Linked by Eugenia Loli on Wed 2nd May 2007 02:41 UTC
X11, Window Managers Cairo v1.4.6 is released and it's got a "particularly juicy performance fix, (working around an X server performance bug), as well as native PDF gradients with alpha". In other interesting open source releases, the powerful audio application Ardour v2.0 was released (with Mac OS X support).
Thread beginning with comment 236779
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Ardour2.0, great release!
by djame on Wed 2nd May 2007 23:55 UTC in reply to "Ardour2.0, great release!"
Member since:

Sorry, it's not that great for the professionnal sound designer for a simple reason : no drivers support on linux (through alsa or oss non free) for so called professionnal sound card devices, the ones you'll pay at least 1000 euros and which are able to record simultaneously more than 16 tracks in stereo in 96 khz at the same time. I know it's not ardour's fault of course, but still.

As long as it can't match Cubase VST on a feature 2 feature basis, it'll stay a toy, a nice one, still, but a toy.


Edited 2007-05-02 23:59

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Ardour2.0, great release!
by ntl_ on Thu 3rd May 2007 03:25 in reply to "RE: Ardour2.0, great release!"
ntl_ Member since:

I'm sorry, but given the quality of the majority of music people even try to record, chances are for most people the tool is not the limiting factor in how good the music sounds.

How many of the arguably greatest albums of all time came from four tracks?

Besides, there are a few fairly high end cards (like those from RME) which are very well supported by alsa.

Reply Parent Score: 1

butters Member since:

I agree, but for different reasons. I just finished recording a full-length chamber-pop album with over 30 tracks in the mix. We used Pro Tools for MacOSX on a G5 with outboard DSP and a fortune's worth of VST and TDM plugins.

The availability of driver support for professional-quality recording interfaces was not the primary issue preventing us from considering Ardour on Linux. For example, the FreeBoB driver for JACK provides support for excellent digital recording interfaces such as the Presonus FirePod and FireStudio. In most cases, JACK provides routing capabilities that exceed those of the manufacturer's drivers. Ardour now supports motorized control surfaces based on the Mackie Control Protocol.

Where Ardour falls flat is its imperfect and fiddly support for VST plugins, no VST support outside of 32-bit x86, and no support for plugin formats that utilize outboard DSP hardware. Otherwise we could have seriously considered Ardour for our project. Steinberg and Yamaha have licensed the VST plugin framework as freeware, but they don't allow redistribution, and they don't provide source code. Steinberg said about a year ago that an open source release is not out of the question, but nothing has happened since.

While Ardour isn't what you might consider production quality at this point in time, neither are the proprietary solutions, in all honesty. We experienced a number of Pro Tools crashes over the course of the project, one of which caused data loss. I look forward to the possibility of recording our next album with Ardour. With the addition of solid VST support on a powerful 64-bit SMP system, it would be ready for a serious evaluation.

Reply Parent Score: 5

Ringheims Auto Member since:

Well, actually Linux supports quite a good range of sound cards, some of them of professional quality. Ardour, I suspect, was more or less designed to work with these:

AFAIK you can hardly get any more professional soundcards than that. And once you have the ADAT interface you can choose from a vast range of high end A/D converters.

Me I use the M-Audio Delta66, inexpensive but actually quite good. It works 110% in Linux, in some occations even better than in Windows.

You mentioned Cubase VST. Well, I've used it's brother Nuendo2.0 for three months at a professional production facility, and I can safely tell you I wouldn't exchange it for Ardour. If you want I can make you a F2F comparison, cause I know both programs pretty darned well. One example where Ardour will win is for example the limited number of "slots" for plugins on each track in Nuendo. Ardour does not have this limitation. It's also not possible to copy/paste plugins in Nuendo, making it tricky to move one plugin/parameters from one place/track to another. And don't get me started on the routing possibilities, not to mention the speed. Only place Nuendo has a small advantage is in stability, even though I've had both system lockups and corrupted sessionfiles in it.

Reply Parent Score: 1