This started out on the Mac Music forum, but I've taken in here as it really is off-topic over there.

Quote Tui:

---

So, what are your reasons for choosing Linux over Mac OS or Windows?

---

My choice was a combination of cost, familiarity, and availability.

Quote Exalted Wombat:

---

Hands up everyone who looked into starting with computer music, assessed the tools available and decided "These Linux applications seem by far the best!"

---

I didn't start making digital recordings with Linux. I started with Music 5000 on the BBC Model B with the AMPLE music programming language, then moved to 'proper' MIDI control, two hardware synths and internal sound synthesis on the Acorn Archimedes, which had a built-in D/A converter that could produce quite respectable quality sounds. I think the 1990 'Music Maker' program was possibly the very first true soft synth for a domestic computer. It had additive harmonic sound generation, amplitude/pitch ADSR and stereo positioning.

For office work I took the route BBC OS (Model B), which gave very good results at the time; RISC OS, which I loved; Windows 98, which I absolutely detested; Linux which comes somewhere near the usability of RISC OS.

For real digital music, the route was RISC OS - Linux. I was still using a RISC PC into the late 1990s.

There is no issue of limiting myself. In the same way as I'd be unable to make use of a 64 channel analoge mixer, hundreds of plugins would just slow me down and stop me being creative. I would also add, I do it for fun. There is no schedule to meet and some of my tracks have literally taken years to develop.

--------------------
It wasn't me!
(Well, actually, it probably was)

OK. For the average muso, Linux still seems too limited, unless perhaps all you want to do is record audio. For composing and mixing ITB, there just isn't enough software available.

I wonder, how many audio interfaces come with Linux drivers?

In the near future, perhaps more developers will see Linux as a viable and, importantly, desirable alternative. Personally, I'd be all for it.

Cheers.

Quote Tui:

---

OK. For the average muso, Linux still seems too limited, unless perhaps all you want to do is record audio. For composing and mixing ITB, there just isn't enough software available.

---

For the average, maybe I will agree.

But does that mean you can't use it for either of those? Not really. I was using Linux for paid work a decade ago, and things were MUCH more limiting back then in comparison.

I do find some limiting factors in Linux don't get me wrong. I have both a Macbook Pro running OS X, and my primary workstation running Linux. When I switched back to Linux about 2 years ago for my primary workstation, I had invested literally thousands in plugins, some of which have no equivalent yet in Linux (Audio Restoration etc.). However I find myself wishing for my Linux workstation for my work these days more than my laptop for whatever that means.

Note that my workflow is primarily mixing and editing. I know several composers that use Linux, but I know several that have given it more than a fair shot and with good reason gone back to other systems. In fact one of the projects I am involved with in my spare time that I am not paid for, the composer is going to be using Logic on OS X obviously, as it works for his workflow much better than the Linux options right now.

The two major areas that have hit me as shortcomings on Linux personally(And there are certainly others, these are just the two big ones I run across in my work) are the limited selection of virtual instruments, and audio restoration tools. That isn't to say there aren't good instruments available for Linux, but if you are looking to compose a full orchestral score, the quality of what is there just isn't there yet. Similar for audio restoration, there are tools available, but what is there just doesn't compare to closed source solutions on other platforms.

Now in both of these cases they can be addressed in methods other than running a different OS, but that will take much more money as well. A hardware sampler/keyboard/Receptor, etc. for samples/instruments. Or realtime restoration hardware such as the CEDAR options for audio restoration. The latter only fills one possible workflow for audio forensics/restoration out of many, but it just happens to be the one I use most often;)

Quote:

---

I wonder, how many audio interfaces come with Linux drivers?

---

Next to Zero. All drivers were written by people other than the manufacturers on Linux and are generally part of FFADO(Firewire devices) or ALSA(Everything else) for most people on Linux. The selection of manufacturers is limited as well. That being said the interfaces I own personally and can use on Linux include a Focusrite Saffire, RME HDSP, Mackie Onyx-i. Along with this I have intentions to pick up a Sound Devices USBPre or MixPreD, not sure which yet. Other interfaces i own or have used on a regular basis that work with Linux, I just haven't personally used them on Linux, include the entire Echo Audiofire line along with a variety of interface from M-Audio(Always check these before purchasing for Linux), Roland(Same), and a few others I am probably forgetting about. I have not tested my Apogee Duet on Linux, it is not supported but there is a chance it may work through FFADO from some of what I read, but have never seen a confirmed report that it does in fact work.

