digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

See the original image at hehe2.net —

Free, Professional Music Production: A Linux Introduction

hehe2.net — If you ’re thinking of getting SONAR 8 Studio for your audio needs, be prepared to shell out $369 for it. OR you can do it totally free! With Linux we can make music, and from a software standpoint, it’s going to cost us nothing.

show profanity settings
expand all
  • nerddtvg, on 10/05/2008, -3/+40For those who do not need such a massive program, Audacity (http://audacity.sourceforge.net%29 works great. It can mix, edit, and export as many tracks as your computer can handle. And it's cross-platform!
    • meheartrobot, on 10/05/2008, -1/+21But a DAW it is not.
    • roxgod666, on 10/05/2008, -1/+11Isn't Audacity only for editing audio rather than producing it? Music shake makes really cool beats but you actually have to purchase the finished song at the end.
    • ArthurSucks, on 10/05/2008, -0/+7Audacity might be missing a lot, but for trimming and normalizing ( with a visual representation ) it's hard to beat.
    • lennybird, on 10/05/2008, -1/+7For music production, you're going to need a hardware interface. M-Audio makes some cheap ones. I recommend the TC Electronic konnekt 6, though. $250, has a XLR mic preamp and two balanced 1/4" guitar pre-amp jacks. Don't expect to just jack your guitar in via 1/8" - 1/4" through your line-in on the back panel of your computer. Need the A/D converter that's in it as well. It comes with Cubase LE4, too. I'm completely new to music composition, so I'm a little over my head, here. All I can say is Audacity is hell for music creation. Since you need the hardware, you might as well get something bundled with some decent software.
      • praisethelard, on 10/05/2008, -1/+4You don't need any of that to compose.
      • lennybird, on 10/05/2008, -0/+2Sorry, horrible misuse of the word.
    • jdubdub, on 10/05/2008, -2/+8Audacity is like a fancy version of Sound Recorder for Windows... it doesn't even remotely compare to modern commercial audio editors!
      • damentz, on 10/05/2008, -2/+1Why did you say that, you just made Sound Recorder look bad. Why doesn't Windows come with this tool by default? Pretty much every full fledged Linux distro includes this as their "Sound Recorder" of choice.
    • DrStephanHeimer, on 10/05/2008, -1/+1That is a drastic understatement sir!
    • ATLien74, on 10/05/2008, -0/+1Audacity is more of a sound editor than a multi-tracker. For Windows, I used to use Cubase, Sound Forge, and Acid. Now, on the Mac, it's all about Logic Pro!

      If you are a singer, guitarist, bassist, or whatever.... you need an audio interface to get the sound into the computer, and I recommend Line 6. You can get a USB-TonePort really cheap, which has Mic and Guitar inputs, plus software that models and emulates lots of extremely expensive classic gear. You get Marshall, Fender, Boogie, and many more guitar amp sounds, as well as clssic effects, plus you also get those million dollar Neve Pre-Amp models for some really amazing sounding vocal tracks! They have different versions with more or less inputs, and one that has a MIDI keyboard built in. I think the single input one goes for about $50 and the pro-model 8-input one goes for around 400 or 500 i think. Best sound for the buck by FAR!!!
  • svensko, on 10/05/2008, -7/+23I love Linux.
  • EagleGoalie93, on 10/05/2008, -17/+1Daw skeet skeet ***** skeet skeet.
  • AzureRise, on 10/05/2008, -6/+2Cool article, I might try some of these programs.
  • burninginh2o, on 10/05/2008, -6/+12I think this is all fine and dandy, but the chances of using your sound interface are pretty slim.
    • ArthurSucks, on 10/05/2008, -0/+3I have yet to find a sound interface I couldn't connect too...
    • dedknedy, on 10/05/2008, -0/+1I take it any digidesign hardware is out of the question.
    • bedouin, on 10/05/2008, -4/+2I use a PreSonus Firebox with Logic or Garageband (depending on what I'm doing) and sync it up with either Reason or an Akai MPC. I just Googled to see if the Firebox was supported with ease in Linux and just got a bunch of forum posts on people trying to get it to work right, sometimes successfully.

