monkeybob wrote:Has anyone got much experience of Ardour or Rosegarden?

I'm looking at scrapping windows and moving to linux, and I reckon the biggest loss will be Cubase SX. Are Ardour or Rosegarden any sort of reasonable substitute?

Just run your Windows apps through Wine. It's Windows emulation for UNIX/Linux.

Does anyone know if it's possible to use Fluxbox and Beryl together?

Colonel Panic wrote:

monkeybob wrote:Has anyone got much experience of Ardour or Rosegarden?

I'm looking at scrapping windows and moving to linux, and I reckon the biggest loss will be Cubase SX. Are Ardour or Rosegarden any sort of reasonable substitute?

Just run your Windows apps through Wine. It's Windows emulation for UNIX/Linux.

Does anyone know if it's possible to use Fluxbox and Beryl together?

It might be more complicated than that. Cubase, for example, isn't supported by WINE...at least as far as I can tell. Well, it would run just fine, but the USB dongle copy protection hoses it. There might be a workaround somewhere...Or, barring that, elements of software will work, but others (read: VST's) won't. You have to jump through some hoops (i.e. install libraries and configure) to get VST's to work...it is a relatively recent development. However, for example, different hosts can be dodgy in how they support individual VST's as well.

If you are simply using your system as a tape deck, there are a pile of options available. However, if you use some digital processing, it pays to look at several options, and at how you want to use your system.

Later: Here's a better link. This one shows you what applications have been tested, and what the results were. It's where you start with WINE and audio applications.

Thanks for the info. To be honest my PC only just runs cubase well in Windows, so the chances of it running smoothly in linux are pretty minimal! Hence why I was looking for a linux alternative to cubase.

monkeybob wrote:Thanks for the info. To be honest my PC only just runs cubase well in Windows, so the chances of it running smoothly in linux are pretty minimal! Hence why I was looking for a linux alternative to cubase.

Don't assume this. The issues you are probably looking at are whether or not you can get the software to run in the first place. Of course, if you are looking to streamline Cubase's performance, it might not help. It would probably help with stability, but keep in mind that there is a whole layer of emulation going on...the speed you might get running GNU-Linux would probably get lost in the emulation. I don't know. There are doubtless others on that Linux site who could actually provide more experience and knowhow...

rayj wrote:It might be more complicated than that. Cubase, for example, isn't supported by WINE...at least as far as I can tell. Well, it would run just fine, but the USB dongle copy protection hoses it. There might be a workaround somewhere...Or, barring that, elements of software will work, but others (read: VST's) won't. You have to jump through some hoops (i.e. install libraries and configure) to get VST's to work...it is a relatively recent development. However, for example, different hosts can be dodgy in how they support individual VST's as well.

Well then how about running it under Windows XP, within virtualization software like Xen or VMware? Or better yet just make it a dual-boot system with a minimal, stripped down XP installation for running Cubase and have Linux for your default boot OS.

Colonel Panic wrote:

rayj wrote:It might be more complicated than that. Cubase, for example, isn't supported by WINE...at least as far as I can tell. Well, it would run just fine, but the USB dongle copy protection hoses it. There might be a workaround somewhere...Or, barring that, elements of software will work, but others (read: VST's) won't. You have to jump through some hoops (i.e. install libraries and configure) to get VST's to work...it is a relatively recent development. However, for example, different hosts can be dodgy in how they support individual VST's as well.

Well then how about running it under Windows XP, within virtualization software like Xen or VMware? Or better yet just make it a dual-boot system with a minimal, stripped down XP installation for running Cubase and have Linux for your default boot OS.

Man, I don't know. The possible solutions are numerous, to the point of being overwhelming. I'm just jumping on this Linux train myself.

However, I do think that running a dual-boot system defeats the purpose of making the jump. There have traditionally been two reasons why I didn't switch to GNU-Linux long ago: audio software and game compatibility. Cedenga is working to deal with the gaming (and quite well, it looks like), and audio is slowly working its way up the ladder. Microsoft is apparently working against this via the forced driver-incompatibilities ploy, insuring that you have to research your intended system architecture from the hardware on back.

I have to think about it 'backwards'...i.e. what do I actually want to do with it all? I've found a few reasonable soundcards that support Linux drivers. I've also found several architectures that will, in theory, support the few VST's I've found to be indispensable in mixing audio. MIDI control is pretty much dealt with. However, I have yet to buy a decent soundcard and test it all. Even if I do, well, that's for my specific configuration...etc.

For what it's worth, Reaper looks like it might be the answer to multitracking. I've experimented with C Sound, strictly for digital synthesis, and it is rock-solid for building unique digital synths...provided you don't mind actually coding the synth from zero (which took me weeks of obsession to learn how to do). I still use Buzz for almost everything except multitrack recording (which it does as well...there are just other more user-friendly applications that work as well), and it's relatively easy to switch from Buzz to Buze (a Buzz mock that has been proven to work well with GNU-Linux).

Monkeybob/any other interested parties:

Consider some of the needs of typical audio software:
- relatively close coupling of the audio hardware and the software, to the extent that the audio hardware driver is often addressed at the application level. ie, within the application (cubase in this case) you define the audio driver - like ASIO, or WDM, specific to your card. This is to allow the software access to the relatively specialised capabilites of soundcards used on digital audio hardware platforms.