So the end result, there is a far more limited selection of interfaces for Linux, and in fact this is part of why I switched to OS X for my primary workstation about 6-8 years ago from Linux, at the time FFADO didn't exist and I needed a more portable solution as I was travelling a lot and working across the US(And my primary workstation died:). This is certainly a hinderance. For example in no interface with built in DSP (Verb, etc.) does the DSP work, so that means no UA, SSL Duende, etc. But there is certainly enough selection that you can certainly do professional work, you will have to be far more careful however, and may have to put in more time setting it up on the computer.

Quote:

---

In the near future, perhaps more developers will see Linux as a viable and, importantly, desirable alternative. Personally, I'd be all for it.

---

Every year it seems like someone says is the 'year of the linux desktop'. Really this concept itself is BS. But I will say in the past decade Linux has improved tremendously as a general purpose computer, and as an audio workstation is quite capable itself right now for certain workflows/people, but not for everyone. There is more interest in development on Linux from commercial vendors these days however, between Harrison Mixbus(Yes I know Tui, not this conversation) to Bitwig(In development) to Renoise, LinuxDSP/OvertoneDSP, and a few others. Along with this, one larger plugin developer has been working with a prominent Linux developer to bring support for at least one of their solutions to Linux. When I say larger here, I do mean it for the record, but it likely won't be in the way many people expect so don't get any hopes up at this point. Will work great for me, but won't be for everyone.

So while it will never be 'the year of the Linux desktop', that doesn't mean that more people might be interested in it, and more developers as well. Probably the largest hurdle to overcome is the fact that distributions can be so different, which is both a blessing and a curse of Linux.

Seablade

I like LINUX, but as a DAW, well I tried it, it didn't live up to expectations, for ease of use, Windows leave LINUX in it's dust. I couldn't get eh JACk server setup even though it reported it had found my hardware and whe I needed download and install an application, I went to the manufacturers website, selected LINUX, and then was presented with an array of options, RPM, Debian and whatever, how on would I know what type of package I want? In Windows, yu see the zip file, download, unzip, install, Bob's your Uncle, Fanny's your Aunt and Dick's your best friend, simple as that.

Maybe the fact that LINUX comes in so many flavours, it is its undoing. The average user doesn't want to geek off at so many freely available and admittedly very good apps and distros, they just want to get on with some work and leave messing about under the bonnet to get some work done, simply wants to sit down, switch on, log on, start the app, get busy.

Maybe one day the LINUX community will embrace this idea of consistency and ease of use. As Seablade says, the many different flavours of LINUX is both a blessing and a curse

Quote OneWorld:

---

Maybe the fact that LINUX comes in so many flavours, it is its undoing. The average user doesn't want to geek off at so many freely available and admittedly very good apps and distros, they just want to get on with some work and leave messing about under the bonnet to get some work done, simply wants to sit down, switch on, log on, start the app, get busy.

---

Well I will say tweaking Windows for proper realtime operation can at times be just as much a headache as doing so in Linux:) Mac leaves both in the dust in this department, though the way that 10.8 is going that may change soon.

I will also say, one thing that works against Linux, it has distributions set up for audio available, that said tweaking is minimal, if needed at all. AVLinux(Now in support only mode, no future development sadly) and Dream Studio are both distributions that come to mind for this, but because Ubuntu is the only distribution that most people know about, that is the first place they go and equate Ubuntu to Linux. Only after they spend hours trying to set up Ubuntu for realtime operation do they tend to ask for help(If they do at all) and learn about these other options that are much better for audio in Linux. So Ubuntu's advertising has helped and hurt Linux for this at the same time, helped as more people are willing to try it, and hurt because most people don't even realize it could be much easier.

Seablade

Seablade pretty much nails it: there are plenty of reasons why Linux on the desktop (including on the desktop of musicians) just isn't ever going to be a mainstream thing. This post by the guy who used to lead the Gnome project makes that case: What Killed The Linux Desktop?

Interesting article.

Quote:

---

The only way to fix Linux is to take one distro, one set of components as a baseline, abandon everything else and everyone should just contribute to this single Linux. Whether this is Canonical's Ubutu, or Red Hat's Fedora or Debian's system or a new joint effort is something that intelligent people will disagree until the end of the days.

---

As a non-Linux user I'd agree that having a million different versions is a big turn-off. People are supposed to like choice, but they don't, really.