      This is another one of those articles that makes people who do serious work think Linux will work out for them, only for them to find out it was a bunch of ***** and never touch Linux again. You'd be better off just saying, "It's not quite ready for prime time, but here's some cool things we're up to."
      • int19h, on 10/05/2008, -0/+2It's PreSunus' fault if they don't support Linux though. Blame the right people here.
      • Cupantae, on 10/05/2008, -0/+2This isn't about using the same programmes on Linux, this is about viable alternatives to those programmes
    • djauto23, on 10/05/2008, -0/+1Well, yeah, but if you're planning to set up a real music/studio solution, you're gonna wanna check that the hardware you're planning to use works with the software you're planning to use. Rule of the thumb is that M-Audio and RME PCI cards work great, a whole range of firewire interfaces, and all USB interfaces which are "standard" (never knew what that means) USB soundcards. For firewire solutions that work see http://www.ffado.org/?q=devicesupport/list

      The point is of course that you should check the compatibility before you buy the hardware. Not everything works on the mac either, even though there's better branding on products about wether they work on the mac or not. Linux could benefit of having some similar sort of "works with linux" on hardware products.
      • jihadjoe75, on 10/05/2008, -0/+1I record via apogee ensemble. Guess I'm out of the picture.
  • DroppedGT, on 10/05/2008, -12/+1um.. mininov.... thepirat... you know you were thinking about it.
  • RadiatedAnt, on 10/05/2008, -4/+17You don't pay to do it, you pay to make the job easier.
    • UKsHaDoW, on 10/05/2008, -1/+6Which saves you time, which over time saves you money. People often forget that.
  • Karohan, on 10/05/2008, -2/+6Yup I love Ubuntu Studio...just wished jack wasn't such a pain to use/set up
    • bieber, on 10/05/2008, -1/+4Amen to that. I'd love to give ardour a try, but simply apt-getting it apparently doesn't set it up correctly, and it's certainly not important enough to go through God only knows how much configuration for :/ Here's hoping it all gets well-integrated some day...
  • kd420, on 10/05/2008, -0/+13I've tried Audacity and Ardour and if you want more advanced editing/recording then Ardour is the way to go. But the great thing is that you can try both, no hassle!
    • praisethelard, on 10/05/2008, -1/+3Too bad Ardour isn't available for Windows.
  • tava0002, on 10/05/2008, -10/+2I'm drunk right now but I'll digg this and read it tomorrow as it sounds like something I've very interested in.
    • tava0002, on 10/05/2008, -9/+2Edit: I still need Linux to support Line 6 products, especially the PODxt. Do you hear that Line 6?!

      I'm sure your top developers will be working on that tomorrow[sigh]. Or maybe I'll write a good driver for it, *****!

      Edit: I don't have time to write a Linux driver for Line 6 the POD, so I won't buy one of their products until they do! Ha! How bout that?!
  • nitsnipe, on 10/05/2008, -1/+12The problem for some people is they since they get these products for free they do not get to appreciate the value they have. Whereas if you pay for something, you would want to get your money's worth back, thus you're going to try harder to understand how to use it. With open-source apps you're a lot more likely to just give up(i.e. GIMP is always going to be a pain to use).

    Nevertheless, i'd recommend you try out Hydrogen first. It's very easy to use and making beats is quite fun.
    • peestandingup, on 10/05/2008, -12/+2Not to mention that high profile apps that are free usually suck.
    • dogfood, on 10/05/2008, -0/+3I agree that people give up too easy on open source products because they view them as inferior to products that cost a lot of money. Recently, I abandoned Dreamweaver for Aptana Studio and payed for the pro upgrade for three machines (less than the price of one copy of Dreamweaver) because it was in every way superior to Dreamweaver for what I do. I advise everyone to give products like Ardour, Hydrogen, and Aptana a few hours of playing and reading documentation before you write them off. You might not only save thousands of dollars, but find features that are lacking in the expensive brands.
    • bipolarruledout, on 10/05/2008, -0/+1I will admit that most open source applications are TECHNICALY better. This however isn't worth the megabytes on your hard drive if you can't figure out how to use the damn thing. People buy commercial software not because it is necessarily better but because it's very usable and well documented. Open source applications such as FireFox also prove that people will in fact use well designed open source software even if they already have a suitable alternative such as IE.

