I'm Dumping Sonar 4P and Cubase SX3 for Ardour/Audacity/Ro..

[Guest]

Archived from groups: cakewalk.audio,alt.steinberg.cubase,rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Sat, 11 Jun 2005 17:41:49 +0000, Aphelion wrote:

> On Sat, 11 Jun 2005 13:43:20 GMT, philicorda
> <philicorda@localhost.com> wrote:
>
>>Here's a list of VST plugins that are known to work in Ardour on x86 Linux
>>under Wine/FST emulation. The main stumbling block at the moment is the
>>redistribution licence for the VST header files that requires you to
>>either download them separately from Steinberg and compile VST support
>>yourself (difficult), or buy a distro like Fervent. There is little to no
>>efficiency hit from the 'emulation' as far as I know. Running VST plugins
>>is Linux is still pretty raw, though it's easier than running Jack apps in
>>Windows.
>>
>>AbsynthVST.dll
>>Ambience.dll
>>AnechoicRoomSimulator.dll
>
> <snip-snip>
>
> Sorry..... using real time applications running under an emulation
> does not cut it. I have nothing against Linux and it's variations but
> there is currently no way you can come close to matching features
> available in modern Windows sequencers. About a year ago I was willing
> to give Linux a try but after a lot of investigation I soon realized
> it what a futile attempt it would become.

As kraig pointed out, it's not a problem in theory for plugins, hence the
quotes around 'emulation' as it's not really emulation, but rather
providing a windows compatible API.

I would say that running audio apps like Cubase,Logic etc under Wine
is never going to be that great (If they would work at all)... There are
too many differences in the OSs to trust them to be reliable, even if the
execution speed was the same. Plugins are not so OS specific or demanding,
so it's possible. Copy protection is a real problem though.

Linux audio apps are nowhere near as advanced as those available for
windows... but hey, give me virtually unlimited tracks of 24/96 audio with
non linear editing and automation plus a good software modular and I can
just about rough it. I work mostly with real instruments, and like
outboard effects, so I don't need much, at least for my personal recording.

>
> To say nothing of the lack of audio card support. Specifically, full
> featured audio support. What good is having an audio card that supports
> 16 channels I/O, ADAT compatibility, S/PDIF... if under Linux all you
> get is stereo I/O.

Which card is that?

>
> re: Linux
>
> I like the idea... but I'd rather pay for what works and what I need.

To do anything else would be foolish.

>
> Ap

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: cakewalk.audio,alt.steinberg.cubase,rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Sat, 11 Jun 2005 21:23:11 GMT, philicorda
<philicorda@localhost.com> wrote:

>On Sat, 11 Jun 2005 17:41:49 +0000, Aphelion wrote:

>> Sorry..... using real time applications running under an emulation
>> does not cut it. I have nothing against Linux and it's variations but
>> there is currently no way you can come close to matching features
>> available in modern Windows sequencers. About a year ago I was willing
>> to give Linux a try but after a lot of investigation I soon realized
>> it what a futile attempt it would become.
>
>As kraig pointed out, it's not a problem in theory for plugins, hence the
>quotes around 'emulation' as it's not really emulation, but rather
>providing a windows compatible API.

Yes, in theory.

>I would say that running audio apps like Cubase,Logic etc under Wine
>is never going to be that great (If they would work at all)... There are
>too many differences in the OSs to trust them to be reliable, even if the
>execution speed was the same. Plugins are not so OS specific or demanding,
>so it's possible. Copy protection is a real problem though.
>
>Linux audio apps are nowhere near as advanced as those available for
>windows... but hey, give me virtually unlimited tracks of 24/96 audio with
>non linear editing and automation plus a good software modular and I can
>just about rough it. I work mostly with real instruments, and like
>outboard effects, so I don't need much, at least for my personal recording.

I too work mostly with live musicians w/outboard mixer, synths and
some effects. However... it would be difficult to lose 99%
compatibility with other musicians/studios, lose great plugins that
I've paid good money for. I know East/West Symphonic Gold edition is
mot going to run under Linux! .

>> To say nothing of the lack of audio card support. Specifically, full
>> featured audio support. What good is having an audio card that supports
>> 16 channels I/O, ADAT compatibility, S/PDIF... if under Linux all you
>> get is stereo I/O.
>
>Which card is that?

The MOTU series, RME, Lynx.

