I've been spending a lot of time on the #opensourcemusicians channel
talking to Ubuntu Studio users about their kernel and latency times they're
getting. Seems like most of them are using g a stock kernel with the
preemptive option enabled and they are getting great latency results
(2ms)while utilizing the @audio group on their user. I ended up compiling
my own low latency kernel and I haven't had any issues with it yet. If this
is what we are missing for the spin I'd be happy to maintain packaging for
the kernel. I know ccrma has been behind a few kernel releases.
I saw the instructions for adding the real time patch for a tick less
kernel and from what I can tell it wouldn't be hard to get that rolling as
I'm not entirely sure what ccrma does differently with their kernels
compared to other Linux users, and I'm still a bit of a noob so I could be
off base with this, but I would reason that we should be able to just
utilize the same settings to archive similar performance enhancements.
I thought I read that ccrma uses a unique scheduler, but if we could get a
2ms latency time without it, the point may be moot.
Currently number 5 out of 11 for torrent downloads! Not bad for the new kid.
Its very quiet on this list at the moment, so tell us what you've been
doing with music! Fedora / Linux / recording etc etc
Me, I've been trying to organize my many samples into sfz format for
use. Also found new interest in guitar (my new schecter rocks!)
I'm no drummer, but have been studying drumming a lot lately to fill out
some triggered recordings. Would love to hear other peoples experience
in this area.
kick out the jams
Thanks for all of the information and discussion on this topic. I took a
trip to a couple of audio hardware dealers yesterday and tried plugging
in a couple of different audio interfaces to see if they would work out
of the box with my laptop running fedora18. Here is what I found:
The presonus 44vsl usb 2.0 was not recognized by my system. Upon opening
system settings >> sound and then looking for the device under the
"output" and "input" tabs, there was nothing to select except for my
default on-board mic and speakers.
The presonus 22vsl usb 2.0 provided the most hope of all of the devices
I tried. I was able to select it in system settings and then also select
it in the devices section of audacity's preferences menu. Upon
connecting a mic and headphones I was able to both record into audacity
and monitor output from audacity through the headphones. The one
drawback I had with presonus 22vsl was that I was unable to play music
from neither rhythmbox nor amarok. Just as important for me as recording
and monitoring sound I create with audacity (or some other sound editing
software) is the ability to listen to music for inspiration and new
ideas. I could hook up monitors (speakers) directly to my headphone jack
on my computer, but I'd like to take advantage of the preamps on board
the audio interface.
I then went to a second store and connected a tascom US-600. The tascom
was not recognized at all by my laptop. I tried rebooting with the
device connected and still nothing in system settings or in audacity.
The final device I tried was the Focusrite 2i4. I was excited to see
that it was recognized in system settings. I was able to select the
Focusrite as an output device, but when I selected it as an input device
my system settings window would crash. I was able to select the device
for both input and output in audacity. I was able to listen to playback
in audacity, but the unable to record into audacity through a mic.
I still have not purchased anything. I'd like to hear some feedback on
how I might be able to solve the issue with the presonus 22vsl not being
able to output signals from amarok and rhythmbox.
Thanks and hope some of you find this information useful.
On Jul 5, 2013 10:03 AM, "Kevin Fenzi" <kevin(a)scrye.com
> I'd like to propose some changes to the spins process for F20.
> I'm sending this just to the spins and test lists first, to try and hash
> out things, then we can move on to running it the devel list once we
> have more concrete plans.
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/20/Spins shall be the cannonical
> list of approved spins by the sig.
> A Milestone is one of Alpha, Beta, Final.
> A basic spin test will be created (Or perhaps we can re-use the Basic
> desktop test, or whatever QA folks would prefer). This basic spin test
> will test:
> At Alpha:
> * The image composes.
> * The image boots with any method
> * The liveuser user can login
> * The user can apply updates
> At Beta:
> * All Alpha tests, and
> * The image meets it's size goal
> * The image boots with all supported live media boot methods.