      UI design (and documentation) are the major issues which need to be addressed in open source applications, not their technical capabilities.
      • flatfish, on 10/07/2008, -0/+1Bingo! We have a winner!
        Before ya'll bury me, I happen to like Audacity and Ardour and yes they are fantastic value's for the money, however Audacity is no SoundForge and Ardour is no Nuendo.
        The major problem with these and other Linux programs is that the PLUGINS, like Ivory (a stunningly realistic piano), Waves, Sonnox, URS and all the others do not work, or have limited functionality with Linux.
        Many of these software plugins are super accurate software versions of classic recording studio desks, effects devices, instruments etc.

        Without full VSTI support, Linux audio is well behind the 8 ball.

        The other problem, as bipolarruledo points out is the UI.

        Why do you think some professionals prefer Nuendo while others perfer Protools, or Sonar?
        They all pretty much do the same thing.
        It's the UI, the help system, the support structure etc.
        When you are using something 16 hours a day, a poor UI will quickly become a major impediment to your work.

        Linux DAW programs are off to a good start but it's tools are just way too rough around the edges to be considered for professional use.
        Hopefully this will change in the near future.
        The fact that Ardour is being used in the Harrison Console/Desk is a big encouragement however that is really more of an embedded device type application.
  • Meekus, on 10/05/2008, -4/+5Awesome article! I didn't know these programs even existed for linux. Time to fire up apt-get....
  • nitsnipe, on 10/05/2008, -0/+8He forgot to mention about LMMS (Linux Multimedia Studio)

    http://lmms.sourceforge.net/screenshots.php
  • Sneakernets, on 10/05/2008, -0/+5Still no well-written, free scorewriters--- which is what I need, unfortunately.
  • dogfood, on 10/05/2008, -0/+4Is there a Guitar Rig equivalent for linux? I have played with Aurdor and it is pretty decent- got it to work well with a standard M-audio Firewire setup, but I would need a good guitar emulator to start using it for real.
    • ArthurSucks, on 10/05/2008, -0/+1JACK-Rack with Monitor setup in Jack. Get the latency down to sub .5 milliseconds and you should have no problem. Make sure you get the LADSPA effects too.
  • candyman420, on 10/05/2008, -1/+27"The program comes with a decent set of effects from compression to reverb"

    What the author doesn't seem to understand is that if you want to make professional sounding music, "decent" effects aren't really good enough. The programs need to support VST (or Audio Units, but that's a mac thing).. then you can load GOOD compressors, reverbs and EQs like the stuff Universal Audio makes; 3rd party effects are generally tons better than the built-in plugs.

    Then there is the issue of how these programs stack up to Logic, Cubase, Sonar, Protools, etc in terms of audio engine quality. This free stuff may be adequate if you're an amateur hobbyist, and they may have some of the same features, but if he's making a serious comparison to the real, pro audio industry standard apps, that's a bit of a stretch.
    • Shirleycakes, on 10/05/2008, -0/+6Couldn't agree more. The entirety of my production sound is not so much based in the host program as the hardware (mics, preamps) and plugins. If there's no VST it's nothing more than windows Sound Recorder to me.
    • SLiPSTR34M, on 10/05/2008, -1/+9Agreed. There's a reason people and studios are constantly shelling out hundreds upon thousands of dollars for all this software- Reason. Cubase, DP, Logic, Kontact, GPO, protools. If the free stuff was truly 'professional' quality, people wouldn't be paying $399 for auto tune.
      • spyd3rweb, on 10/05/2008, -3/+10Does anyone remember back to the days when there was no such thing as auto tune, and people actually had to have talent?
      • SLiPSTR34M, on 10/05/2008, -3/+1..... Rhianna........
      • DigitAl56K, on 10/05/2008, -1/+4Forget auto-tune. These days people just use auto-coldplay, auto-brittney, and auto-coversong.
      • int19h, on 10/05/2008, -0/+1@SLiPSTR34M:
        By that logic, they pay because the software is professional and it's professional because they pay for it. Do they really need additional features, or do they just pay because they think they need professional software, and in order for software to be professional, they have to pay? I think you'll find both types.
      • SLiPSTR34M, on 10/05/2008, -0/+1Agreed, absolutely. But again there's no question that a $200 reverb or compressor plugin will sound /perform far better than a free one in the vast majority of cases. Whether or not the extra quality is NEEDED in a particular situation, i guess that's what they're getting at here. Lots of people can get by with just free stuff - demos, mixing your own band EPs, and such.
    • vladimirp00pen, on 11/13/2008, -1/+2Good thing I opened all comments. I have a ***** of VSTs that can't be used on Linux and I agree about the audio engines.
    • dedknedy, on 10/05/2008, -0/+3Ardour supports the use of native Windows VST's by using a WINE compatibility layer. Also, yes there are native Linux compatible commercial VST's, however I have not tested the quality... google it.
    • ArthurSucks, on 10/05/2008, -1/+2When it comes to writing pcm to the hard drive, all DAW is the same. Theres a point where it comes down to the skill and talent of the person recording.
      • candyman420, on 10/05/2008, -0/+1not true.. the quality of the code involved in writing that PCM varies greatly. The default EQ of a cheap DAW will distort on the high end when boosted. A crappy compressor will just "mash the sound around" without adding any character.. universal audio's compressors are mostly vintage analog emulations, Fairchild, 1176LN, etc. Finally, a tin can crappy software reverb built-in to a DAW can't produce anywhere near the same quality as say UAD Dreamverb or an impulse based convolution verb, such as Space Designer. Then you have the quality of the code involved in summing the tracks, not all DAWs are the same. I could go on.