Cards that offer professional audio features.
When I looked at Linux (a year ago) audio card support was seriously
lacking. Cards that did have support did not have all features
available, only basic I/O.

Is there now audio support for 8 or 16 Input audio devices?

>> re: Linux
>>
>> I like the idea... but I'd rather pay for what works and what I need.
>
>To do anything else would be foolish.

Those that tout the advantages of Linux might also consider posting
it's downside. There's no need to slam exisiting Win software (not you
Phil) to prove a point about Linux. (if there is a point other than
it's free, efficient, not Windows and lacks professional features.)

That said, I will probably order the Fervent software CD to see how
things have developed.

Ap

 

[kitekrazy]

Archived from groups: cakewalk.audio,alt.steinberg.cubase,rec.audio.pro (More info?)

J.C. Scott wrote:
Can you explain again why anyone
> would want to switch from Windows/Mac to Linux for recording? I fail to
> see any real benefit.

Hopefully someday Linux will be great for audio. Windows and Mac have
their drawbacks as well.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: cakewalk.audio,alt.steinberg.cubase,rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Good.

--

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: cakewalk.audio,alt.steinberg.cubase,rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Hi. Troll here. By the way, what exactly is wrong with being a troll? I
simply read the posts when I get a chance to and see if something interests
me. This thread certainly did just that. *L* I just wanted to note(for what
ever it matters from a troll) that the first guy who said he was switching
to Linux didn't seem to me as though he was doing or saying anything wrong
in the very first post. Did I miss something there? Mod did seem to(from
what I saw) "attack" first. Either way, it turned out to be fairly amusing.
I had a few chuckles here and there. In case I did miss it, is there
something wrong with switching to Linux or selling your legal copies of
software on Ebay(if they could be sold, which he seemed to have believed to
be the case)? I personally feel that you should have EVERY right to sell
something that you have purchased. Cakewalk saying I can't sell something I
have paid for(a product, a thing, something I have in my hands that I OWN)
is CRAZY! *L* Anyway, certainly not joining in either side here, just
wondering if I missed something. Back to the troll thing real quick
though... what exactly is so bad about being a troll to a newsgroup? Am I
missing something there as well? Am I expected to log on everyday and type
something so that someone somewhere will think I'm actively participating?
When I do log on, I always throw in a post when it seems I have info that
may help some how, but I don't go to newsgroups very often. Any newsgroup I
ever go to for any subject is just to get info. I didn't realize they were
used for anything else. If I have something to share, I certainly do out of
common courtesy, but I don't just "hang out" and post on them all day. I
have a job and a family that require more time of me than that, and, I enjoy
spending time with friends and family here in real life, so seeking that on
the internet just seems a bit trivial. hmm... that sounded sarcastic. Didn't
mean it that way, I'm just not sure I'm getting the whole concept of this
particular newsgroup? I use a newsgroup like any other type of manual or
research for something I'm doing. If there's something I'm un-shure of, I
pop in and see if it's been discussed, and if not, I post a question and the
nice people here will usually post a reply, and while I'm here, I scan over
other posts to see if I have anything useful to contribute. Let me know if
I'm missing the mark here? Have a good day.

J. Anthony

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: cakewalk.audio,alt.steinberg.cubase,rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On , "J. Anthony" <topdaddy@charter.net> wrote:


> In case I did miss it, is there
>something wrong with switching to Linux or selling your legal copies of
>software on Ebay(if they could be sold, which he seemed to have believed to
>be the case)? I personally feel that you should have EVERY right to sell
>something that you have purchased. Cakewalk saying I can't sell something I
>have paid for(a product, a thing, something I have in my hands that I OWN)
>is CRAZY! *L* Anyway,

Of course you can sell it, however it can't be registered in the (new)
purchasers name or upgraded.

Ap

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: cakewalk.audio,alt.steinberg.cubase,rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 00:12:44 -0500, "J. Anthony"
<topdaddy@charter.net> wrote:

>Let me know if
>I'm missing the mark here? Have a good day.

I think you don't know what a "troll" is.

CubaseFAQ www.laurencepayne.co.uk/CubaseFAQ.htm
"Possibly the world's least impressive web site": George Perfect

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: cakewalk.audio,alt.steinberg.cubase,rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"philicorda" <philicorda@localhost.com> wrote in message

>
> As kraig pointed out, it's not a problem in theory for plugins, hence the
> quotes around 'emulation' as it's not really emulation, but rather
> providing a windows compatible API.