> At Final:
> * All Beta test and
> * No selinux denials on boot/login
> At the Alpha milestone, all approved spins will be created by rel-eng.
> Each approved spin MUST have at least 2 people fill in the Basic spin
> test matrix for at least 1 TC or RC. If the image fails, maintainers
> can try again at the next milestone, but the image is NOT shipped for
> that milestone. if an image doesn't get 2 people filling in Basic spin
> tests, the image is dropped for that cycle and IS NOT SHIPPED FOR THAT
> RELEASE! Such images can be reapproved by the spins sig for the next
> At the Beta milestone, only those images that got testing in the Alpha
> milestone will be produced.
> At the Final milestone, only those images that were tested at the Beta
> release will be produced.
> The http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/20/Spins page will be
> enhanced with a 'Alpha/Beta/Final' field, where we can note what spins
> are in what state.
> Questions/Feedback needed on:
> - Is 2 people too many? Should it just be 1? or More?
> - Are there other Basic tests we should require?
> - Is there a better way to track things than that wiki page?
> - Is there a good way to make sure all spins maintainers are aware of
> these changes and are not surprised by them?
> Anything else?
Apologies in advance for cross-posting. I think Kevin's proposal is
reasonable, I'm pretty sure we can manage 2 people to test the Jam ISOs
at Alpha/Beta and Final. If you have any feedback I'd recommend replying
on the spins list rather than here, so the other Spins SIGs can hear
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 16:42:06 +0100
From: Mark Knoop <mark(a)opus11.net>
Subject: Re: [Fedora-music-list] Compatible USB Audio Interface
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
At 12:44 on 26 Jul 2013, Brendan Jones wrote:
>On 07/26/2013 10:19 AM, Mark Knoop wrote:
>> At 08:28 on 26 Jul 2013, Brendan Jones wrote:
>>> Look I'm really interested in peoples experience with there USB
>>> devices that have more than two ins and outs. I haven't tried one as
>>> yet but will be on the market for a new interface soon. I am using a
>>> cheap Behringer UCA 202 when I need an extra out for monitoring (but
>>> that's not recording, just useful for DJing at parties ;)
>> I have a stable setup with an M-Audio Fast Track Ultra. USB2.0,
>> 8-in/8-out, MIDI, digital in/out (coax, not optical), upto 24-bit @
>> 96kHz. The sound quality is good (although the mic pre-amps are
>> nothing to get excited about).
How come you are looking for an alternative to the M-Audio Fast Track if
it is a stable set-up? Are you able to route audio playback through it
from a media player (amarok, rhythmbox) successfully? I found the Fast
Track available here:
What version of fedora are you using it with? and what software (jack,
I am a musician and recently joined this mailing list. I use Fedora18
and would like to use it to create music. I am having trouble getting
off the ground as I have not identified a USB Audio Interface that is
compatible with Fedora. I have visited the ALSA soundcard matrix wiki
and a number of forums in hopes of finding a device. Unfortunately many
of the models and makes talked about are a few years old now and,
frequently, are no longer available from distributors. I imagine a few
people on this list use some sort of soundcard to test/use all of the
great software that is being created for linux users.
I am inviting suggestions from people with experience in the application
of audio hardware in the fedora environment. I am looking for a device
that uses an independent power plug, connects with usb 2.0, and has both
MIDI and analogue inputs and outputs. A device similar to this would be
Thanks and I look forward to offering feedback on software once I am up
On 07/12/2013 03:51 PM, William Blackburn wrote:
> i was thinking the same thing, it is very quiet here and on irc. Is
> there a twitter account for Fedora-Jam?
I don't think so. If not start one please! (i don't use a mobile but I'm
sure pretty much everyone else does)
Anyway man, what have you been up to with music recently?
I went to a hotrod festival about 100k's from berlin with some good
punk, and the next week to a Goa trance party. Both good, both with lots
of mosquitos. All good when music is king