  • elektronjunge, on 10/05/2008, -0/+5So now the only bar holding me back from my linux audio production is working drivers for a sound card that is better than the one that came with my motherboard (but that only works on Saturdays so I guess that doesn't help either)
    • stuffradio, on 10/05/2008, -2/+2Most work out of the box... at least in Ubuntu.
  • mynameistux, on 10/05/2008, -1/+2I love royal hehe2, lets the owner is going to need to get a better server at some point, if he doesn't want the downtime he had that other time.
  • ArthurSucks, on 10/05/2008, -1/+2Ardour is probably the most impressive application in the Linux world. A close second would be Blender. It's about time Linux started to gain ground in the multimedia world.
  • DeFex, on 10/05/2008, -0/+5oh..what about all my VSTi's , editor for Spectralis,evolver,VG99 and especcially the VST for the Virus TI. well apart from that i guess linux rules!
  • bewnshine, on 10/05/2008, -5/+0I've used everything from Fruitypoops to Cubase, and felt robbed when I found Reaper. Most DAWs are bloated, clunky, have counter intuitive "WTF UI", and in some cases, all of the above.

    My audio plugins & VSTs load at least five times faster in Reaper, and are much more responsive. It's just a slick little app. The installer weighs in at a whopping 3.4MB

    http://www.reaper.fm/

    Unfortunately I'm still forced to use Protools for clients because it is the "industry standard"

    I hate standards.
    • poppacherry, on 10/05/2008, -0/+5Pro tools isn't an industry standard. Apple computers aren't an industry standard. I'm sick and tired of people getting that term confused! An industry standard is a STANDARD given within the industry that ALL manufactures and companies abide by. XLR, 1/4'', Speak-On cables are all wired one way... an industry standard way. So stop getting to two confused!

      Although I'm sure Digidesign and Apple's marketing departments love people's remarks like yours...
      • bewnshine, on 10/06/2008, -1/+0Heh.

        I take the time to share a great find and some loser comes along to nitpick my terminology.

        That's digg for you.

        BTW, thanks for capitalizing "standard" and "all". It helped assure me of your idiocy.
    • derkles, on 10/05/2008, -1/+1Not sure why you are getting downmodded. Reaper FTW!
  • travbrack, on 10/05/2008, -0/+5How can you possibly go from using Cubase, and FL studio or reason connected with ReWire to Ardour and Hydrogen? Can you even sync the two programs in real time?
    • ArthurSucks, on 10/05/2008, -1/+2Hydrogen and Ardour CAN sync. Just switch on the jack-time plugin for both applications.
    • bedouin, on 10/05/2008, -0/+5No, and it will take six weeks of Googling, playing with config files, and asking people who have no idea what you're actually trying to do on Linux forums to find out you can't.

