×

Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

The Fix Is In: Ardour Set For Summer Release

timothy posted more than 11 years ago | from the young-man's-thoughts-turn-to dept.

Music 254

uprightcitizen writes "Good news for the open source audio recording world! Ardour creator Paul Davis has announced a feature-freeze and has set a binary release date for the now-famous GPL multitrack audio recording application. Ardour has recently been featured in Sound on Sound and has been mentioned on Slashdot many times (here(1), here(2), etc..). The feature freeze is effective as of May 4 and the binary release date is set for sometime in July or August. Good Job Paul!"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

w00t! (-1)

llamalicious (448215) | more than 11 years ago | (#5887768)

_sounds_ good to me

*ducks*

Revenge. It's what's for dinner! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5887770)

I was laid-off about a month ago. The office I worked for used a lot of pirated software, so I decided to report them to the BSA.
As hypocritical as it was for me to do it, they're in deep shit now.
Revenge is *sweet*, I am so proud of myself!
Maybe I could get a job with the BSA and hunt all you pirating and '"free" software' shit heads down!

Re:Revenge. It's what's for dinner! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5887903)

I got laid about a month ago. The girl I humped drank a lot of alcohol, so I decided to teach her why it isn't a good idea.

As hypocritical as it was for me to do it, she's pregnant now.

Pussy is *warm*, I am so proud of myself!

Maybe I could get a job with the birth control pill factory!

Sounds like they went through a real (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5887773)

Ardourous process.

Re:Sounds like they went through a real (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5888280)

Yeah, that's pretty damn clever. I bet an ardourous process is something like these Slashdot mods go through while viewing a goatse.cx link.

Don't be afraid to mod this up. It's only karma after all.

Ardour and commercial applications (-1, Flamebait)

Istealmymusic (573079) | more than 11 years ago | (#5887779)

GPL'd software is a major advancement in technological progress no doubt, but how does Mr. Ardour intend to compete with giant commercial revivals such as Bose? This facetious struggle will be egregiously facil to watch?

uhhh.... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5887820)

could you possibly tell me where you acquired that cocaine?

Re:uhhh.... (0)

Istealmymusic (573079) | more than 11 years ago | (#5888060)

could you possibly tell me where you acquired that cocaine?
Afroman.

"Binary Release Date" (-1, Offtopic)

Scoria (264473) | more than 11 years ago | (#5887794)

01001001001000000110110101110101011100110111010000 10000001100100011001010110010001101001011000110110 00010111010001100101001000000110000101101110001000 00011001010111100001100011011001010111001101110011 01101001011101100110010100100000011000010110110101 10111101110101011011100111010000100000011011110110 01100010000001110100011010010110110101100101001000 00011101000110111100100000011000110110111101101101 01110000011101010111010001100101011100100111001100 11101100100000011101010111000001101111011011100010 00000111001001100101011000010110010001101001011011 10011001110010000001110100011010000110000101110100 00101100001000000100100100100000011001010110111001 11011001101001011100110110100101101111011011100110 01010110010000100000011000010010000000100010011000 10011010010110111001100001011100100111100100100000 01110010011001010110110001100101011000010111001101 10010100100000011001000110000101110100011001010010 11100010001000100000

Gullable! Help! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5887805)

My gullable friend was duped into ordering a subscrition from "mp3 grand central", which you'll find by searching google/overture for mp3 and looking under the
"sponsored links." So, to get revenge, CLICK HERE [mp3grandcentral.com] to download a large file (kazaa light) from their server. In addition, using no bandwidth, you can click on their ad here [altavista.com] to make them pay $1.40 to Overture. It's the 2nd "sponsored match" at the left saying "Napster's Replacement Only $0.99 a Month."

more pro use of linux (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5887818)

One more pro use of linux to knock the proprietary big boys down. The article doesn't say it, so I will here. We're gaining on those markets where Apple and PC hardware have been used and how, simply because there were once the only solution. Where there was Photoshop, now there is GIMP. Where there was film editing, now there is Film Gimp. Where there were proprietary rendering, now movies like XMen2 use Linux. Where there was Pro Tools, now we have our own solution too.

These may be relatively small markets compared to desktop users, but they are extremely solid ones. Once GPL software is usable there and the savings are being made (come on now, free software compared to over $14,000 for Pro Tools in audio) the hold will be unavoidable.

It's a coming of age

Yeah, but these open source "solutions" suck! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5887850)

The free software equivilants are no where near as good as their corporate counterparts.

Face it, Linux will be nothing more than a server OS, and a poor one at that.

Re:more pro use of linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5887897)

Instead of poser, I can use...what?
Instead of Cakewalk, I can use...what?

You're bluffing with only a pair of threes to show for it, if even that.