Then consider the characteristics of emulation:
- the emulated environment is abstracted from the physical environment, so that radically different environments can be simulated. This is almost always done by providing a lowest-common-denominator software emulation of a capability or function. Specific hardware features (like direct monitoring) are usually sacrificed to do this.

So, while keeping in mind that sound is a function of time:

Close coupling = fast, low latency, and topologically fragile. Usually necessary for digital audio work.

And Emulation = slower, more generally compatible (which is why you often see stuff like "soundblaster compatible" described, in the example of game system requirements, or in bioses). I'm not referring to emulation within GNU/linux here, I mean emulation on any platform.

Nutshell conclusion:
You're really pushing a ton of shit uphill with a tongue depressor if you want to get an audio app like Cubase running under VMWare/Wine on a linux box. Companies like Digidesign (for example) are total wankers in this regard, because their modus operandi is to create/cripple functionality so that it cannot be emulated, meaning you need to periodically need to BUY A NEW PRODUCT from them. They don't give a shit about the art you create surviving for long periods of time, they want your consumer dollar.

To give you a good practice scenario to follow should you want to, if you're going to do audio work on a linux box...

1 - use JACK. This means the audio app you use doesn't need to know a damn thing about your soundcard, ie the hardware is not being addressed at the application level. This allows you to avoid Digidesign leprosy, like the interdependent relationship artificially maintained between pro tools and the digi001. I'm using this description in a totally general sense to illustrate the fact; Cubase is only slightly less cursed than Protools in this regard.
The logical signal chain would look like:
soundcard X --> JACK ---> application X
JACK manages to keep the latency extremely low, whilst providing abstraction between app and hardware, by presenting the raw capabilities of the soundcard as a service. The app only sees the abstract service.
It's not perfect, it's just a step in the right direction in terms of topology. JACK can run on most unixes, like BSD and OSX, not just Linux.

2 - take a hard pill on the app front. Think of it in terms of which functions you need, not which program you need. You will not cease to be a creative individual if you do not use Cubase (no intentional double negative there . Map out the functions in Cubase you deem important, and work out how to do those same things in another program or combination of programs. I don't mean this in any disparaging sense, but you probably don't use 100% of Cubase's features. Therefore, you can almost certainly work your way around any feature scenario using native GNU/linux audio apps like Ardour or Rosegarden. Think of the functions you're trying to replicate in terms of their end effect of the soundwave, not in terms of "this isn't like cubase, therefore it sucks".
If you see yourself as being dependent on a particular program to make music, then you are in trouble. If you really are dependent on a particular program to participate in the musical world, then you will probably not be participating in the musical world for very long. Audio applications aren't like instruments, they don't stick around in the same form for more than a few years. Be prepared to shift, don't wait until you have to shift, because by then you're risking your music.

3 - Just to temper things, don't blindly take the plunge. Do your research, make sure you use well-supported hardware, and ask questions whenever you need to. UbuntuStudio is a good place to start, it's easy to install for a new user, and a lot of the tweaking/hacking that used to have to occur before you could start audio work is done for you. Planet CCRMA is also pretty capable, but you might need to get your hands a little dirtier. Be persistent, and don't be put off by people like me who'll occasionally come out with statements like "Fuck cubase with a big rubber cock". We mean well, really.

^ sorry for being a tard. I meant that info for Colonel Panic, not Monkeybob.

Thanks very much for that Skinny honkie, it's the most useful advice I've read on this stuff so far!

My situation is that I'm in a band and basically want to mix some recordings we've got, without having to pay for studio time. I'm on a very limited budget, but still want fairly professional sounding results. I've learned loads about cubase over the last few months, and am starting to get results that stand up against what we've mixed in the studio (who use logic on a macbook).

I'm interested in moving to linux because I really don't want to have to move to vista, which I will pretty much have to do if I want to upgrade my PC and stay in an MS environment, as I have the stupidly restrictive OEM XP, which does really allow a motherboard upgrade.

I think my first move will be to install ubuntuStudio (not seen that before, sounds brilliant, thanks!) on a partition and try to mix a track using the apps there. I can then see how it compares to what I've achieved in cubase. There's a ton of applications that come with the distro, so I guess it's a case of spending time fiddling and seeing what I can do. Agreed, trying to find a match for cubase is probably the wrong approach, it depends on what I'm trying to do.

I think the bottom line will be the compressions and reverbs available, they are essentially what makes the difference between a professional sounding recording and a demo, and I don't have any rack stuff to use. Also, there will need to be decent linux drivers for my audiophile 2496, or it's pretty much a non-starter.

skinny honkie wrote:^ sorry for being a tard. I meant that info for Colonel Panic, not Monkeybob.

You're absolutely right. I hadn't considered the specific needs of audio software when recommending that emulation/virtualization idea.

When you get down to it, making the switch to Linux only to run Win32 apps in emulation is kinda defeating the purpose of going open source in the first place. One of the biggest hurdles for users in switching to open source is having to give up not only the familiar OS environment but also the applications they've grown used to working with for years and years.