6 ms·

I agree with you. I've been using Linux since the day Linus announced it on minix-list, and for the last 12 years Ubuntu has been my daily-driver system .. and

by mmjaa 10y ago

I agree with you. I've been using Linux since the day Linus announced it on minix-list, and for the last 12 years Ubuntu has been my daily-driver system .. and it is amazing. I'm a musician, so when people see that I'm using Ubuntu Studio for my DAW, I usually hear a few chuckles .. until I fire up Ardour, show them my plugin list, the standard suite of synths and effects I use, and so on .. that usually shuts them up at least. But what gets them really curious is when I show them how easy it is to break out the source code for any of these powerful tools, make modifications, re-install and maintain my system with very, very powerful techniques. There simply isn't any operating system as conducive to creative tinkering and progressive enhancement of key software as Ubuntu Studio. Its way, way ahead of the pack in this regard, and I think anyone who scoffs at the idea needs to be taught the lesson that Ubuntu - and of course, Linux and the ecosystem it promotes - is really worth the effort to know, learn and understand.

tehwalrus 10y ago
Do you have a link to a blog post about your setup? If not, would you consider writing about it?
- pawadu 10y ago
  I am also interested in this! It would also be great to see some audio latency numbers for ubuntu vs the rest on common hardware
  - Cephlin 10y ago
    I also would like to know your setup! I'd be very interested! I was looking into whether I should purchase Windows or buy a Mac to run a DAW, but if you're saying that Ardour is good enough, then I can just install that this weekend!
    - mmjaa 10y ago
      Just do it! BUT! Commit to using JACK for everything, and get rid of PulseAudio.
  - Crespyl 10y ago
    IIRC Ubuntu Studio (and most (all?) professional linux audio systems) uses JACK rather than ASLA/Pulse like most other versions of Ubuntu. JACK has a reputation for being fiddly to set up, but puts great emphasis on low-latency/real-time and other professional use-cases. I'd expect it to be competitive, but don't really have the knowledge to make the comparisons myself. I did find this unfinished review of latency in JACK from a few years ago: http://apps.linuxaudio.org/wiki/jack_latency_tests#does_latency_really_really_matter http://apps.linuxaudio.org/wiki/jack_latency_tests#does_late...
stinos 10y ago
Ardour is pretty great, but I'm not so sure the state of audio in general on linux is. Granted last time I struggled (as in a couple of days of trying out different things with god know how many different audio subsystems there were at the time) with it is about 5 years ago but it still seemed impossible to get a configuration with really low I-O latency (say <10mSec), nor did it 'just work' as on the other two main operating systems. Is this better with Ubuntu Studio? Does it work nicely with e.g. RME cards?
- mmjaa 10y ago
  For almost a decade now, I have had rock solid, high-performance audio running on my multi-channel DAW running Ubuntu Studio. Rock solid. Better than Pro Tools. How? I chose my hardware wisely. In my case, I've got two Presonus Firepod FP-10 interfaces, which work out of the box with JACK. Truly superlative Firewire audio interfaces, and I chalk that up to the fact that the Bridgeco chipset used in these devices was developed in a pro-Linux environment. Of course, ymmv .. especially if you fall into the PulseAudio trap, which is designed - imho - to make Audio suck on Linux as much as possible. Not so with Jack and Firewire audio - in this case, its the best possible combination of audio hardware and software components, given superlative latency and multi-channel I/o capabilities ..
coldtea 10y ago
>I'm a musician, so when people see that I'm using Ubuntu Studio for my DAW, I usually hear a few chuckles .. until I fire up Ardour, show them my plugin list, the standard suite of synths and effects I use, and so on .. that usually shuts them up at least. Well, it's not that impressive compared to something like Live or Cubase.
- funnyfacts365 10y ago
  Can you modify Live or Cubase?
  - thirdsun 10y ago
    "modify" is a very flexible term, but at least Live offers lots of customization options, particularly when you consider Max for Live: https://www.ableton.com/en/live/max-for-live/ https://www.ableton.com/en/live/max-for-live/
    - smonff 10y ago
      Can you modify Max?
      - pjmlp 10y ago
        Does it matter at all when one doesn't want to?
        smonff 10y ago
        This is a thread about a Free / Open Source operating system announcement. Why Cubase, Live and Max are even mentioned here? The problem for me is not superior VS inferior or impressive VS unimpressive software but free software VS closed software.
        coldtea 10y ago
        >The problem for me is not superior VS inferior or impressive VS unimpressive software but free software VS closed software. The problem for most people is good and inferior, or "getting my work done with this" and "this is lacking". Free vs closed doesn't even come second to most people's concerns, and I'm not even sure it should.