So that's why 'DX' gets dropped from every plugin discussion ?

geoff

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: cakewalk.audio,alt.steinberg.cubase,rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 10:25:38 +1200, Geoff Wood wrote:

>
> "philicorda" <philicorda@localhost.com> wrote in message
>
>>
>> As kraig pointed out, it's not a problem in theory for plugins, hence the
>> quotes around 'emulation' as it's not really emulation, but rather
>> providing a windows compatible API.
>
> So that's why 'DX' gets dropped from every plugin discussion ?

There is zero DirectX audio plugin support. Not many VST plugins
work either. Most software uses the LADSPA plugin API or connects via Jack.

>
> geoff

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: cakewalk.audio,alt.steinberg.cubase,rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Fri, 10 Jun 2005 23:56:46 GMT, toofar@fromthesun.com (Aphelion)
wrote:

>On 10 Jun 2005 16:11:26 -0700, "Wilson Pettibone"
><wilson_pettibone@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>I've really had it with the bloated, buggy software on the Windows
>>platform and I have finally made the decision to move over to Linux
>>because all the software I need is free.
>>I've been test driving some Linux software for the last couple of weeks
>>and truthfully I can't find anything that my Linux software can't do
>>that the others with Windows can do.
>
>What are you using for an audio card?

That's a good question. I've tried running various audio interfaces in
Rosegarden and cannot get anything to work above and beyond the 16-bit
44.1KHz Linux native audio support. Maybe someday Linux will support
advanced audio standards, and maybe one day manufacturers of advanced
audio interfaces will started releasing Linux drivers, but for now,
Linux audio is just a nifty toy.

- TR

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: cakewalk.audio,alt.steinberg.cubase,rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In news:1118529374.934345.96860@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com the killer
robot "J.C. Scott" <jacyscott@hotmail.com> grabbed the controls of the
spaceship cakewalk.audio and pressed these buttons...

> Yes, I mean who doesn't want to jump through hoops and make it more
> complex to record than necessary? I ask you. Run an emulator to use
> apps that I can run in Windows itself with full compatibility? If that
> floats your boat, more power to you. Can you explain again why anyone
> would want to switch from Windows/Mac to Linux for recording? I fail to
> see any real benefit.

Hehe, he wants to get away from "bloatware", and use a Linux recording app
that uses Windows emulation for plugins. That sounds less bloated. <g>

--
Remove YourHeadFromYourAss to reply by email.
_______ _____ ___ _____ ____
/ ___/ / / __/ |/ / |/ / _ )/ __ \
/ (_ / /__/ _// / / _ / /_/ /
\___/____/___/_/|_/_/|_/____/\____/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Glennbo These go to eleven
Non-Linear Sound http/www.soundclick.com/glennbo
Hear My Music http/www.soundclick.com/jambits

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: cakewalk.audio,alt.steinberg.cubase,rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In news:gvPqe.18693$mZ2.3519@fe07.lga the killer robot "J. Anthony"
<topdaddy@charter.net> grabbed the controls of the spaceship
cakewalk.audio and pressed these buttons...

> I personally feel that you should have EVERY right to sell
> something that you have purchased. Cakewalk saying I can't sell
> something I have paid for(a product, a thing, something I have in my
> hands that I OWN)

You don't own *any* of the software you have. Read the freeking license
agreement. You own a *license* to *use* the software, nothing more.

--
Remove YourHeadFromYourAss to reply by email.
_______ _____ ___ _____ ____
/ ___/ / / __/ |/ / |/ / _ )/ __ \
/ (_ / /__/ _// / / _ / /_/ /
\___/____/___/_/|_/_/|_/____/\____/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Glennbo These go to eleven
Non-Linear Sound http/www.soundclick.com/glennbo
Hear My Music http/www.soundclick.com/jambits

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: cakewalk.audio,alt.steinberg.cubase,rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Sat, 11 Jun 2005 21:49:22 +0000, Aphelion wrote:

> On Sat, 11 Jun 2005 21:23:11 GMT, philicorda
> <philicorda@localhost.com> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 11 Jun 2005 17:41:49 +0000, Aphelion wrote:
>
>>> Sorry..... using real time applications running under an emulation
>>> does not cut it. I have nothing against Linux and it's variations but
>>> there is currently no way you can come close to matching features
>>> available in modern Windows sequencers. About a year ago I was willing
>>> to give Linux a try but after a lot of investigation I soon realized
>>> it what a futile attempt it would become.
>>
>>As kraig pointed out, it's not a problem in theory for plugins, hence the
>>quotes around 'emulation' as it's not really emulation, but rather
>>providing a windows compatible API.
>
> Yes, in theory.
>
>>I would say that running audio apps like Cubase,Logic etc under Wine
>>is never going to be that great (If they would work at all)... There are
>>too many differences in the OSs to trust them to be reliable, even if the
>>execution speed was the same. Plugins are not so OS specific or demanding,
>>so it's possible. Copy protection is a real problem though.
>>
>>Linux audio apps are nowhere near as advanced as those available for
>>windows... but hey, give me virtually unlimited tracks of 24/96 audio with
>>non linear editing and automation plus a good software modular and I can
>>just about rough it. I work mostly with real instruments, and like
>>outboard effects, so I don't need much, at least for my personal recording.
>
> I too work mostly with live musicians w/outboard mixer, synths and
> some effects. However... it would be difficult to lose 99%
> compatibility with other musicians/studios, lose great plugins that
> I've paid good money for. I know East/West Symphonic Gold edition is
> mot going to run under Linux! .

That's the way it is. There is no way I can ever lose my Windows+CubaseSX
system as I have so much archived material recorded with it. Also, it's
reliable and pleasant to use. Compatibility is another issue. I can't
exchange files reliably with other SX users on the Mac, or at all with
other PC users using a more recent upgrade of SX, let alone with other
Windows sequencers.

I get the feeling Linux audio is going to be around a long time,
and I'm in no hurry to dump a working system. As a second audio computer
in the studio it has proved useful though, so I keep hacking away with it.

>
>>> To say nothing of the lack of audio card support. Specifically, full
>>> featured audio support. What good is having an audio card that
>>> supports 16 channels I/O, ADAT compatibility, S/PDIF... if under Linux
>>> all you get is stereo I/O.
>>
>>Which card is that?
>
> The MOTU series, RME, Lynx.

There's virtually no support for MOTU cards, and probably never
will be. (Only their little midi interfaces work I think.)
Lynx is the same.

RME cards are well supported with gui mixers and all io as far as I can
tell. Not used one myself.

>
> Cards that offer professional audio features. When I looked at Linux (a
> year ago) audio card support was seriously lacking. Cards that did have
> support did not have all features available, only basic I/O.
>
> Is there now audio support for 8 or 16 Input audio devices?

Yes. I have Delta1010 and Echoaudio Gina20 with all io working and nice
mixers for monitoring, clocking, scms, emphasis, spdif consumer/pro etc.

>
>>> re: Linux
>>>
>>> I like the idea... but I'd rather pay for what works and what I need.
>>
>>To do anything else would be foolish.
>
> Those that tout the advantages of Linux might also consider posting it's
> downside. There's no need to slam exisiting Win software (not you Phil)
> to prove a point about Linux. (if there is a point other than it's free,
> efficient, not Windows and lacks professional features.)
>
> That said, I will probably order the Fervent software CD to see how
> things have developed.

I'd be interested to hear what it's like.

>
> Ap

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: cakewalk.audio,alt.steinberg.cubase,rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Good point. Still silly. I should be able to sell my right to use it if I no
longer need to. By the way, someone posted that I must not know what a troll
is. I guess I don't. Could someone spell it out for me please? I guess I
never knew what exactly was meant by that term. Later...

J. Anthony
"Glennbo" <vdrumsYourHeadFromYourAss@cox.net> wrote in message
news:Xns9673692A9FB24BrownShoesDontMakeIt@68.6.19.6...
> In news:gvPqe.18693$mZ2.3519@fe07.lga the killer robot "J. Anthony"
> <topdaddy@charter.net> grabbed the controls of the spaceship
> cakewalk.audio and pressed these buttons...
>
>> I personally feel that you should have EVERY right to sell
>> something that you have purchased. Cakewalk saying I can't sell
>> something I have paid for(a product, a thing, something I have in my
>> hands that I OWN)
>
> You don't own *any* of the software you have. Read the freeking license
> agreement. You own a *license* to *use* the software, nothing more.
>
> --
> Remove YourHeadFromYourAss to reply by email.
> _______ _____ ___ _____ ____
> / ___/ / / __/ |/ / |/ / _ )/ __ \
> / (_ / /__/ _// / / _ / /_/ /
> \___/____/___/_/|_/_/|_/____/\____/
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Glennbo These go to eleven
> Non-Linear Sound http/www.soundclick.com/glennbo
> Hear My Music http/www.soundclick.com/jambits

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: cakewalk.audio,alt.steinberg.cubase,rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 17:48:01 GMT, philicorda
<philicorda@localhost.com> wrote:

>> That said, I will probably order the Fervent software CD to see how
>> things have developed.
>
>I'd be interested to hear what it's like.