Re:more pro use of linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5888322)

I believe the key term was "pro use".

Cakewalk is the kids toy DAW.

Re:more pro use of linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5887907)

why do people insist on comparing gimp to photoshop... its more in between ms paint and paintshop pro.

Re:more pro use of linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5887975)

Yes but most web grpahics aren't now made with photoshop or mspaint or paint shop pro but guess what?\

Look at the signatures in .jpg images and you'll will find many or not most of them are made in THE GIMP BUT NOT THE OTHERS.

Speak with your foot out of your mouth before you open it.

Re:more pro use of linux (2, Interesting)

shaitand (626655) | more than 11 years ago | (#5887977)

obviously the comment of a photoshop fanatic, I know I used to be one. Now you couldn't pry my gimp from my cold dead fingers ;) Sorry, photoshop has a couple points on gimp, but gimp has points back. Gimp also has another small advantage in that it's about $800 less expensive than photoshop.

Re:more pro use of linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5887986)

No, just the comments of someone who works in print.

Re:more pro use of linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5888021)

I'm sure the guys who used to write books with quill pens sneered at moveable type, too.

Print is dying.

Re:more pro use of linux (1)

i_am_nitrogen (524475) | more than 11 years ago | (#5888034)

Photoshop is frequently used for other things beside print. Gimp is really slow at handling huge images (4kx4k pixels) with its default configuration (I don't know if increasing the tile cache to 1/2 the RAM size like Photoshop uses would improve that). But, Gimp doesn't suck. Patents on color spaces and color matching and color systems like Pantone are what suck.

I understand people being defensive about software investments. However, I would love it if an Open Source package came along that could replace Acid Pro 4 and its Dolby Digital encoder (a rather large investment for someone who only writes music and makes movies as a hobby).

Re:more pro use of linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5888044)

Let's not forget Gimp's awful brush system. (I like an idea of how much area is going to be affected by the current brush size vs. the current magnification level, something Photoshop does that Gimp didn't do last time I used it.)

Of course, that was roughly a year ago that I last used Gimp. Has it changed any since then?

Re:more pro use of linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5888078)

Has it changed any since then?

Unfortunately no. I raised the issue of precise cursors with a GIMP developer at the end of last year. I was laughed at with the comment "do you know how fucking hard that would be?"

Hey. make it easy for people to switch or stay forever in mediocrity.

Re:more pro use of linux (1)

shaitand (626655) | more than 11 years ago | (#5888090)

Alot changes in open source programs in the course of a year. If I'm understanding the feature you mean, then it's not the default behavior... but I've never really tried. I may not be understanding you at all though... sometimes it's hard to convey visual related features via text.

Re:more pro use of linux (2, Insightful)

Cplus (79286) | more than 11 years ago | (#5888166)

I agree, and I mean no offense to the users and developers in saying this, it's a wonderful product, can be great for non-professional use, but it's not even close to what a professional needs. Note that by professional I don't mean a web-designer, GIMP is ideal for web-designers.

DId you know... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5888070)

This guy wrote the software with Linux in mind, not BSD. Actually, most successful large, Open Source projects are designed primarily for Linux (such as KDE and Samba [samba.org] .)

Deal with it.

Re:more pro use of linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5888353)

Dude, you need to login to karma whore.

Solid audio software is the breaking point (5, Insightful)

mao che minh (611166) | more than 11 years ago | (#5887822)

Solid audio software is the breaking point for many Windows and Macintosh users that mix music. I have a few friends that happen to actually be successful in the music biz (on a very small scale, of course), and they all use Macintosh (one has worked with Puff Daddy before, no shit). A few DJ friends use Windows for simple mixing and burning. All of them show an interest in Linux, but are put off by it's lack of a really good audio application. If this proggie is as good as it's makers are claiming it is, then Linux will have about (let me count....) 11 new users real fast.

This same scenario has to apply to many others out there. My small group of musically talented friends can't be the only ones.

Re:Solid audio software is the breaking point (4, Informative)

jdkincad (576359) | more than 11 years ago | (#5887978)

I'll second that. A musician buddy [devnbave.com] of mine is really interested in trying Linux, but until there's a replacement for Cool Edit Pro [syntrillium.com] there's no point in him switching. Atfer all, what's the use of an OS that doesn't have the apps that caused you to get a computer in the first place?

Re:Solid audio software is the breaking point (1)

tshak (173364) | more than 11 years ago | (#5887996)

Read down for my post why this isn't a Pro Tools (or comparable products) replacement. And even if it was, that's only one tool. WAV editing tools are huge. Plugins are even bigger (generally costing several times more than the DAW software) and many people have already invested in them. Software synthesis (eg: Propellerheads "Reason") is rapdily growing and are used almost exlcusively for some productions.