thirdsun 10y ago
I have no doubt that you can work efficiently in such an environment and I firmly believe that audio related works these days are rarely limited by the available tools, but knowing how to use them in-depth. However you're giving up a lot of third party instrument and effect options, aren't you? Again, those are not essential in any way, but there are really worthwhile options I wouldn't want to miss. Do you rely on internal plugins only? And have you tried Bitwig yet? With its similarities to Ableton Live, I'm sure it has the potential to push audio production on Linux to some degree.
- pawadu 10y ago
  A few years back Linux Voice reviewed Bitwig and they seemed to like it a lot: https://www.linuxvoice.com/issues/003/LV3bitwig.pdf https://www.linuxvoice.com/issues/003/LV3bitwig.pdf As plugins go, many good ones are available in LV2 or similar formats so no problem on that front.
- mmjaa 10y ago
  >However you're giving up a lot of third party instrument and effect options, aren't you? You'd be surprised just how many VST's work smoothly and reliably under Linux. >Bitwig Tried it, but not a fan - I have too many external hardware sequencers to be bothered with setting it up with the rest of my system. (Hardware sequencers run forever!) I do, however, have Ardour set up for perfect multi-channel recording, so every instrument has its own digital tracking, and this has been wonderful ..
Pigo 10y ago
Looks like you got a lot of feedback from your comment, but if you have the time I'd like to ask a question too. I'm still getting my feet wet with more the more advanced aspects of Linux, primarily Ubuntu on my Chromebook. I always hear about people tweaking programs, but it never dawns on me what kind of tweaks are possible or even useful. I'd be interested in a couple use-cases you've come across, like problems you wanted to solve with a program and a brief overview of how you altered the source to do so. Maybe it's embarrassing to admit, but I've never tweaked anything outside of VS Code or Atom.
- zeptomu 10y ago
  First, it is definitely not embarrassing to admit, and the answer may be overwhelming, but you can customize nearly everything. One of the simpler things is to customize the look and feel. E.g. you could try out different desktop experiences and WMs (window managers). Most of them are just an `apt-get` away and when you logout and login again you can choose and try out a different desktop.
- jlgaddis 10y ago
  I'm not sure if this is the kind of thing you're looking for or not, but here's a situation I encountered in just the last couple of days. I have a new workstation PC I just recently put together. It's currently running Ubuntu 16.04 LTS but I plan to switch over to Arch Linux in the near future. Because I want to use LUKS (a.k.a. full disk encryption) and ZFS (and multiple ZFS pools) on it, I decided to work through the installation procedure on a laptop first (just to make sure I've got the steps down right -- an installation w/ the root filesystem on ZFS is "non-standard", and LUKS throws additional issues into the mix) before I wipe out my primary work machine. First, by default, the LUKS setup only supports "unlocking" a single encrypted drive at boot. Since the laptop has a pair of SSDs (in a ZFS mirror), I need to unlock both of them (and my workstation has an NVMe, two SSDs, and two HDDs, so that'll be an even bigger problem!). I had to "hack on" the initramfs stuff so that I could unlock both drives when the system boots up. In addition, I have several Yubikeys and wanted to use them with LUKS. I set them up in Challenge-Response mode, programmed them with a "secret key" that I generated, and then came up with a (relatively) short(er) passphrase that I can use to unlock the disks. I also had to create a custom (initramfs) "hook" to prompt for my passphrase, detect if a Yubikey is attached and, if so, send the "challenge" to the Yubikey, receive the response from it, and use that to unlock the disks. If a Yubikey isn't attached, then I have to provide a (much longer, more secure) "backup" passphrase to unlock (each of) the disks. On the laptop, this means I can enter in my (relatively) short(er) passphrase once and unlock both disks. On my workstation, it means I'll enter it once to unlock all five disks. The alternative would be to type in my much longer, more secure passphrase FIVE separate times every time I boot the system up. None of this was very hard or time consuming, but it was necessary in order to meet my exact goals and I'm glad that Linux allows me the opportunity to do exactly this type of non-standard stuff.
laumars 10y ago
Ubuntu Studio isn't managed by Canonical (though I think they do receive financial contributions?) so that's a little different from the Canonical lead variations that the GP was discussing. However I do agree with you that Ubuntu Studio is a great product. I remember using it back when it was relatively new and even then I could see real potential in the making.