I would think it's a bit rich for someone from the Gnome community (even ex-members) to make such criticisms. Especially as they have a reputation for totally ignoring suggestions/complaints from anyone not of the 'fraternity'. They have also dumped two major incompatible changes on their users with no apparent way back. Fortunately there is more to Linux than Gnome - the gtk toolkit is great, It's just the desktop environment that's crap. I'm delighted that the choices are there. However, you don't have to use them. You can stick with one of the better known distributions if you want to.

Something that seems to get the commercial extremists foaming at the mouth is the fact that a lot of FOSS developers are not especially concerned about whether their applications go mainstream or not. They have an itch they need to scratch so make a scratching stick. Finding it works quite well they let others use it and are quite pleased when someone returns it with an enhanced double-bend back over-reach. It is an outlook that lots of people can't get to grips with.

Some 15 years ago, an Eastern European maths student in his early 20s was unable to afford anything more than a fairly modest computer. He was however very interesting in music and set about writing his own synthesiser. ZynAddSubFX celebrates it's 10 birthday this year. About 3 years ago an experienced programmer (disabled with terminal cancer) created the Yoshimi branch making some quite dramatic improvements to an already seriously good piece of software. When we finally lost him, others continued his work, and also fed back some of his improvements to the original Zyn branch.

Now there is no need for anyone to contribute to this, you can just make use of what has been created - an insanely complex but astonishingly flexible soft-synth - however some of us do contribute back. For me it's just voice patches, and some testing when I have time. Sticking my neck out a bit, for the last week, in my free time, I've been working on this. It is composed and performed entirely within the machine and uses just 1 instance of yoshimi for all the sounds.

Without in any way doubting what others say, I am rather perplexed at the problems they seem to have, especially with jack. Maybe I've just been lucky, but I've never had any problems at all with it. Indeed, as far as I can see it is the closest thing you can get to real go-anywhere MIDI and audio patchbays.

As I touched on before, the critical thing for me is to have a system I can bend to my preferred workflow, not having to change my methods to suit a system that lacks flexibility. For comparison, these days I won't even think about getting a car that doesn't have fully adjustable mirrors, seats (height as well as angle and distance), steering wheel, etc. That's just me. Other people seem quite happy to drive one with just basic fittings.

Finally, there are some people using Linux based DAWs and synths without (probably) actually being aware of it. I know of at least two commercial systems out there.

P.S.
To say nothing of the Android market!

--------------------
It wasn't me!
(Well, actually, it probably was)

Quote BJG145:

---

Interesting article.

Quote:

---

The only way to fix Linux is to take one distro, one set of components as a baseline, abandon everything else and everyone should just contribute to this single Linux. Whether this is Canonical's Ubutu, or Red Hat's Fedora or Debian's system or a new joint effort is something that intelligent people will disagree until the end of the days.

---

As a non-Linux user I'd agree that having a million different versions is a big turn-off. People are supposed to like choice, but they don't, really.

---

+1

The problem with Linux is simplicity.
That is to say, OSX with roots in unix makes a far better job of it, with simplistic installations and widespread 3rd party compatibly.
Most USB devices can simply be plugged in and they work. ( do that on your pc ! ) because of core compliance.
My experience of Linux was worse than trying to do something in Windows ( which comes with its own set of issues).
Downloading and installing software is completely alien to mac & pc users.
Setting things up in linux requires considerable knowledge of unix and to put it bluntly, most people don't care for it.
Most just want it to work with no fuss.

Add to this the industry apps such as PT, Logic, and video apps like Avid and Final Cut, Linux looses out, because most people will want to learn these apps and become skilled in them, rather than the free apps available in Linux which are not viewed in the same light.

Don't get me wrong, I think Linux is brilliant and it deserves every chance to compete against corporate monsters like MS and Apple.
As an OS for musicians, it needs much more work to be accessible and it needs pro app support.

Pt on Linux, Mr Avid ?

Quote Scope:

---

I think Linux is brilliant and it deserves every chance to compete against corporate monsters like MS and Apple.
As an OS for musicians, it needs much more work to be accessible and it needs pro app support.

---

That was the point I was trying to make. It may just happen that MS and Apple become so overbearingly controlling and selfish, and their products so impractical (Windows 8 live tiles on a PC - really? ) that Linux may suddenly/gradually be the logical next step for many developers and end-users, in order to regain control over one's tools. I wouldn't be surprised.