Hi,

Just spoke (emailed) with the fellow from Fervent, looks like I'll
be ordering the CD next week. Wasn't sure if they ship to the US but
it's all covered in the base price.

Ap

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: cakewalk.audio,alt.steinberg.cubase,rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On , "J. Anthony" <topdaddy@charter.net> wrote:

>NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 16:56:11 MST
>Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 18:56:11 -0500
>Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com cakewalk.audio:140961 alt.steinberg.cubase:213066 rec.audio.pro:1179523
>
>Good point. Still silly. I should be able to sell my right to use it if I no
>longer need to. By the way, someone posted that I must not know what a troll
>is. I guess I don't. Could someone spell it out for me please? I guess I
>never knew what exactly was meant by that term. Later...

A very excellnt desciption.

http/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll


As for the software: As mentioned, you cansell it but the purchaser
will not have rights to tech support or upgrades, neither can it be
registered in his/her name.

Before Steinberg was bought by Pinnacle and subsquently sold to
Yamaha. You could sell the software by informing Steinberg (by post)
of the new owners name, your name and the software's serial number.
The new owner could then pay a flat $50 fee to register the software
in their name.

Don't know if the above procedure is still in place, doubtful.

Ap

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: cakewalk.audio,alt.steinberg.cubase,rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Aphelion wrote:

> On , "J. Anthony" <topdaddy@charter.net> wrote:
>
>
>>NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 16:56:11 MST
>>Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 18:56:11 -0500
>>Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com cakewalk.audio:140961 alt.steinberg.cubase:213066 rec.audio.pro:1179523
>>
>>Good point. Still silly. I should be able to sell my right to use it if I no
>>longer need to. By the way, someone posted that I must not know what a troll
>>is. I guess I don't. Could someone spell it out for me please? I guess I
>>never knew what exactly was meant by that term. Later...
>
>
> A very excellnt desciption.
>
> http/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll
>
>
> As for the software: As mentioned, you cansell it but the purchaser
> will not have rights to tech support or upgrades, neither can it be
> registered in his/her name.
>
> Before Steinberg was bought by Pinnacle and subsquently sold to
> Yamaha. You could sell the software by informing Steinberg (by post)
> of the new owners name, your name and the software's serial number.
> The new owner could then pay a flat $50 fee to register the software
> in their name.
>
> Don't know if the above procedure is still in place, doubtful.
>
> Ap
>
>
I think Cakewalk will let you transfer the license, but you do have to
involve them in order for them to recognise it.

KO

 

[kitekrazy]

Archived from groups: cakewalk.audio,alt.steinberg.cubase,rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Kraig Olmstead wrote:

>>
>>
> I think Cakewalk will let you transfer the license, but you do have to
> involve them in order for them to recognise it.
>
> KO


Doesn't Cakewalk also have a 30 day money back guarantee?

 

[RainDog]

Archived from groups: cakewalk.audio,alt.steinberg.cubase,rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Aphelion wrote:
>>Interesting. What about all those VSTs, Dxis, plugins, etc? Will they run in
>>Linux?
>
> No, they won't... but he won't need them as his Soundblaster Live has
> builit in effects! Oh wait, SBLive effects aren't supported in
> Linux... darn!
>
> Ap
>>RM

Go to Google and search for' vst and linux' and come out with these results:

http/www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=vst+and+linux&btnG=Google+Search&meta=

Specifically look at this: http/www.djcj.org/LAU/ladspavst/

They say vsts can run under linux using wine, but it looks like a major
pain to set up. I have used Linux for several years and have more than
enough technical skills, but I'd rather would rather spend my music
time recording with Cubase, Tracktion etc and vstis on Windows for now.
If all this could be done with one install they might have something.
But not yet for vsti use.