by mmjaa 10y ago

tehwalrus 10y ago

Do you have a link to a blog post about your setup? If not, would you consider writing about it?

pawadu 10y ago
I am also interested in this! It would also be great to see some audio latency numbers for ubuntu vs the rest on common hardware
- Cephlin 10y ago
  I also would like to know your setup! I'd be very interested! I was looking into whether I should purchase Windows or buy a Mac to run a DAW, but if you're saying that Ardour is good enough, then I can just install that this weekend!
  - mmjaa 10y ago
    Just do it! BUT! Commit to using JACK for everything, and get rid of PulseAudio.
- Crespyl 10y ago
  IIRC Ubuntu Studio (and most (all?) professional linux audio systems) uses JACK rather than ASLA/Pulse like most other versions of Ubuntu. JACK has a reputation for being fiddly to set up, but puts great emphasis on low-latency/real-time and other professional use-cases. I'd expect it to be competitive, but don't really have the knowledge to make the comparisons myself. I did find this unfinished review of latency in JACK from a few years ago: http://apps.linuxaudio.org/wiki/jack_latency_tests#does_latency_really_really_matter http://apps.linuxaudio.org/wiki/jack_latency_tests#does_late...

stinos 10y ago

Ardour is pretty great, but I'm not so sure the state of audio in general on linux is. Granted last time I struggled (as in a couple of days of trying out different things with god know how many different audio subsystems there were at the time) with it is about 5 years ago but it still seemed impossible to get a configuration with really low I-O latency (say <10mSec), nor did it 'just work' as on the other two main operating systems. Is this better with Ubuntu Studio? Does it work nicely with e.g. RME cards?

mmjaa 10y ago
For almost a decade now, I have had rock solid, high-performance audio running on my multi-channel DAW running Ubuntu Studio. Rock solid. Better than Pro Tools. How? I chose my hardware wisely. In my case, I've got two Presonus Firepod FP-10 interfaces, which work out of the box with JACK. Truly superlative Firewire audio interfaces, and I chalk that up to the fact that the Bridgeco chipset used in these devices was developed in a pro-Linux environment. Of course, ymmv .. especially if you fall into the PulseAudio trap, which is designed - imho - to make Audio suck on Linux as much as possible. Not so with Jack and Firewire audio - in this case, its the best possible combination of audio hardware and software components, given superlative latency and multi-channel I/o capabilities ..

coldtea 10y ago

>I'm a musician, so when people see that I'm using Ubuntu Studio for my DAW, I usually hear a few chuckles .. until I fire up Ardour, show them my plugin list, the standard suite of synths and effects I use, and so on .. that usually shuts them up at least. Well, it's not that impressive compared to something like Live or Cubase.

funnyfacts365 10y ago
Can you modify Live or Cubase?
- thirdsun 10y ago
  "modify" is a very flexible term, but at least Live offers lots of customization options, particularly when you consider Max for Live: https://www.ableton.com/en/live/max-for-live/ https://www.ableton.com/en/live/max-for-live/
  - smonff 10y ago
    Can you modify Max?
    - pjmlp 10y ago
      Does it matter at all when one doesn't want to?
      - smonff 10y ago
        This is a thread about a Free / Open Source operating system announcement. Why Cubase, Live and Max are even mentioned here? The problem for me is not superior VS inferior or impressive VS unimpressive software but free software VS closed software.
        coldtea 10y ago
        >The problem for me is not superior VS inferior or impressive VS unimpressive software but free software VS closed software. The problem for most people is good and inferior, or "getting my work done with this" and "this is lacking". Free vs closed doesn't even come second to most people's concerns, and I'm not even sure it should.