      And on pro audio forums no one uses Linux, so -- no support there.
  • gplpark92, on 10/05/2008, -2/+5Doesn't matter to me, still won't get rid of stupid dropouts and latency issues. screw Sonar and Acid.
    i'm getting a Mac Pro for this stuff.
    • ATLien74, on 10/05/2008, -0/+2I made the switch about 5 years ago and haven't looked back! I used to use Acid, Cubase, FL Studio, Sound Forge, and now on Mac I use Logic Studio Pro and Peak Bias with a Line6 Toneport and I wouldn't trade it for nothing!
    • gplpark92, on 10/05/2008, -0/+25 years ago i could record very smoothly on Sonar 2. try to do the EXACT same thing today with the same hardware on Sonar 7, and it just ***** itself.

      i'm not even doing anything differently! there's something fundamentally wrong here.
      • OfNumbers, on 10/05/2008, -0/+1You all can have fun with your Mac Books. I'll continue using a 5.1 with every software app there is.

        Umm, can either of you spare a few gigs?
    • flatfish, on 10/07/2008, -0/+1I've never had too much luck with Sonar.
      I also don't like the busy UI, although it can be customized, it still looks like crap IMHO.
      I get dropouts with Ivory like crazy unless I back off on the settings.
      No problems with Nuendo or Samplitude 10.1 which I am starting to really like, even better than Nuendo.

      The object oriented concept is playing with my mind though!
      Different way of thinking, but very powerful once you get used to it.


      As far as ardour is concerned, if I get anywhere near 5msec latency I get xruns.
      On the same system running Nuendo I get 3.3mesc.
      Running Reaper I go below 3msec.

      And like others have said, it's all about the plugins.
      It really is...
      Even moderately priced plugins like iZotope Ozone when used with care can turn muddy tracks into clean, clear crisp sounding tracks.
      Problem is most people over process or use the pre-sets and end up with noise.


  • cheezintern, on 10/05/2008, -3/+2Great software, almost makes me want to give up reason 4 and install ubuntu, almost.
    • poppacherry, on 10/05/2008, -5/+2reason is a midi program, you tool.
  • drag, on 10/05/2008, -0/+11Now keep in mind that I can't recommend anybody to switch to Linux for the express purpose of using it for musical creation, but I do recommend if you have the inclination and the aptitude for this sort of thing then it's worth evaluating.

    There are still numerous confusing aspects and lack of usability that plague Linux and sound audio. Not to mention that it can be difficult to support some specific types of hardware (such as Creative's newer hardware). So don't think that you can dive right in with no headaches...

    But Linux audio capabilities is one of those things that people are just not really aware of. These sort of capabilities have been around for a while now and, believe it or not, Linux-based DAW and other things are making it into professional settings. For example you may want to have a high performance way to do large numbers of recordings for live venues or for studio work. Even if your not using Linux for your main workstation, Linux (due in large part to it's regular use as a mid-to-upper-end enterprise server) it can provide a cheap and inexpensive way to provide disk-based multichannel recording box. Just get some high-quality audio card with lots of I/O and you can have very very good results.

    > Yup I love Ubuntu Studio...just wished jack wasn't such a pain to use/set up

    I like 64 Studio. It's based on, and compatible, with Debian, and is very mature. Offers professional paid support if you desire it, as well as no-cost downloads. It's used in professional products, right now, and is completely and totally 100% Free and Open Source software

    > The programs need to support VST (or Audio Units, but that's a mac thing)..

    Really? What makes you think that they DON'T support VST? You don't think that there is their own plugin systems on top of that either? The 'native' plugin infrastructure for Linux audio is called LADSPA. It provides easy way to plugin sound processors to various programs.

    I don't recommend using Wine and that sort of thing to use VST stuff in Linux, but if it's ' that one last thing' holding you back then it maybe worth a try.

    Also Linux has JACK audio daemon. Jack serves as a way to route PCM audio (raw uncompressed audio streams) and MIDI signals from hardware I/O and various programs. You can 'chain' up applications so that you can produce the results you desire or whatever you favor for your personal workflow.


    For example I have a Keyboard-style Midi controller that connects via USB. Using this I can use jack to route the USB midi signals to external MIdi devices. However generally I just use a software syth. However none of the software synths that I use really have that high-quality reverb and sound manipulation to make it sound like I am using a large piano in a hall... so I route the PCM from the software syth into a program called 'Alsa Modular Synth' that I use to create a complex chain that replicates the effects of the piano sound echo'ng off of far walls and other subtle nuances. This requires quite a bit of tweaking to really get how I like it. It can take a bit to avoid sound clipping while pounding away at the keyboard and still be able to hear soft presses when I take it slow.