Interesting thread! Some years ago, I tried to get Linux to work with my soundcards: a digi 002 and a duet. The Digidesign Digi002 I couldn't get to work. The Apogee Duet actually worked in some limited way, but there were issues I didn't find out how to resolve before I got tired of trying - it might have been related to latency and changing the inputs between line, mic and hi-z. Therefore, I returned to the mac (but I could just as well have returned to windows), and got on with recording, thinking if it takes a long time to get stuff working, it will probably also be unreliable and take a long time to fix when stuff goes wrong. But this was my thoughts back then. Now, I wouldn't try linux as a DAW again before I've seen someone use it efficiently.

I've held Linux at arm's length up until now, but recently installed Linux Mint 14 on VirtualBox because it was the only way to check something out, and I have to confess, I kind of like it. It's certainly a huge improvement on the last version I saw some years ago. But I was slightly surprised to pick up a couple of books on Ubuntu and discover that they both proceeded to endorse a flowers-in-your-hair world of open source and human kindness while dissing Microsoft. It would be like picking up a technical manual on Cubase and opening Chapter 1 at: "Why use Cubase? Well, Pro Tools just sucks. It's just useless, and..."

A bit strange really. Very tribal. I can see the appeal though.

I've been using linux for about 4 years now, and only the last 10 months or so to make music.

At first I didn't think there were many "quality" linux-based synths available, as VSTi's for Windows are many, and most proprietary non-free synths cater to Windows OS.

But I've discovered there are many very nice synths for linux, and more coming out as time goes by.
In fact, I recently created a website that showcases some of the more "popular" ones here:

AmSynth.com

Many people seem to think that you have to be a "geek" to use linux. Or super-intelligent, or whatever. But as my experience shows, this is not true.
What's nice is that linux allows you to create your PC the way YOU want it. Install what you want, leave the rest.
And, many audio production distributions are available: KXStudio, Studio 64, AVLinux..
And other distros that are not made specifically for audio production can still be tweaked the way you want them to work, including installing a low-latency or realtime kernel.

Not having to install CPU-sucking apps like anti-viruses, is really nice. I currently have 4GB of RAM, which is overkill.

And, if you don't like a particular app and would like it changed, you can do it yourself, and share your work with everyone else!

And there's lots of forums to help people set up their computer just the way they want it.


brian

--------------------
Build your PC your way: use linux!
Linux-based synthesizers

Okay then. I have an old Sony VAIO laptop here (VGN-FJ series, 1.7 GHz Celeron, 1 GB RAM) which is too slow to run Ubuntu 12.10...I already tried...the Ubuntu UI was so sluggish I actually laughed out loud.

So recommend me a Linux distro for audio. I have a Firewire Behringer FCA202 audio interface which, I believe, will work with Linux.

--------------------
Spanky

Quote MonkeySpank:

---

Okay then. I have an old Sony VAIO laptop here (VGN-FJ series, 1.7 GHz Celeron, 1 GB RAM) which is too slow to run Ubuntu 12.10...I already tried...the Ubuntu UI was so sluggish I actually laughed out loud.

So recommend me a Linux distro for audio. I have a Firewire Behringer FCA202 audio interface which, I believe, will work with Linux.

---

BodhiLinux.

http://www.bodhilinux.com/

This one comes with very few apps.
So when you make the CD and do the install, then open the "Synaptic Package Manager" and click "reload" and then "updates."
Download whatever updates are required. You *may* have to reboot if it tells you to. (Often rebooting is not necessary.

Then use the search field to add whatever apps you like. For music, make sure to install "JackCtl" and the a2jmidid packages.

Installing JackCtl it will ask you if you want to have realtime capabilites, so you can choose it if you want. (You can get very good performance without realtime capability too.)

Let us know what you do..

brian

--------------------
Build your PC your way: use linux!
Linux-based synthesizers

I would really like to use LINUX, but on the several attempts I have made what puts me off is this kind of thing....

I installed one flavour of LINUX, can't remember which, there are that many. But I needed to install Flash to watch YouTube. So I went to the Adobe download page, selected LINUX and then was presented with several other choices, what type of package did I want? How would I know, aqm only a novice user.

Compare that with Windows, there's 2 choices 32bit, 64bit and that's that, download/install and done. Until LINUX matches that level of usability, it's just for anoraks who like to spend more time under the bonnet than actually driving the thing. As soon as they make LINUX as easy to use, I am ditching Windows, but am not holding my breath.

Yes I understand the various distros and that's a good thing, but why not settle on some commonly used methods, for example downloading/installing, that are identical across the distros, so a chump like myself can go on a site, select the download, bung it in a folder and double click on the installer and that's that, Bob's your Uncle, Fanny's your Aunt and Dick's your best friend!