I don't see this making a difference to all but the very casual home music hobbyist. And even then, on Mac's or Windows you can get very powerful and not-so-aptly-named "light" versions of a lot of these tools for an affordable price or even for free.

Church audio recording setup with ardour (5, Interesting)

zzxc (635106) | more than 11 years ago | (#5887834)

I recently set up an audio recording computer for a church. (433mhz, oss/free sound drivers, CMI8738 sound card) They were going to use windows, but I convinced them that Linux would be the better choice. I set it up so that recording is done from the command line, encoding ogg [vorbis.com] (ok, vorbis) or flac [sf.net] in realtime.

For shorter tracks, ardour is used for more user friendly recording. (Audacity and sweep cause choppy audio in my experience)

In addition, I have made command-line full duplex recording possible. (where the instrument track is done first, then vocals laid on top of it) However, be warned that you'll need to make a small program to write raw instructions to the soundcard if you want to turn off the audio loopback, as the CMI* OSS/free driver doesn't implement this for some reason. (I haven't checked if ALSA does this or not)

One major bug that slowed it down was only recording .5 seconds for every second of audio, and thus it sounded like it was in fast forward. (44100hz 16bit) After reading the driver line by line, I fixed it with a one-line shell script.

I have been getting extremely good sound out of it, however. In addition, I have only had to write about 50 lines of code. So if anyone has tried without success to record with a CMI8738 soundcard on linux - don't give up. If you want me to send you the fixes to the problems that I have created, contact me.

What the hell are you going to church for? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5887863)

Tell me you're more intelligent than that!

Re:What the hell are you going to church for? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5887900)

What the hell are you going to church for?

Tell me you're more intelligent than that!


Science has NOT been able to explain everything. Evolution remains unproved and has mounting evidence against it. Read this article on evidence against Evolution [turnpike.net] for more on that.

In addition, there are many open problems to evolution. You can read about some of them here [turnpike.net] .

For a short summary of what Christians (who do not ignore science) believe, see this link. [turnpike.net]

Re:What the hell are you going to church for? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5887991)

So, you're going to church to discover the origin of species?

My FAQ-fu is stronger than yours (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5888004)

Science has NOT been able to explain everything.

It's not science's job to "explain everything." Science, unlike religion, is a process rather than a product. No scientist will ever claim that his or her work is complete. (Similarly, no scientist will ever insist that you take his or her work on faith, lest your soul burn for all eternity in some 13th-century Italian dude's idea of a bad Quake level.)

In addition, there are many open problems to evolution.

Again, we're not the ones trying to sell you all the answers to your questions. (They're free, and many of them can be found here. [faqs.org]

Re:What the hell are you going to church for? (0, Offtopic)

shaitand (626655) | more than 11 years ago | (#5888024)

Personally, I do believe in the concept of evolution, it has mounting RECENT evidence FOR it. As for the current man from ape garbage being spouted in some schools, nope, not buying it.

And I most definately do not buy into the invisible man who will send plagues, famine, flood, sexual urges you can't act upon, and cast you into a pit of raging molten torture for all eternity if you piss him off... but loves you.

Re:What the hell are you going to church for? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5888059)

And I most definately do not buy into the invisible man who will send plagues, famine, flood, sexual urges you can't act upon, and cast you into a pit of raging molten torture for all eternity if you piss him off... but loves you.

You know, if any woman had a boyfriend who acted like that but still professed to love them, everyone they know would be upon them to leave the psycho sonofabitch.

I think that's the best advice regarding church n religion I've ever heard.

Re:What the hell are you going to church for? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5888063)

Ever consider some intelligence in the process?

How do you explain a worm/other primitive organism becoming a human over "millions of years" by white noise. ("millions of years" helps calm down much common sense... right?) We haven't discovered any transitionary species. ("missing links") It would take very percise environmental conditions... creation... to facilitate the formation of the diverse organisms on Earth.

In my opinion, evolution requires a whole lot more faith than creationism.

Re:What the hell are you going to church for? (0, Offtopic)

shaitand (626655) | more than 11 years ago | (#5888198)

