PlanetZ forums - scopeusers.com

Next on my list in trying out various vst compatible linux audio setups, is the combination of dssi-vst, and a sequencer called RoseGarden. RoseGarden is the pinnacle of linux MIDI. It's been around forever, and has gone through a lot of development. DSSI is sort of a VST standard for linux, and DSSI-VST is a wrapper that is limited to VST instruments. DSSI-VST has some serious limitations, like only being able to handle 2 output channels, not being able to get tempo info from host, etc. This is a serious cripple, so I would guess most people are turned off already. Anyway, RoseGarden is DSSI compatible, and can load DSSI synths. RoseGarden also has audio capabilities, and loads realtime effects, etc.. you'd be almost convinced this is the Cubase counterpart in Linux.

DSSI-VST has recently gone through a version update. Although you still have to manually compile the program, which wasn't as challenging I thought it would be, you no longer need to get the VST SDK from Steinberg. This is because they switched over to using the reverse engineered files from the guy who made LMMS. The point is, everyone's lives got a little easier.

RoseGarden looks like what MIDI only sequencers were.. 10 years go. I think that was about when the RoseGarden projects was started, and so it has a lot fo legacy traditions that are still recognizable. The program itself is quite stable. It looks sort of clunky, but there are more important issues. Of all the sequencers in Linux I've tried so far (LMMS, MuSE) I think RoseGarden is the most practical. Almost capable of serious production.

But as expected, it's not quite there yet. There are some elementary things that are flawed. I think many of the problems root in the old traditions that the program retains from the yester-MIDI sequencer days.. One such feature is the MIDI metronome. All MIDI tracks can be routed to a synth, or any ouput. The problem is, the MIDI metronome can only be routed OUT, as in out of the RoseGarden. And unfortunately, there is no audio-click option either. This means, to hear the metronome, you need to either have a physical outboard device to make the clicks, or launch an external program and use JACK (linux's rewire) to reroute the MIDI clicks from RoseGarden into whatever program that you want to use as the click source. Very stupid.

I did manage to lay down a 4 tracks with the strange metronome.. and I was surprised to see the CPU usage shoot up pretty fast. I'm pretty sure if the CPU usage bar is almost maxed out, it means I'm hitting a performance wall. So, at 11ms latency, 4 tracks (of which 2 are VSTi), 2-3 effects on each track, my P4 3ghz was maxed out. Something tells me my machine should be able to perform a little better.

There are also little things that will bug you. For example, there are no solo buttons. I don't see them anywhere. Not in the main track view, not on the mixer, no where. What were these guys thinking? Maybe I'm just missing a keyboard shortcut or something.. There is a "mute all tracks" menu item. (close!)

I liked the window management in this one. If you open a VSTi window, it comes up as a separate window. Actually, the mixer, or any auxiliary window you open, comes up as a separate window from the main track view. This means, you can drag them on to the second monitor and lay them out as you like. I've always wanted to do this, and my version of cubase can't do that.

The entire process of getting this setup to work, wasn't too bad. I had a bit of problem after compiling DSSI-VST, where I had to edit my start up script (like autoexec.bat) to set some environment variables, but other than that, there weren't any serious problems. I seriously thought this could be a cool alternative working environment. But who would have thought it would be brought down by a poor metronome implementation, and a bad mixer with no mute and solo buttons... Alas, it's been proven again that linux audio still has some ways to go before it becomes "productive".

To be fair, this setup isn't bad. It's far less a "joke" like all the other ones. I bet, if I spent serious time with it, perhaps I might be able to write something on it. Playing the VSTis was as smooth as can be, no clicks/pops, very good 11ms latency.. it's not completely hilariously broken.

It's still a bit of a shock tho, because since RoseGarden is a huge milestone in linux audio, the fact that its sequencer functionality, and integrity as a production tool was much below par sends a very vivid message. Again, the problem isn't with VSTi integration, but poor design on the host's side.

So anyway, I think I've just about tried all combinations here.. Seems like so far, Using linux's windows emulator (WINE - actually doesn't emulate, but allows you to run win files natively in linux), and running Reaper seems to be the best choice, simply because Reaper is a much more solid sequencer than anything linux has to offer natively.

Thanks for these reports Ken, they are fascinating for someone like me who doesn't have the time to check out this stuff. Obviously you know my thoughts from the other threads so I won't repeat them here. All I'll say is that I'd take my ancient WinXP/Logic5.5 setup over this any day. Still handles virtually any VST plug I throw at it, and for the rest there's EnergyXT This covers all the ones that matter for me. Logic 5.51 still has the most efficient and good-sounding audio engine I've come across on Windows, and obviously the MIDI editing is fast and intuitive.