Quote OneWorld:

---

As soon as they make LINUX as easy to use, I am ditching Windows

---

They did! It's called OS X.

--------------------
Spanky

Quote Folderol:

---

Sticking my neck out a bit, for the last week, in my free time, I've been working on this.

---

Stick it out a bit further, please.

--------------------
Spanky

Quote MonkeySpank:

---

Quote Folderol:

---

Sticking my neck out a bit, for the last week, in my free time, I've been working on this.

---

Stick it out a bit further, please.

---

How does this help me get to like LINUX? what is your point exactly with regard to the topic at the top of this thread? The reason I would like to get to know LINUX is because of it's cost - zilch, so going to Apple, which costs even more than Windows would be jumping out of the frying pan into the fire, so there's no compelling reason for me to get 'misty' eyed about AppleOX

Quote OneWorld:

---

How does this help me get to like LINUX? what is your point exactly with regard to the topic at the top of this thread? The reason I would like to get to know LINUX is because of it's cost - zilch, so going to Apple, which costs even more than Windows would be jumping out of the frying pan into the fire, so there's no compelling reason for me to get 'misty' eyed about AppleOX

---

I actually meant it as a joke - you said wanted a version of Linux that was as easy to use as Windows.

I'm not "misty eyed" about Apple either, and neither are the countless thousands of musicians who chose Apple as their music platform. I switched from Linux to OS X in 2005 because I was fed up with the constant hobbyist BS and lack of serious DAWs. And I will switch to something else if Apple nukes Logic: right now, as I type this, I am installing a DAW on a fresh Linux laptop. I am using the Bodhri distribution, like briandc suggested; I am going to re-trying a Linux DAW installation with various soft synths (from amsynth.com).

And just for the sake of completeness (and off-topicness!) I use windows 7 and 8 every day in work (I'm a software engineer) and I think they're superb. I wouldn't hesitate to use Windows on my music computer.

--------------------
Spanky

Quote OneWorld:

---

I would really like to use LINUX, but on the several attempts I have made what puts me off is this kind of thing....

I installed one flavour of LINUX, can't remember which, there are that many. But I needed to install Flash to watch YouTube. So I went to the Adobe download page, selected LINUX and then was presented with several other choices, what type of package did I want? How would I know, aqm only a novice user.

Compare that with Windows, there's 2 choices 32bit, 64bit and that's that, download/install and done. Until LINUX matches that level of usability, it's just for anoraks who like to spend more time under the bonnet than actually driving the thing. As soon as they make LINUX as easy to use, I am ditching Windows, but am not holding my breath.

Yes I understand the various distros and that's a good thing, but why not settle on some commonly used methods, for example downloading/installing, that are identical across the distros, so a chump like myself can go on a site, select the download, bung it in a folder and double click on the installer and that's that, Bob's your Uncle, Fanny's your Aunt and Dick's your best friend!

---

With the majority of distros in linux, you have what's called a "package manager," which is basically a library of free applications that you can browse and install. Flash is usually included in the library. Just put it in the search field.

The only "difficulty" these days is knowing what you want to install. Windows does your thinking for you in most cases, which some people might like.

BUT, if you want to make your computer into a dedicated audio production machine, linux lets you do that. It's modular. Add what you like, leave the rest.


brian

--------------------
Build your PC your way: use linux!
Linux-based synthesizers

Quote MonkeySpank:

---

I'm not "misty eyed" about Apple either, and neither are the countless thousands of musicians who chose Apple as their music platform. I switched from Linux to OS X in 2005 because I was fed up with the constant hobbyist BS and lack of serious DAWs. And I will switch to something else if Apple nukes Logic: right now, as I type this, I am installing a DAW on a fresh Linux laptop. I am using the Bodhri distribution, like briandc suggested; I am going to re-trying a Linux DAW installation with various soft synths (from amsynth.com).

And just for the sake of completeness (and off-topicness!) I use windows 7 and 8 every day in work (I'm a software engineer) and I think they're superb. I wouldn't hesitate to use Windows on my music computer.

---

Let us know how it goes!
You'll be surprised how fast a PC can run.

brian

--------------------
Build your PC your way: use linux!
Linux-based synthesizers

Quote briandc:

---

Let us know how it goes!
You'll be surprised how fast a PC can run.

---

I'll try to do that Brian, thanks.