Perhaps, but you get into a paradox that is unsolvable. You see if the creator could simply "always have been" and come from nowhere, then we could and all the other species could have as well. As I said, I don't buy into current evolution theory either. My own ideas include it but differ... our origins I don't have enough data to come to any real conclusions about, only speculation. I myself tend to think it's perfectly ok to accept NONE of the commonly accepted beliefs of human origin rather than settling for the one that comes closest. I believe in human evolution (not ape to human evolution) because I've seen evidence of it in my own lifetime. Humans are evolving more and more rapidly, the average IQ level of each generation is higher than the last. The number of perfect SAT scores grows despite a slacking interest in acedemics. This is in large part due to more readily available information. But readily available information can only go so far when your trying to explain away literally 3yr old computer programmers and 8yr old stock market gurus. (yes these really exist, google for yourself). That is why I believe in HUMAN evolution, if it exists in humans then it must exist in the other species as well. After all we are made of the same stuff and even share a great deal of DNA. Do I believe in one animal transitioning into another in terms of evolution? I've no hard evidence to support or dispute this and reserve judgement. Do I believe my own eyewitness testimony of evolution (or at the least adaptation) disproves a creator based beginning? Absolutely not, I believe we now adapt and evolve, whether we do so because of some invisible man in the sky's grand design, or perhaps we are the creation of yet another species via floating particles in that lingering odor left after he passed gas. Who can tell? At this point, I find the two conventional theories and that last equally likely. There is simply not enough data for me to believe otherwise.

Re:What the hell are you going to church for? (1)

shaitand (626655) | more than 11 years ago | (#5888218)

very precise enviornmental conditions... the various environmental conditions which exist/have existed/will exist in the universe are theoretically infinite. That makes the occurance not a longshot, but an inevitability. I think that is the strongest argument for evolution I've heard to date ;)

Evolution is proven (0)

mao che minh (611166) | more than 11 years ago | (#5888134)

Evolution has long been proven. It can be demonstrated, tested, and replicated. The evidence for evolution is far beyond the theoretical realm. In my opinion, it should be made a law (A natural phenomenon that has been proven to occur invariably whenever certain conditions are met), since thus far it is an irrefutable observation of nature, whom's edicts have lead to the validation of many theories that were based upon it's (evolution's) observations.

Don't be mislead by Creationist mumbo-jumbo. Only listen to real science. If you start believing what Christian "scientists" have to say concerning scientific topics, then you might as well take into consideration the declarations of Buddhists, Muslims, Hindus, and Wiccans concerning natural phenomenon.

Re:What the hell are you going to church for? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5888236)

*Takes a deep breath*

Religion has had a long time to establish itself as a leader in science. Thousands of years of documentation. The potential to store scientific knowledge has been enormous. If religion were interested in how the world works, we'd be much further advanced than we are now. Here's an understatement for you: You had your chance! Sweet Jesus on a pogo stick, you had your chance!

Re:Church audio recording setup with ardour (1)

CableModemSniper (556285) | more than 11 years ago | (#5887871)

If you want me to send you the fixes to the problems that I have created, contact me.

I'm not even going to say anything else.

Re:Church audio recording setup with ardour (5, Insightful)

Yeroc (125826) | more than 11 years ago | (#5887884)

Whoah...the fact that you had to jump through all those hoops including reading source code tells me that Linux has a ways to go before your average musician is going to find it the easy route to go for audio recording...

Re:Church audio recording setup with ardour (2, Informative)

shaitand (626655) | more than 11 years ago | (#5887998)

His primary issues were with the sound driver/card he was using. It's best to go with linux friendly hardware to begin with.

Re:Church audio recording setup with ardour (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5888373)

Right, the software is free, you just need to buy a new machine to run it.

Re:Church audio recording setup with ardour (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5887906)

If you want me to send you the fixes to the problems that I have created, contact me

Can you just not create the problems in the first place? I mean... that works for me

(ok I couldn't resist. sorry. good points otherwise :)

please post the shell script fix and "Ard" version (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5887911)

please

Re:please post the shell script fix and "Ard" vers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5887974)

The shell script for the .41 seconds of audio for every one second... dd if=/dev/dsp of=/dev/dsp bs=512 count=100 This is the easiest way to force the CMI8738 soundcard into full duplex mode. An alternative way would be to write a simple C program, like I did, to write raw bits to the soundcard. I have it writing bits to the soundcard to disable audio loopback and enable "full-duplex" mode all the time.

Score -1 BULLSHIT (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5887918)

you fooled the moderators at least

Re:Church audio recording setup with ardour (1, Interesting)

HappyPhunBall (587625) | more than 11 years ago | (#5888285)

You convinced them that using a linux system with a CLI interface and custom code would be a better solution than Windows plus readily available and supported software? Nice job, hope you are proud of yourself. I am quite sure your church pals are only humouring you my friend, and probably regretting it already. Wanna bet any amount that as soon as you leave they will replace that box?

Won't replace Pro Tools anytime soon (3, Interesting)

tshak (173364) | more than 11 years ago | (#5887835)

Pro Tools is not just software - you'll normally find it installed as a hardware/software combo. This is in part due to the fact that modern CPU's can not handle mulitple high quality real time effects for larger studio projects. The other big factor with Pro Tools (and comperable systems) is the Control Surface. Sure, there are incredible MIDI controllers out there, but the proprietary Pro Tools control surfaces are second to none.