thirdsun 10y ago

I have no doubt that you can work efficiently in such an environment and I firmly believe that audio related works these days are rarely limited by the available tools, but knowing how to use them in-depth. However you're giving up a lot of third party instrument and effect options, aren't you? Again, those are not essential in any way, but there are really worthwhile options I wouldn't want to miss. Do you rely on internal plugins only? And have you tried Bitwig yet? With its similarities to Ableton Live, I'm sure it has the potential to push audio production on Linux to some degree.

pawadu 10y ago
A few years back Linux Voice reviewed Bitwig and they seemed to like it a lot: https://www.linuxvoice.com/issues/003/LV3bitwig.pdf https://www.linuxvoice.com/issues/003/LV3bitwig.pdf As plugins go, many good ones are available in LV2 or similar formats so no problem on that front.
mmjaa 10y ago
>However you're giving up a lot of third party instrument and effect options, aren't you? You'd be surprised just how many VST's work smoothly and reliably under Linux. >Bitwig Tried it, but not a fan - I have too many external hardware sequencers to be bothered with setting it up with the rest of my system. (Hardware sequencers run forever!) I do, however, have Ardour set up for perfect multi-channel recording, so every instrument has its own digital tracking, and this has been wonderful ..

Pigo 10y ago

Looks like you got a lot of feedback from your comment, but if you have the time I'd like to ask a question too. I'm still getting my feet wet with more the more advanced aspects of Linux, primarily Ubuntu on my Chromebook. I always hear about people tweaking programs, but it never dawns on me what kind of tweaks are possible or even useful. I'd be interested in a couple use-cases you've come across, like problems you wanted to solve with a program and a brief overview of how you altered the source to do so. Maybe it's embarrassing to admit, but I've never tweaked anything outside of VS Code or Atom.

zeptomu 10y ago
First, it is definitely not embarrassing to admit, and the answer may be overwhelming, but you can customize nearly everything. One of the simpler things is to customize the look and feel. E.g. you could try out different desktop experiences and WMs (window managers). Most of them are just an `apt-get` away and when you logout and login again you can choose and try out a different desktop.
jlgaddis 10y ago
I'm not sure if this is the kind of thing you're looking for or not, but here's a situation I encountered in just the last couple of days. I have a new workstation PC I just recently put together. It's currently running Ubuntu 16.04 LTS but I plan to switch over to Arch Linux in the near future. Because I want to use LUKS (a.k.a. full disk encryption) and ZFS (and multiple ZFS pools) on it, I decided to work through the installation procedure on a laptop first (just to make sure I've got the steps down right -- an installation w/ the root filesystem on ZFS is "non-standard", and LUKS throws additional issues into the mix) before I wipe out my primary work machine. First, by default, the LUKS setup only supports "unlocking" a single encrypted drive at boot. Since the laptop has a pair of SSDs (in a ZFS mirror), I need to unlock both of them (and my workstation has an NVMe, two SSDs, and two HDDs, so that'll be an even bigger problem!). I had to "hack on" the initramfs stuff so that I could unlock both drives when the system boots up. In addition, I have several Yubikeys and wanted to use them with LUKS. I set them up in Challenge-Response mode, programmed them with a "secret key" that I generated, and then came up with a (relatively) short(er) passphrase that I can use to unlock the disks. I also had to create a custom (initramfs) "hook" to prompt for my passphrase, detect if a Yubikey is attached and, if so, send the "challenge" to the Yubikey, receive the response from it, and use that to unlock the disks. If a Yubikey isn't attached, then I have to provide a (much longer, more secure) "backup" passphrase to unlock (each of) the disks. On the laptop, this means I can enter in my (relatively) short(er) passphrase once and unlock both disks. On my workstation, it means I'll enter it once to unlock all five disks. The alternative would be to type in my much longer, more secure passphrase FIVE separate times every time I boot the system up. None of this was very hard or time consuming, but it was necessary in order to meet my exact goals and I'm glad that Linux allows me the opportunity to do exactly this type of non-standard stuff.

laumars 10y ago

Ubuntu Studio isn't managed by Canonical (though I think they do receive financial contributions?) so that's a little different from the Canonical lead variations that the GP was discussing. However I do agree with you that Ubuntu Studio is a great product. I remember using it back when it was relatively new and even then I could see real potential in the making.