I'd even rather set up a hackintosh than run Linux - lots of fiddling, but at least the rewards are usable and stable.

Reminder/pointer to the CCRMA site:
http://ccrma.stanford.edu/planetccrma/software/
Some people run this stuff for certain reasons.

I'm forcing myself to gain more experience with Ubuntu for other reasons.
But I have to say I am more comfortable in Fedora.

Kensuguro,

You say it is like a sequencer from 10 years ago, that is being generous. I tried this a while back with the Knoppix DVD. I don't see how anyone who is used to a modern sequencer could use this. It is nice that you are trying it so we don't have to. It would have a much bigger following if there was just one good sequencer program or pattern sequencer like Reason or Fruity Loops. It's a chicken or egg thing. I use open source stuff. I think we all do now but not for music. Maybe one day. I hope so. It's a great OS for surfing the web though.

I think Linux is used more for experimental development like Aura, CSound, Supercolider, PD etc. I must say though, I am really impressed with your perseverance Ken.

kensuguro wrote:.. There is a "mute all tracks" menu item. (close!)

Just wondering why no solo buttons. Don't think it could be so difficult to add them for programmer people that worked out around the app.

Click from ext devices ever fooled me due to different latency times...

I just got confirmation that the only way to get metronome is to route it to an external app or device. I've put in a feature request for an audio metronome. Still some more features I'd like to see tho.. Like Solo button on Mixer (turns out the blue buttons were mute, or more like "acitve/inactive" buttons), aux send pots and pre/post effects along with that, ability to vertically zoom each track separately in the main track view (someone already requested that), vsti parameter automation etc.. just so much it's missing.

So, the platform is dead. I mean, Reaper + asio-wine drivers would offer a proper sequencer with full vst/vsti capability (still crashes), but that's essentially not linux. It doesn't really take advantage of the sequencer, effects, or instruments that linux has to offer, so I think you'd be better off just doing it in Windows. Seems like the biggest benefit would be something like system security or something like that. Open source or not doesn't really matter at this point.

Bingo: I really do wonder if people who use software like ones you mentioned even do their mixing / editing in linux. From what I've seen at school, a lot of "experimental" people have very archaic work flow, like recording straight into a stereo mix, and cutting and pasting that mix (not multitrack), or a lot of PD guys had multi track within PD, but just recorded the stereo out of what came out of PD. In that sense, I guess it makes sense that there is no decent sequencer, because none of these guys have any use for it. Heck, when I used PD I had to build a mixer within PD because there were no other ways to get the job done right. (which took 3 full weeks to build)

I think my patience has run out pretty much.. I want to be fair, and say "this can't be done" only after I've tried most practical solutions. Especially because I know it will influence what people (just planetZ) think about linux audio, so I feel a bit of responsibility to be thorough.

My DAW is the most secure. I don't connect it to the net.

Most Linux apps (other than LMMS) don't try to be all-in-one tools so you will rarely find one that is. They will usually try to be good at one thing and interoperate with other apps via open standards. The solution to your metronome issue can be resolved by simply firing up a metronome application such as "klick". Rosegarden lets it know to begin "klicking" automagically through the jack transport. Your problem with solo-ing tracks can be accomplished by muting all tracks and then unmuting the one you want to listen to.

right. if all the apps worked and if the open standards were actually standardized, I might actually be able to write a tune at optimal speed. if not, I can always write my own app from ground up right? Linux it too much about the user having to twist and change his workflow to accommodate the machine. As with the solo track issue, the question is not whether there is a logical way for me to play 1 track and mute all the other or not. Ya, I can unmute 1 track and mute all the others. But why stop there when solo is much quicker and efficient... and employed by every sequencer out there? Like, why offer an alternative that is inferior?

I do agree though, that there are certain things linux excels at, which is specific aps like csound, pd or any of the other native synthesis platforms. I guess the main problem is that I'm trying to impose a windows based (or "vst + host" based) workflow onto linux.. I really wished it just worked, because it's such a smarter, leaner way to go...

kensuguro wrote:right. if all the apps worked

Since we all know that all Windows apps work perfectly.

kensuguro wrote:and if the open standards were actually standardized

Which open standards did you find not be standardized?

kensuguro wrote:if not, I can always write my own app from ground up right?