Re:Won't replace Pro Tools anytime soon (5, Insightful)

questamor (653018) | more than 11 years ago | (#5887860)

One thing often mentioned with the 'big' apps compared to free software is the monetary cost. The software is minimal when it comes to the costs of an entire studio. For larger projects with big profit margins it's next to nothing. The embedded knowledge of thousands of Pro Tools users isn't going to go away just because a few thousand dollars can be saved on projects that are worth millions.

Where inroads will be made for now, is in small productions that have no choice. Where once their project was impossible due to monetary constraints it will now be one step closer to reality.

Re:Won't replace Pro Tools anytime soon (5, Insightful)

oscarcar (208055) | more than 11 years ago | (#5888169)

I think you have to look beyond the imitation of what is already out there. With Open Source you get possbilities of a lot more creative people doing original things.

Some Digital Audio Workstations (DAWs) do a pretty good job of being able to have effects and such act as controllers, filters, what have you. But with the source code, a lot of really, really interesting things could develop that haven't been thought of.

Now you have a few companies that all try to copy each other in getting certain tools in the hand of their users. And that's great, but we're better off opening the ability to creating tools to a lot more creative people.

Would we have the electric guitar or a saxaphone, if it wasn't for the common man taking a hack at building an instrument?

Re:Won't replace Pro Tools anytime soon (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5888349)

$14 kilobucks is =not= minimal for the vast majority of recording studios. For every Hit Factory or Power Station, there are hundreds of regional and project studios for which that kind of money is a Big Deal.

And guess what, ProTools is =very= big in the world of the small studio.

Re:Won't replace Pro Tools anytime soon (4, Interesting)

fishbowl (7759) | more than 11 years ago | (#5887899)

The problem with ProTools, is that you don't need a golden ear to recognize something that was produced with it.

I don't mean to make a value judgement on it, just that there are some subtle characteristics, especially in the vocal effects department, that scream out at me "yep, protools."

Re:Won't replace Pro Tools anytime soon (3, Insightful)

tshak (173364) | more than 11 years ago | (#5887931)

I don't dissagree, but I contend that this is practically impossible. You'd be amazed at what albums used Pro Tools. For example, many classical recordings use Pro Tools - but what they don't do is over-compress, over-EQ, or over-process the sound. What you're used to hearing has nothing to do with Pro Tools, and everything to do with the Pop Music Industry's production style.

Re:Won't replace Pro Tools anytime soon (1)

fishbowl (7759) | more than 11 years ago | (#5887955)

Agreed. But what's really annoying is when you hear the same effect that just says "I used the default setting of the vox flanger."

Re:Won't replace Pro Tools anytime soon (1)

EverDense (575518) | more than 11 years ago | (#5888343)

Agreed. But what's really annoying is when you hear the same effect that just says "I used
the default setting of the vox flanger."


Damn straight!
Which you can bet is usually because...
The singer they are working with has a voice that requires hiding behind effects.

Re:Won't replace Pro Tools anytime soon (1)

cblood (323189) | more than 11 years ago | (#5887966)

There are many good alternatives to slow tools. But protools was first and because compatility with other studios was important, it became the defacto standard. I Record with SAWstudio because It is great. but there are many other systems that work fine.

What is needed is a standard way to save edit lists, to allow interchange between diffrent packages.Don't expect any help or support from protools. But ardour should shake things up a bit.

EUROPE = GAY (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5887843)

The USA will always be more powerful.

Just some thoughts on OSS. (0, Offtopic)

the uNF cola (657200) | more than 11 years ago | (#5887844)

I've heard the argument that OSS doesn't inovate like MS and IBM closed source projects do. But software like this is the counter argument. With Linux and BSD, on the desktop, it's relatively close to a fresh start. From scratch. You get the idea.

Before, we had to get sound up reliably, window managers etc.. all that chewy good stuff. Windows was ahead of "us" on that since the boom of unix on the desktop didn't happen 'till a little later.

MS can only inovate so fast. Problem is, duplicating what is already out there... good desktop interfaces, some kick ass softare .. all as OSS is "easy".

And btw, inovations are easy once you think how to solve a problem. mp3's and ogg aren't hard problems that required tons of scientists. Just a few good eggs working on something. Same with softupdates for FreeBSD and a lot of junk.

Re:Just some thoughts on OSS. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5887877)

I've heard the argument that OSS doesn't inovate like MS and IBM closed source projects do. But software like this is the counter argument. With Linux and BSD, on the desktop, it's relatively close to a fresh start. From scratch. You get the idea

You're using an example of OSS software copying features of an existing market solution MS already dominate and have done so for years (professional audio recording) as an example of OSS innovation

You trying to make a reality distortion field to rival isteve huh?