Actually so far Bodhri is the most reponsive Linux I have had on this laptop yet (yes, I'm typing this in Midori on the old laptop). I previously tried Mint, Ubuntu and Fedora, but they all plodded along (or looked like it was still 1995).

I'll give Ardour and Rose Garden a spin as soon as I can lay hands on a PC-to-FireWire 400 cable for my audio interface.

--------------------
Spanky

Ok.
Remember that Synaptic is important. At least once a week open it, click "reload" and the "get updates." Whatever it tells you to update, click ok, then click install and ok. If the updates are important (like an updated kernel) you'll have to reboot when it's finished. Otherwise, you're good to go.

When you select JackCtl and install it (along with the other packages that are required), as well as "a2jmidid," then open it (it'll be in the menu under "video and audio" and click on setup (right side of panel).

There is an "options" tab, click it. In the field "execute script after startup" type this:

a2jmidid -e &

There are other adjustments in the first setup page you can tweak, such as buffers, frames, whatever. You also select the in and out ports, which are usually selected automatically.

This makes sure that anything that is managed by Alsa (one of 3 audio managers: Alsa, PulseAudio and Jack) will be passed over to Jack. In other words, when Jack is open, Jack should be controlling all audio in/out.

Back on the main window of JackCtl, there is a connections button. Clicking that, you can connect midi things, and in the audio, connect whatever instruments/plugins are open to the system.


brian

--------------------
Build your PC your way: use linux!
Linux-based synthesizers

Thanks again Brian.

Just need that PC firewire cable now.

Also, do you know of any cheap, USB MIDI adapters that would work with Bodhi?

Also, also have you tried any of the other audio distros like AV Linux, or KXAudio or Ubuntu Studio..?

--------------------
Spanky

Quote Folderol:

---

I didn't start making digital recordings with Linux.

---

And you haven't made one yet! You've used whatever recording software you chose. The underlying operating system affected its choice of functions very little if at all.

Quote MonkeySpank:

---

Thanks again Brian.

Just need that PC firewire cable now.

Also, do you know of any cheap, USB MIDI adapters that would work with Bodhi?

Also, also have you tried any of the other audio distros like AV Linux, or KXAudio or Ubuntu Studio..?

---

I am using a midiman Midisport 2x2, it works great in Fedora 18. M-Audio is making the Midisport line now, I think the Anniversary edition has the same nuts and bolts as the original Midiman product.

I am considering going to Ubunto as an alternate os, duel boot config and running my sound sw Cubase ect thru sw called Wine. A slicker fast os easier to update FREE, ect.... If it works well GREAT if not back to plan A and giving ms money every few years.

Can't run Cubase in Wine. The copy protection dongle prevents this.

I've never used midi adapters (only USB), but I'm sure there are several that work just fine.

As for other distros, yes, on my newer PC I'm using Ubuntu Studio and KXStudio. Remember that KXStudio is not a distro. First you install Ubuntu Studio. And Ubuntu Studio will give you a lot of applications and a good setup.

KXStudio is an extra "mega package" that adds more instruments, more plugins, ...

So you can use Ubuntu Studio alone. It is a distro, just like BodhiLinux.

But KXStudio needs to be added "on top" of a distro.


I tried AVLinux last year but it wasn't for me. It works fine, I guess for personal taste I decided to stay with Ubuntu Studio and KXStudio on top. But it's kind of a personal thing, and your PC may work better with one or the other.

Another interesting alternative is 64 Studio, and Studio 13.37. Studio 13.37 is a distro that is loaded to a USB stick, and you can run it on any PC. I haven't tried it, but the concept is neat. Here are links to both:

http://www.64studio.com/screenshots

http://www.getstudio1337.com/features-2/

So there are lots of "flavors" and ways to make your PC into an audio production suite.


brian

--------------------
Build your PC your way: use linux!
Linux-based synthesizers

Yes, Ubuntu is one option. It's not the only one, however, and some people feel it isn't as lightweight as they'd like.
But for people who previously only used to Windows (like many of us), Ubuntu is kind of "familiar."

brian

--------------------
Build your PC your way: use linux!
Linux-based synthesizers

Quote briandc:

---

Quote OneWorld:

---

I would really like to use LINUX, but on the several attempts I have made what puts me off is this kind of thing....

I installed one flavour of LINUX, can't remember which, there are that many. But I needed to install Flash to watch YouTube. So I went to the Adobe download page, selected LINUX and then was presented with several other choices, what type of package did I want? How would I know, aqm only a novice user.