Just like you can on Windows. Not sure how that's relevant here. Unless you mean that you can't contribute to any of the proprietary apps on Windows like you can contribute to the open source apps on Linux. It seems like that would be more of a con towards Windows then.

kensuguro wrote:Linux it too much about the user having to twist and change his workflow to accommodate the machine.

You could say that about anything.

kensuguro wrote:As with the solo track issue, the question is not whether there is a logical way for me to play 1 track and mute all the other or not. Ya, I can unmute 1 track and mute all the others. But why stop there when solo is much quicker and efficient

I can see how the extra mouse click would impede the creative progress. Just think how bad things were in the days of tape when you might have had to re-cable your studio for each take. It's a wonder how anybody got by.

kensuguro wrote:I do agree though, that there are certain things linux excels at, which is specific aps like csound, pd or any of the other native synthesis platforms. I guess the main problem is that I'm trying to impose a windows based (or "vst + host" based) workflow onto linux.. I really wished it just worked, because it's such a smarter, leaner way to go...

If you had no plans of adjusting your workflow then why bother looking in the first place?

gee sr1, you're taking this rather personally.


what he's saying is that for him, Linux is still too big of a pain in the ass, compared to osx and windoze, even if it's a "better" os. obviously, the music industry agrees....he's not saying that windoze is cooler and that Linux users are booger heads or anything like that.

garyb wrote:gee sr1, you're taking this rather personally.

Actually I was just suggesting workarounds to those huge, showstopping problems. I figured someone who stated that it was their "responsibility to be thorough" would appreciate that if they were truly interested in looking at alternatives. I didn't realize that discussing the merits of one system vs another constituted starting a holy war. My apologies for not sticking with the status quo.

now your feelings are hurt again.

this thread is pretty old.....

nobody has a problem with the discussion. right now, however, regardless of what a great os Linux is(even though unix is stupid compared to the original apple os), Linux is useless for the majority of the music industry for many of the reasons that ken mentioned(i agree that the solo issue is small, but a solo button is pretty basic to a mixing console. the lack of a solo button is a symbol of just how underdeveloped the software is. for those wishing to use Linux, for whatever reason, the workaround is certainly doable and only a problem when you get 20 or 30 tracks going...). if installs were simple and the software really existed, i'm sure many of us would be using Linux. it's not like anyone really loves m$(except for bc).

afaics, the real problem with open source is the babies who expect people to do everything for them for free...in a world of proper cooperation, open source is the only sane choice. in the real world, people die of starvation or lose their homes from lack of income. i'm sure that this tends to limit the truly great open source apps and drivers...

SR1 wrote:

kensuguro wrote:As with the solo track issue, the question is not whether there is a logical way for me to play 1 track and mute all the other or not. Ya, I can unmute 1 track and mute all the others. But why stop there when solo is much quicker and efficient

I can see how the extra mouse click would impede the creative progress. Just think how bad things were in the days of tape when you might have had to re-cable your studio for each take. It's a wonder how anybody got by.

Sorry but this statement is absolutely ridiculous. The fact that you, and most Linux programmers, cannot understand this is precisely why Linux will never be a widely accepted platform for music/audio work.

Using Linux is actually more like trying to sync up 8x 2-track tape machines instead of using a single 16-track machine when both are available

Sorry to be harsh but the truth just is sometimes.

darkrezin wrote:Using Linux is actually more like trying to sync up 8x 2-track tape machines instead of using a single 16-track machine when both are available

Can you quantify that statement?

The evidence is right up there in the first post, and all the workarounds you have suggested. When in a creative frame of mind, the last thing someone wants to do is perform unnecessary workarounds, start 15 different apps and remember to save their settings when 1 would do just fine, and so on.

darkrezin wrote:The evidence is right up there in the first post, and all the workarounds you have suggested. When in a creative frame of mind, the last thing someone wants to do is perform unnecessary workarounds, start 15 different apps and remember to save their settings when 1 would do just fine, and so on.

Your creative frame of mind must be extremely fragile.

Look man, I'm not gonna argue with someone so determined to believe in something. But out here in the real world, the vast majority of people find it unacceptable to even start a 2nd application like Scope (you do know what Scope is, right? Or did you find this thread on Google and join the forum to set the world to rights.... ). So something like Linux where you have to start another app for a metronome is not really gonna cut the mustard for many.

I didn't say that Linux is evil and it should be banned, I just said it wasn't going to become a widely-accepted platfom for music anytime soon. We could argue until the cows come home but it still won't change that simple fact.

I'm sorry, I didn't realize we were discussing beliefs. But, you're absolutely right. The music industry is clearly not the right place for anyone to try to do anything differently.