On Sat, Sep 13, 2008 at 03:06:05PM +0200, m cassar wrote: > > BTW, and related to fbsd kind of being younger than linux, i had an amd64 > version at some point, of freebsd, and couldn't install wine because it is > based on 32bit windows or what have you. it works on ubuntu studio (64) fine > and i am also under the impression that anything linux can do, freebsd can > do; and it's just a matter of time. I'm just glad i didn't have to wipe fbsd > to install ubuntu. Yes, at this moment it is not possible to use wine within an amd64 environment, and yes, it is also true that other operating systems support wine/64. There are a lot more i368-only ports. -- Oliver PETER, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED], ICQ# 113969174 "If it feels good, you're doing something wrong." -- Coach McTavish ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Audio Production
On Sat, Sep 13, 2008 at 03:06:05PM +0200, m cassar wrote: > On Sat, Sep 13, 2008 at 12:15 PM, Oliver Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ... > I got this impression since i had a pcbsd install on another disk and it > had slightly better performance than my fbsd 7, which i only wanted to get > up and running asap and kinda sloppy. (pcbsd 1.5.1, with base 6.3, which i > think doesn't fully support dual cores). I'm pretty sure it does fully support dual core. Only the SMP performance is not as good as it is in 7-STABLE. Since then the scheduler has changed as well (SCHED_4BSD -> SCHED_ULE). > ... > ok, so when 7.1 is released, there will still be a relative stable branch, > right? i think i will sit on 7,1, release for a while when out. Yes, RELENG_7 will still be available after 7.1 has been released. -RELEASE is taken from RELENG_x every ~6 month: http://www.freebsd.org/releng/index.html#freeze Cheers. -- Oliver PETER, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED], ICQ# 113969174 "If it feels good, you're doing something wrong." -- Coach McTavish ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Audio Production
On Sat, Sep 13, 2008 at 12:15 PM, Oliver Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 08:23:16PM +0200, m cassar wrote: > > Does anyone here use freebsd for serious audio/video production work? or > > know if there is some kind of community? > > > > i have seen ubuntu studio for a general idea outside windows/osx, but > prefer > > fbsd over linux. and found most programs in ports, but i would like to > find > > out more about kernel optimization in that respect and what goes into > that > > type of dedicated setup. > > > > i am running 7-stable with a custom kernel, where i only added vesa, and > > removed some scsi and network drivers i don't have from the generic > kernel, > > but i figure there must be more settings to tweak than what i saw there > in > > the generic file. would there be more settings somewhere else or would > you > > add them to the kernconf file? > > I think it does not depend on your kernel configuration - checkout the > portstree for the software you need: > > % cd /usr/ports > % make search key="$MY_MULTIMEDIA_SOFTWARE" > > Furthermore you should checkout the hardware/release notes for > 7.0 and/or 7.1: > >http://www.freebsd.org/where.html > > > my setup works fairly decent for desktop use, but seems kinda sluggish > with > > even basic multimedia. > > IMO FreeBSD is not made for that kind of multimedia machine - > it's not about the software, it's more about the drivers. > FreeBSD has a focus on network and stability, not to support your brandnew > 7:1 soundhardware or the latest ATI SLI graphics card for $500... > > I prefer FreeBSD over Linux as well, but I think you should go for a > dual-boot installation. :) > I've heard very good things about Ubuntu Studio and believe that > the hardware support for your needs is better. > ok, I see what you mean with freebsd's main focus (stability,etc), i just thought it was just 'younger' than linux(es) for desktop and that type of use, but had the potential and would get there eventually; also considering that the user community could gradually grow from here, meaning more feature demands for end users and also more potential developers, i.e. new users with the expertise. And from my end, since i don't have a crucial need for a production system at the moment, and just a hobby, i could stick to it instead of linux and see it deveope in that way, and learn more about what goes under the hood. I got this impression since i had a pcbsd install on another disk and it had slightly better performance than my fbsd 7, which i only wanted to get up and running asap and kinda sloppy. (pcbsd 1.5.1, with base 6.3, which i think doesn't fully support dual cores). coincidently, i installed ubuntu studio this morning, but i still feel 15mins there is 15mins away from fbsd, especially if it is a matter of tweaking and such. BTW, and related to fbsd kind of being younger than linux, i had an amd64 version at some point, of freebsd, and couldn't install wine because it is based on 32bit windows or what have you. it works on ubuntu studio (64) fine and i am also under the impression that anything linux can do, freebsd can do; and it's just a matter of time. I'm just glad i didn't have to wipe fbsd to install ubuntu. anyhoo, thanks for your info, and i take it there is no known projects at the moment similar to ubuntu studio, suse/jad, fedora/planet ccrma, etc. I am not sure if you mean there is surely no hope or whether it is just early, assuming that it would basically need a real-time or low-latency kernel bidonkey donk modifications. > > > p.s. on a different note while i'm here, how do you go from 7.1 > prerelease > > to 7.1 release when it is out? when/how do you tell when you stop using > > stable-supfile and start using standard-supfile? > > Your're following -STABLE, aka RELENG_7. > After 7.1-RELEASE is out you will have to follow RELENG_7_1 is what > you want (if you don't want to follow -STABLE anymore). > > ok, so when 7.1 is released, there will still be a relative stable branch, right? i think i will sit on 7,1, release for a while when out. thank you > -- > Oliver PETER, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED], ICQ# 113969174 > "If it feels good, you're doing something wrong." > -- Coach McTavish > ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Audio Production
On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 08:23:16PM +0200, m cassar wrote: > Does anyone here use freebsd for serious audio/video production work? or > know if there is some kind of community? > > i have seen ubuntu studio for a general idea outside windows/osx, but prefer > fbsd over linux. and found most programs in ports, but i would like to find > out more about kernel optimization in that respect and what goes into that > type of dedicated setup. > > i am running 7-stable with a custom kernel, where i only added vesa, and > removed some scsi and network drivers i don't have from the generic kernel, > but i figure there must be more settings to tweak than what i saw there in > the generic file. would there be more settings somewhere else or would you > add them to the kernconf file? I think it does not depend on your kernel configuration - checkout the portstree for the software you need: % cd /usr/ports % make search key="$MY_MULTIMEDIA_SOFTWARE" Furthermore you should checkout the hardware/release notes for 7.0 and/or 7.1: http://www.freebsd.org/where.html > my setup works fairly decent for desktop use, but seems kinda sluggish with > even basic multimedia. IMO FreeBSD is not made for that kind of multimedia machine - it's not about the software, it's more about the drivers. FreeBSD has a focus on network and stability, not to support your brandnew 7:1 soundhardware or the latest ATI SLI graphics card for $500... I prefer FreeBSD over Linux as well, but I think you should go for a dual-boot installation. :) I've heard very good things about Ubuntu Studio and believe that the hardware support for your needs is better. > p.s. on a different note while i'm here, how do you go from 7.1 prerelease > to 7.1 release when it is out? when/how do you tell when you stop using > stable-supfile and start using standard-supfile? Your're following -STABLE, aka RELENG_7. After 7.1-RELEASE is out you will have to follow RELENG_7_1 is what you want (if you don't want to follow -STABLE anymore). -- Oliver PETER, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED], ICQ# 113969174 "If it feels good, you're doing something wrong." -- Coach McTavish ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