Re:Just some thoughts on OSS. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5888230)

Your ignorant post aside:

Read the guy's page. He says that this software was designed specifically for Linux. He even suggests people go install the low-latency kernel patches for Linux.

Yeah, I'm sure it will run under FreeBSD, and it will probably also run under Solaris, but he does NOT mention BSD: you did, and noone cares.

You BSD whiners never quit. Always trying to steal the thunder..

suck my dick (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5887845)

VA Linux == bankrupt!!!!!

ardour still not a "big boy" (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5887870)

i like ardour. I use ardour. I've probably submitted 20 bugfixes through the years.

However, it's still not ready for prime time. A couple more years and it could be.

The DSP framework needs a complete rewrite to fix some limitations, and the phase vocoder is 2nd generation, when most commercial tools use 4th or 5th generation.

F/OSS: Conquering new markets! (4, Insightful)

exhilaration (587191) | more than 11 years ago | (#5887872)

Woaw. This is pretty cool. Ardour might do for Linux and professional audio users what CinePaint (Film Gimp) did for Linux and movie studios.

You know - I don't mean this as a troll - but I really have to wonder what the hell is going to happen to all the software developers working for closed source companies when mainstream users start adopting free products in droves.

After all, if Microsoft's Palladium is successful, that could mean the end of software piracy - which probably accounts for a good chunk of the market. What will all those users do? Will they go out and spend $200 on Windows, $500 on Office, and $600 on Photoshop? No, they'll come running to Free and Open Source Software! And pretty soon, they'll be able to find replacements for EVERYTHING they need.

(Sorry for jumping from topic to topic, it's late.)

The big deal? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5887876)

What's the big freakin' deal? You could always retrieve the code from CVS and compile it yourself. So what if they're releasing a binary package and a tarball. Wah. ./configure make make install How fucking hard is that?

Binary = stable in some many people's eyes (5, Informative)

mao che minh (611166) | more than 11 years ago | (#5887940)

Because a stable binary release means that it will be taken more seriously by the "every man", and major distributions will be less apprehensive about including it with their distro (binary installs are easier to upgrade and manage in todays apt-get, RPM, ports world of open source operating systems).

A potential Linux user that doesn't have the luxury of a hand-holding-Linux-guru friend to help them install their desired software would view an easy to install binary application as a "big plus".

In the meantime, (-1)

Bitter Old Man (572131) | more than 11 years ago | (#5887915)

Perhaps they could give it a new name. How about Suckdour?

What did he say? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5887930)

Let me quote his page:

"I am now a tireless advocate for Linux in the audio world, and work essentially full time writing free (as in beer and talk) software for electronic music composition and recording."

He said Linux. Not *BSD.

Deal with it.

Re:What did he say? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5888330)

Egad, modded down by the *BSD boys again!

God damnit, I need some fucking backup! Where the fuck are the rest of you when I need some goddamned backup!?

I wanna see some fucking BSD IS DYING posts up in this bitch. Every other posts should explain, in detail, exactly why BSD is dying.

I wanna see some fucking posts rubbing the BSD bitches noses in the dirt.. Remind them that the world is developing software for Linux, not BSD. The world is using the GPL, and not the whore BSD license.

GET BUSY.

Re:What did he say? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5888405)

What? The world uses Windows, my friend.

Re:What did he say? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5888425)

Bitch!

1% of Google Queries are done on Linux machines.
Next year, that will rise to 2%. You get the idea.

Anyway, back on track: GET BUSY YOU GOATSE FUCKER! I don't care if you don't use Linux. Start posting some anti-BSD shit right-fucking-now, and don't give me not fucking backtalk!

Re:What did he say? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5888411)

I'm sorry, but your post is incredibly insensitive. Beating up on *BSD fanboys is like beating up on crippled retards with cancer. Have a little bit of sympathy for people with cancer and be more sensitive to the plight of crippled retards. They don't need nasty posts like yours heaped on top of the insult and injury they're already suffering. jeez.

Sync? Timecode? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5887942)

Well, it might be good for standalone audio-only projects with only a few tracks. One feature I do not see listed is timecode, and support for hardware sync clocks. Without that, you are out of the running for A/V production. In pro audio, media-independent sync is absolutely necessary.

Ah but the people who won't understand this, are the same people who don't understand why the lack of CMYK support is such a limiting factor for Gimp.

Re:Sync? Timecode? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5888029)

CMYK is only useful for legacy printing gear

RGB works just fine for monitors, be they LCD or plasma or CRT or even projection, and it works well for RGB printers such as Durst Lambda or Fuji Pictrograph. Not only be RGB printing but continuous tone and hence without the bother of screening.

The longer CMYK is supported as a legacy technology, the longer we'll be using outdated processes to provide inferior output.