    And in addition to that the modified realtime-preempt Linux kernel and due to the design of Jack and the tweaking I can do to my audio hardware all this processing is done real-time with no discernable ( _consistently_ under 30msec) delay.

    > Then there is the issue of how these programs stack up to Logic, Cubase, Sonar, Protools, etc in terms of audio engine quality. This free stuff may be adequate if you're an amateur hobbyist, and they may have some of the same features, but if he's making a serious comparison to the real, pro audio industry standard apps, that's a bit of a stretch.

    Really? I expect that you've done some serious competitive analysis between the sound quality of Aurdor vs Cubase, or at least have read up on benchmarks, because assuming that they don't compare is a bit closed minded.

    > Still no well-written, free scorewriters--- which is what I need, unfortunately.

    Hrm. Have you tried RoseGarden?
    http://www.rosegardenmusic.com/

    I don't know how scorewriters work in general, as that's not really my thing, but it seems like it would be fun to play around with. Newer versions support Jack, too. So I expect you could write out your score, send midi signals to other programs.. like software synths or external hardware synths, and listen to your music as you wrote it. Also record midi signals coming in from your keyboard and record them realtime while you re-route them to external synth or software synth. (jack can split and replicate signals so that they go to multiple programs at once). Also you could play along with your own music.

    > So now the only bar holding me back from my linux audio production is working drivers for a sound card that is better than the one that came with my motherboard

    Well a cheap device that is well supported, produces good sound, and has a decent number of I/O options is the M-audio Audiophile 24/96. It's a "pro-sumer" style card that can be found for under 100 dollars. For the I/O options it's very cheap. It's a older device, so don't expect to impress your friends. Don't expect it to do good surround sound either.. it's lousy for gaming and home theater. Its a specific purpose sound card and does very good for what it's designed for. In fact for a long time I used my onboard audio for home theater and gaming stuff, and used the 2496 as a second card for when I needed better sound quality and performance.

    The normal Linux mixer apps are unsuited for it. There is a special Alsa application called envy24control

    > How can you possibly go from using Cubase, and FL studio or reason connected with ReWire to Ardour and Hydrogen? Can you even sync the two programs in real time?

    Ah. Yes. Think of Jack as Rewire on steroids. It is very useful completely independent applications and there is no '64 channel' restrictions or anything like that. You can connect dozens of different programs and mixers, and connect external hardware and all that happy stuff with Jack with solid realtime performance. This is (relatively) hard to setup on a generic Linux distribution, but you can download 64 Studio or other similar thing and have it setup for you by default.

    > Is there a Guitar Rig equivalent for linux?

    Maybe. I donno what all people do with Guitar Rig.

    It's possible to get it working in Linux, like VST plugins, via Wine and other such things. It will work very well if it works at all, but requires extra setup. I would not recommend it, but if it's the 'one last thing' that is causing you to stay away from Linux audio then it may be worth a try.
    http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=197536

    > You don't pay to do it, you pay to make the job easier.

    Alright; then pay for it. There are plenty of people more then willing to take your money and they can do a very good job for you.
    http://64studio.com/support


    Remember: To each their own.
    • rhythmicdevil, on 10/05/2008, -0/+1Thanks, that was really informative. I have been using Cubase, Nuendo and Reason for years. I am excited at the prospect of a Linux audio workstation.
      • flatfish, on 10/07/2008, -0/+1A startup selling a complete system running Linux, complete with a laundry list of effects and VSTI's (IOW you pick what you want) installed, and guaranteed to work will most likely have a market.

        We as professionals have been watching Linux for years and would like nothing better than to see Linux succeed in this market.
        But it has a lot of competition, snobbery and people stuck in their ways so it's not going to be easy.

        Try telling a client you don't run Protools and see how long the conversation lasts.
        Sad, but true.

    • candyman420, on 10/06/2008, -0/+1You know, I used to enjoy doing all this linux tinkering that you seem to be into, then I just decided one day that it's just too much of a hassle. There are good programs out there and I'm not cheap, so I went with a mac pro and logic 8. I understand the power of linux and I know where linux has its place, but not in the professional music world. Those people are more interested in making music than scrounging the net for pieces of open source software and compiling *****.. only to find out, "oops, this piece doesn't work quite that well with that piece."