Compare that with Windows, there's 2 choices 32bit, 64bit and that's that, download/install and done. Until LINUX matches that level of usability, it's just for anoraks who like to spend more time under the bonnet than actually driving the thing. As soon as they make LINUX as easy to use, I am ditching Windows, but am not holding my breath.

Yes I understand the various distros and that's a good thing, but why not settle on some commonly used methods, for example downloading/installing, that are identical across the distros, so a chump like myself can go on a site, select the download, bung it in a folder and double click on the installer and that's that, Bob's your Uncle, Fanny's your Aunt and Dick's your best friend!

---

With the majority of distros in linux........

brian

---

Yes that's the problem, how does the novice know which distro does and doesn't fall into that 'majority'

In my case for example, I get a spare hard drive, I slot it in the PC and do the LINUX installation, how do I know the distro I have has the 'package manager'

A case in point,I went to Adobe Website to download Flash, I did this because I started Firefox, went to watch BBC iPlayer and at that point a message came up and said I needed to install Flash, and that took me to the Flash Download site, I clicked on LINUX to be confronted with several options......

.....for Linux(YUM)
.....for Linux(.tar.gz)
.....for Linux(rpm)
.....for Ubuntu(apt)

none of which means a thing to me.

Yes the LINUX Package Manager might be as easy or even easier than the Windows alternative - Download/Run (Can't get much easier than that - even I can do it!) but when the LINUX beginner is confronted with the typical perplexing options, one says to oneself, "What's the point?" Windows is cheaper than Apple, it's not as sexy but hey, it does the job, that'll do me. Quad Core PC, Win7/64, 8GigRam, 2 SATA Drives, Cubase 5, Kontakt 5, Reason 5, Cakewalk Z3TA+2, Dimension Pro, Addictiv Drums - all for less than £1200!!!

I'll still keep coming back to LINUX though because I like the ethos behind it, considering what LINUX does for free is surely an object lesson in how the general public, seduced by slick marketing, will pay shedloads of money for products that are no better than free alternatives - so to the LINUX community - good on yer

Quote Rowboffin:

---

Seablade pretty much nails it: there are plenty of reasons why Linux on the desktop (including on the desktop of musicians) just isn't ever going to be a mainstream thing. This post by the guy who used to lead the Gnome project makes that case: What Killed The Linux Desktop?

---

As an ex-developer of JACK, I find the linked article to be very balanced.
For few years I tried to do music in Linux, yes, it was possible to some extent, given I had hw synths and good guitar processor. But it was a constant fight with the system. As a software developer by day job, I dived into patching all those programs, ended up as a JACK developer. And then, I realized that actually I want to make music in my spare time.
I got myself a MacbookPro + Logic, and never been happier with the tools since then.
Now I use linux only on servers where it belongs.

Quote c0ff:

---

Now I use linux only on servers where it belongs.

---

I'm inclined to agree

Believe it or not, I have less patience to type a post using my Android mobile phone than I do to install a linux distro.

These days, there are several distros for use out-of-box to produce music. You don't need to go to adobe to install anything.

It's like saying, I don't have time to learn to make a plate of rice, I'll just eat Mcdonalds. Of course it's faster, but to say it's difficult to learn to boil some rice is pretty silly.

In most cases, linux is as simple as installing the cd. And that's often as hard as it gets.

From there, the power is in your hands. If I can do it, probably anyone can. After all, it's not like you have to learn to write code. Most apps have a gui these days.

And even if you use Windows, there is still a learning curve.

If you want to take control of your pc, and decide what it has installed, only linux gives you that power. Personally, I don't want Microsoft or Apple telling me what I can or can't do.

Brian

--------------------
Build your PC your way: use linux!
Linux-based synthesizers

Quote c0ff:

---

Quote Rowboffin:

---

Seablade pretty much nails it: there are plenty of reasons why Linux on the desktop (including on the desktop of musicians) just isn't ever going to be a mainstream thing. This post by the guy who used to lead the Gnome project makes that case: What Killed The Linux Desktop?

---

As an ex-developer of JACK, I find the linked article to be very balanced.
For few years I tried to do music in Linux, yes, it was possible to some extent, given I had hw synths and good guitar processor. But it was a constant fight with the system. As a software developer by day job, I dived into patching all those programs, ended up as a JACK developer. And then, I realized that actually I want to make music in my spare time.
I got myself a MacbookPro + Logic, and never been happier with the tools since then.
Now I use linux only on servers where it belongs.