Re:Sync? Timecode? (2, Interesting)

BJH (11355) | more than 11 years ago | (#5888191)

Hate to tell you, but that 'legacy' CMYK technology is currently installed in just about every printer (think 'big book factory' rather than 'laser/inkjet/etc.') in the world. Not being able to submit graphic data in CMYK is a big limitation.

Re:Sync? Timecode? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5888391)

Big time! RGB just doesn't translate to paper very well.

That's fine (1)

J. T. MacLeod (111094) | more than 11 years ago | (#5888301)

Because those people don't matter.

The people who do matter understand that CMYK is important. There's not much to be done about it, though, because it is patented technology.

As long as we're not dealing with a standard that is patent encumbered, it will come in due time. (Due time being the time of those who feel like working on it. They aren't on anyone else's time table.)

ERIC MASSON, YOU ARE TEH GOATSE! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5887952)

WHY DON'T YOU RELEA... oh fuck it.
He's not going to release the beta, he didn't even make one. All the screen shots are altered IRIX pics.
He'll just keep pushing back the date until he dies.
Fuck you Eric Masson.
Back to Windows I go...

killer audio editing app for radio producing (4, Interesting)

jamienk (62492) | more than 11 years ago | (#5887956)

You record your interviews (best would be if you used a hard-disk recorder with a mic levels, not DAT). You transfer them to your computer. Speech recognition is performed. (Maybe interactively, so you can make rough corrections.) You cut, copy, and paste the text file and this assembles the audio. You refine the edits by hand.

How close are we to this?

MIDI sequencer? (2, Insightful)

FiloEleven (602040) | more than 11 years ago | (#5888003)

I've been thinking about doing desktop recording with Linux, but I haven't been able to find what I'm really looking for - an application that integrates hard disk recording and MIDI sequencing. Does anyone have experience with such an app, or even know of one's existence?

Great (4, Funny)

KodaK (5477) | more than 11 years ago | (#5888054)

Now I can sit in my basement holding a guitar, stare at an empty monitor and record nothing with FREE SOFTWARE.

hmm (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5888109)

I'll be happy once my creamwear card is supported with asio 2.
That's the problem .. drivers.
Another is of course .. plugins and vst instruments.

Re:hmm (1)

Sri Ramkrishna (1856) | more than 11 years ago | (#5888247)

"Creamwear", "asio", "drivers", "plugins", "instruments"..damn, Come out of the damn closet already! You're just being transparent now! :-) (j/k)

Please don't hurt me.

sri

Interesting... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5888114)

To quote his page:

"I am now a tireless advocate for Linux in the audio world, and work essentially full time writing free (as in beer and talk) software for electronic music composition and recording."

Isn't it interesting how he said Linux and not BSD? Very interesting indeed. Most successful Open Source projects are licensed under the GPL, and are written specifically for Linux.

The BSD crowd would have you believe this is due to some silly legal issues which predate many large successful Open Source projects, but they are just trying to make excuses for their favorite project's shortcoming: the license.

They choose to believe that 95% of the Open Source world is ignorant and oblivious to the issues of licensing, instead of believing the truth.

Re:Interesting... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5888181)

Mod parent up.
He speaks the truth.

The majority of Open source projects, written by many intelligent people who are capable of making informed decisions, are written specifically for Linux, and carry the GPL license. This isn't some cooincidence or random happening as the BSD crowd would want you to believe.

The GPL puts power in the hands of the people, instead of the corporation. This makes people feel empowered, and it excites and inspires them. This is why people choose the GPL. Sure, some stale old projects some old licenses (like the X11 license) but this is changing with time (an example is the Wine project which switched to the GPL to prevent the raping of their project.)

Re:Interesting... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5888365)

Amen. I'm not dissing BSD and saying it sucks or anything. But when something better like Linux comes along don't sit there bitching and whining that your OS is better and acting like hundreds of thousands of highly techincally literate people 'accidentally' chose Linux by some mistake. Just make the switch or fix the y2k shit in your old OS and deal with the lack of development.

Re:Interesting... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5888432)

There is a lot of truth in those posts about BSD dying.
Heck, *BSD is dying. It lost out big time. It is a bitty niche,
a tiny dying niche.

Audacity, Freshmeat (2, Interesting)

bcrowell (177657) | more than 11 years ago | (#5888164)

How does this software compare to Audacity? Any comments from people who've used both? Personally I've only used Audacity. One thing I really like about it is that it's cross-platform -- cross-platform apps are the best way to spread the word about open source.

And was anybody else bugged by ... -- ?

  1. This belongs on Freshmeat, not Slashdot.
  2. If this was submitted to Freshmeat, they'd tone it down, since it's so obviously a marketing blurb.