      So more power to ya if you enjoy tweaking and troubleshooting, but the engineering & technical side of audio production is complicated enough for me to not want to worry too much about the computer.

  • Gracenotes, on 10/05/2008, -0/+1Nice. I've been looking for this sort of software, being on a Linux-only machine for 2 months (as opposed to dual boot) and looking for a way to expand my amateur music-producing, er, prowess. Rosegarden, which I've tried using before, seems to be way too dependent on JACK, which some of my other apps don't like.
    • djauto23, on 10/05/2008, -0/+1You should bet all your horses on JACK in any case. What applications does it not agree with?

      For an optimal solutions, which many mac/win users also do, is to have one "serious" soundcard to do production and recording, and one crap soundcard (built-in mobo, f.x), to have media players, flash plugin etc. You see, the software mixing done to mix different soundsources is not healthy, and you should keep it away from the serious audio work.

      So set up the crap soundcard as the default one in the system, and JACK to use the "serious" one. Then all the production software will automatically find and use jack, and the rest of the system uses the crap card. Of course you'll also need an outboard analog mixer, but trust me, it's worth it.
  • abbathdoom, on 10/05/2008, -2/+1Ardour has great potential to become the next pro tools. But what I want is the next Garageband. There's simply nothing else out there that comes close to Garageband. I'm buying a Mac just for this one app.
  • Quixotic7, on 10/05/2008, -0/+1I love linux, and I've used some of the open source programs to make music in the past, but I could never switch back from Ableton live and my collection of softsynths from NI.
  • Abomonog, on 10/05/2008, -1/+3I have a win for Linux users. There are no freeware or open source tone generators available for Windows.

    No *****. You can't even pirate one.
    • MrSelfDestruct, on 10/05/2008, -1/+1Why does it have to be free? Why can't you pay for good software?
  • bipolarruledout, on 10/05/2008, -0/+1It's enough of a pain to get some of this multitrack hardware to work right in Mac OS & Windows, this sounds like a great way kill an afternoon.... and possibly an evening. I'm sure it will catch on as soon as professionals start dumping photoshop in favor of GIMP.
    • gplpark92, on 10/05/2008, -0/+2hell no. for me nothing beats CS3. and yes i use ALL the features.
  • derkles, on 10/05/2008, -0/+2Reaper runs great un GNU/Linux using WINE. http://www.reaper.fm/

  • crampy20, on 10/05/2008, -2/+2This is stupid - Professional music production IS EXPENSIVE, $365 for an excellent music producing programming is nothing in comparison to a few semi-decent mikes. Not to mention the rest of the kit involved.

    Plus what is the problem with paying for an extremely good product? People on here obviously won't shell out money for a program that they just want to experiment/tinker with, nor will people on here want to pay for software they will never use but will want to keep it for geek points.

    It seems to me the only reason to get this example of open source cruft is if your a cheap bastard with too much time on your hands.
  • Slacker1031, on 10/05/2008, -2/+2To save people a lot of reading, or effort with installing/trying/learning the hard way here: This software will no produce professional quality results, and is extremely difficult to interface with. If you want professional results, you are going to have to pay the price or pirate the software, this doesn't even come close.
  • hyperlexic, on 10/05/2008, -1/+3For me, the lack of music production software for Linux such as Reason, Ableton Live and FL Studio (plus the host of VSTs i use) is the biggest obstacle for making the switch.
  • zenulator, on 10/06/2008, -0/+2I'm a linux user but to tell you the truth I still boot back to window for music recording/guitar effects. This is one area where windows and macs win. Plus you can pretty much have professional music production on windows and macs with all the available freeware out there. I've recorded my first cd this way several years ago on an old windows 98 machine. I didn't pay a cent for software and had vst effects and multiple audio tracks. So this goes both ways.
  • flatfish, on 10/07/2008, -0/+1One last thing that just occurred to me.
    I remember the days when the Mac crowd said the same thing about Windows audio/video production tools.

    Some things never change :)

    BTW I agree with the person who called Jack ReWire on steroids.
    It's true, however making ReWire work is simple.
    Jack?
    Not so simple.

  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.