---

I don't use linux as a server, but it works very nice for audio production on my PCs. Maybe your love for coding got in the way of making music, but it has nothing to do with how well linux performs. Aisi..

Brian

--------------------
Build your PC your way: use linux!
Linux-based synthesizers

Quote briandc:

---

I don't use linux as a server, but it works very nice for audio production on my PCs. Maybe your love for coding got in the way of making music, but it has nothing to do with how well linux performs. Aisi..

Brian

---

May be... But trying to record some guitar into Ardour along with drums from "synced" Hydrogen, or Seq24+Specimen is a journey I don't want to take again. I did my share of work to improve the situation - that's why I wrote jack midi drivers for ALSA and MIDI implementation for jackdmp (now jack2). But it turned out to be just a start to get things usable. Comparing to the time I spent tuning/bugfixing/patching my Linux system, the price of MBP+Logic+bunch of plugins is next to nothing. If I weren't software developer I'd give up much earlier.

I came to a conclusion that Linux is for those who (for whatever reason) have more time than money. It's not an offense, it's just the state of things. If you value the time you devote to music making and are ready to pay for ease of use, OSX is the way to go (and maybe Windows if you stay away from cheap hw).

Quote c0ff:

---

May be... But trying to record some guitar into Ardour along with drums from "synced" Hydrogen, or Seq24+Specimen is a journey I don't want to take again. I did my share of work to improve the situation - that's why I wrote jack midi drivers for ALSA and MIDI implementation for jackdmp (now jack2). But it turned out to be just a start to get things usable. Comparing to the time I spent tuning/bugfixing/patching my Linux system, the price of MBP+Logic+bunch of plugins is next to nothing. If I weren't software developer I'd give up much earlier.

I came to a conclusion that Linux is for those who (for whatever reason) have more time than money. It's not an offense, it's just the state of things. If you value the time you devote to music making and are ready to pay for ease of use, OSX is the way to go (and maybe Windows if you stay away from cheap hw).

---

It sounds to me like your contribution to linux has been an important one.
I'll just say two things:

1) my experience with linux as a DAW has been very good; and, I know other people are having very good results too.

2) Contributions like yours are important because it speaks to the importance of keeping computers in the hands of the people rather than in the hands of one or two corporations. I don't doubt the stability of both Mac and Windows. After all, all the attention they give is to basically one distro. With linux, as you already know, there are indeed many distros, and some have more development going on than others. It's one thing to use a distro that has a certain amount of "history," something else to use one that was just "born."

My hope is that you'll keep contributing to linux. I'm not a programmer (boy, I wish I was!). But the spirit of community all around the world, working together to make computers do fabulous things, is to me, just as important as tweaking synthesizers and making music. It's all about creativity. And freedom. And (why not?), cost.


brian

--------------------
Build your PC your way: use linux!
Linux-based synthesizers

Quote briandc:

---

Quote c0ff:

---

May be... But trying to record some guitar into Ardour along with drums from "synced" Hydrogen, or Seq24+Specimen is a journey I don't want to take again. I did my share of work to improve the situation - that's why I wrote jack midi drivers for ALSA and MIDI implementation for jackdmp (now jack2). But it turned out to be just a start to get things usable. Comparing to the time I spent tuning/bugfixing/patching my Linux system, the price of MBP+Logic+bunch of plugins is next to nothing. If I weren't software developer I'd give up much earlier.

I came to a conclusion that Linux is for those who (for whatever reason) have more time than money. It's not an offense, it's just the state of things. If you value the time you devote to music making and are ready to pay for ease of use, OSX is the way to go (and maybe Windows if you stay away from cheap hw).

---

It sounds to me like your contribution to linux has been an important one.
I'll just say two things:

1) my experience with linux as a DAW has been very good; and, I know other people are having very good results too.

2) Contributions like yours are important because it speaks to the importance of keeping computers in the hands of the people rather than in the hands of one or two corporations. I don't doubt the stability of both Mac and Windows. After all, all the attention they give is to basically one distro. With linux, as you already know, there are indeed many distros, and some have more development going on than others. It's one thing to use a distro that has a certain amount of "history," something else to use one that was just "born."

My hope is that you'll keep contributing to linux. I'm not a programmer (boy, I wish I was!). But the spirit of community all around the world, working together to make computers do fabulous things, is to me, just as important as tweaking synthesizers and making music. It's all about creativity. And freedom. And (why not?), cost.


brian

---

When I do get a spare few days, I'm going to sit down with a Linux book (I have enough of them collecting dust lol) and really get my head around it.