Re:Audacity, Freshmeat (2, Informative)

bengoerz (581218) | more than 11 years ago | (#5888314)

I'm not exactly the type you requested comment from -- I have yet to use Ardour -- but I have used Audacity (and looked at Ardour heavily). In my eyes, having used several audio programs, the intent seems different. Each one is produced for a "target audience", if you will.

Now Audacity is a decent multi-tracking program for beginners. However, there are many limitations to the control users innately have. For instance, the compressor in the latest release has absolutely no settings -- it just compresses according to presets written into the program. So, while your audio won't be clipping like an uncompressed signal would, but you also get zero control of the particularities of the sound that is produced. From my perspective, having mixed several multi-tracks in my day (most including vocals, drums, guitars, bass, and more), the more control I have the better.... and that's where Audacity falls short.... at least until you start downloading additional plug-ins.

Ardour, on the other hand, looks to be a much more robust design out of the box. It seems intended for more professional usage. From what I've seen, it's got excellent control of just about every processor you could normally want in a studio recording app, and an interface that provides fast and comprehensive control to them all. It's almost like sitting at a real studio mixing board -- the same layout. However, its main drawback looks to be in its learning curve. Most people who just dabble with sound now and again will probably be lost in the complexity that the program offers. However, for my money (or lack thereof), it looks to be much closer to my needs than Audacity.

So in essence, it's all about what you want to do with it and the complexity that you're willing to endure.

Re:Audacity, Freshmeat (4, Informative)

Wumpus (9548) | more than 11 years ago | (#5888352)

How does this software compare to Audacity?

It doesn't. Or hardly doesn't, at least. Ardour is a full featured professional recording application, designed to tackle any audio recording task you can throw at it. Have two studio quality sound cards, giving you a total of 20 cannels in/out, at 96Khz/24bit? Want to record a rock show, with live drums, backing vocals, and enough microphone cables to make AOL's server room look tidy? Ardour can handle it, and then some.

Want to take that 20 track show, and overdub the guitars in the studio, while the whole mess is mixed in real time? It can do that, too.

Ardour is the open source equivalent of Pro Tools (mentioned on slashodot a few days ago). Audacity isn't.

Now, if you're not interested in any of these things, Ardour is probably overkill for you.

And if anyone deserves the marketing here, it's Paul. Ardour is a massive piece of code, that took years of uncompensated full time work to get to its current state. It's well designed and well coded. No corners were cut in the making of this piece of software. Go get it, and pay for it.

Like Christmas in July... (1)

BadElf (448282) | more than 11 years ago | (#5888204)

Oh man! A binary?? I've been dying to try this piece of code, but was never successful compiling it from CVS. Ended up using ReZound and Audacity (which are both good in their own rights), but judging from the Ardour screenshots, I think I'll be switching once the binary comes out.

I feel like a little kid waiting for Christmas. Hurry 'dem binaries, pleease!

all fine but you overlook one thing- (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5888228)

it's garbage - in particular the audio drivers for linux that is. You only get any sort of MMIO with RME drivers (hammerfall dsp + alsa).
For all you slashdorks elmmy translate:
hardware audio is a good thing.

Write effects libs that actually use the dsp chips on more audio hardware or don't even bother with this crap.

This might get me to switch (3, Interesting)

bengoerz (581218) | more than 11 years ago | (#5888231)

I've experimented with Linux and other open-source OSes for a while now, but I've never found one that can make a permanent home on my desktop. One major reason: No good multi-track recorder! Sure, there are options like Audacity [sourceforge.net] , but there is nothing that can rival the mixing options of, say, Cool Edit Pro [syntrillium.com] . For my mixing, I absolutely NEED features that I can control -- a good compressor, gain control, some decent effects, a reliable GUI, etc. Now, it looks like Ardour may offer that, and so I rejoice. This may be the last rail laid on my transitional track, and the golden spike is beautiful. So Ardour, I say bring it on. Lemme see what you got!

Free proxy for you to use (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5888276)

A spammer was trying to use my web server as a SPAM gateway. luckily nmap helped me find out that there box is an open proxy, lets saturate this fsckers bandwidth.

ip 193.130.235.198
port 8080

But can you post on Slashdot with it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5888356)

I guess you can!

TROLL! TROLL! FLAME! TROLL!

Lameness filter filler

Re:But can you post on Slashdot with it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5888379)

one good way to take up bandwidth is open up a bunch of tabs of Google Views and just search for stuff that will bring back a ton of results.

Hey Sherlock! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5888392)

Hey Sherlock did ever consider since the offending IP is an open proxy that maybe the spammer was using it as a fucking proxy!

God damn you are one stupid fucker.

Wish it will be in Knoppix (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5888296)

Wish it will be in Knoppix..

-------
Knoppix.ru - Knoppix is the best Linux !
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?