14 ms·

Music Production on Guix System

181 points by rekado 6y ago

Rochus 6y ago
Never heard of Guix, but it's interesting to read what tools they used to produce the song on Linux. Ardour looks pretty impressive.
- PaulDavisThe1st 6y ago
  Ardour is riddled with bugs. The GUI is incredibly ugly. MIDI workflow is terrible. The developers seem slow, old, and very opposed to new ideas. You can't run Windows plugins in it, so goodbye productive work. No professional anywhere uses it. You have to use C++ (!!) to write support for control surfaces instead of scripting in a real language. Setting up your audio/MIDI hardware settings has its own window instead of being part of Preferences like any real DAW. And of course, no proper DAW workflow like Live or FL Studio. You can't make beats with Ardour, you need actual musicians which is just stupid. I would definitely stick to Audacity.
  - rhizome31 6y ago
    To those who wouldn't realize, this message is from the creator of Ardour. I suppose he's tired of hearing the same complaints again and again so he decided to pack them all in a single message. I'm not going to talk about how much I like Ardour because I feel guilty for not having donated yet.
    - grawprog 6y ago
      Well, as Ardour's the only DAW i've paid for and you saved me from making a fool of myself countering all the things said above allow me to step in and say. I really love ardour, thank you for all the hard work to the creator and devs that have worked hard making an amazing piece of open source software I obnoxiously like to point out every time people complain about a lack of professional quality open source tools.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - Rochus 6y ago
    I will take a look at it anyway. Using C++ to implement a DAW is a very good idea IMHO. Audacity is a mastering tool, not a DAW. I'm actually a musician myself but don't use Linux yet for music productions, but for everything else.
olivierestsage 6y ago
Amazing timing to see this on the front page. I used to do hobby electronic music production using proprietary tools, but as I gradually grew more passionate about the free software movement (and more fatigued with the constant, expensive DAW upgrades/new versions), I stopped in favor of other hobbies. But recently I've realized how far free software tooling has come in terms of usability, especially for amateurs like me. Writing beats and melodies in Sonic Pi [1] and mastering/mixing them in Ardour/LMMS [2] has rekindled my love of music production. [1] https://sonic-pi.net/ https://sonic-pi.net/ [2] https://lmms.io/ https://lmms.io/
- jcelerier 6y ago
  And there's a vibrant community ! We are having the linux audio conference online right now : https://lac2020.sciencesconf.org/ https://lac2020.sciencesconf.org/ with tons of cool talks and workshops
andrewzah 6y ago
Lilypond is a marvel. I use it for transcription currently as it can easily generate tabs as well as regular notation. Seeing others use linux for music production is inspiring. I'm currently in the stages of building a home music studio and I'm strongly considering giving linux a go instead of going with a mac mini. However it's really hard giving up Pro Tools...
- zwp 6y ago
  Ha, that's funny, I abandonned lilypond precisely to create combined stave/tab scores more easily. I found that flipping back and forth between the lilypond "source" and the rendered result was too slow. I read music notation much better than lilypond's "musical LaTex" notation and I found it hard to remember the nuances each time I came back to it. (Adding lyrics to an existing piece was the last straw). I switched to Musecore. Although I generally eschew GUI apps I much prefer it to LP: I can see my editing changes directly without the "compile, run" steps. My efforts are less DRY, to continue the programming metaphor (eg copy/paste the chorus) but that's acceptable. I don't plan on writing any massive symphonies. As @rekado elsewhere on this page, I don't have to act-as-programmer when I'm making music. Musecore has had lots of criticism of its design but that area has apparently improved a lot recently. It might be "Word for music" but it's a mostly-complete-but-simple version (so... Word 6? AbiWord?). Works for me.
  - rekado 6y ago
    > I found that flipping back and forth between the lilypond "source" and the rendered result was too slow. I found Frescobaldi to be a decent compromise in that regard as it serves as a decent Lilypond editor while keeping the rendering of the score up to date at the same time. Personally, I'm going to experiment a little more with tighter Emacs and perhaps Org mode integration. I don't care for the full score at all times, so using Lilypond as a server and sending it only short snippets to be displayed in an Org mode babel buffer might be a viable option. (I know that you can tell Lilypond to skip time and only start rendering after some offset, but I'd rather not have to keep adjusting that offset number all the time; it also doesn't work so well for pieces with different odd meters.)
PaulDavisThe1st 6y ago
The author is honest enough to admit their "superficial" reasons for using the CALF plugin suite, but unfortunately then claims that they also "sound really good". People should be aware that we (the developers of Ardour) STRONGLY recommend against the use of the CALF plugin suite. Not only do numerous of these plugins have basic DSP mistakes in them, but they are also one of the most regular source of crashes for Ardour users. There are better alternatives for every single plugin the CALF suite, and we encourage you to use try them, even if they don't look quite so "pretty".
- ubercow13 6y ago
  Is there a list of suggestions or alternatives for Ardour?
  - PaulDavisThe1st 6y ago
    We don't keep this list as up to date as I'd like: https://manual.ardour.org/working-with-plugins/getting-plugins/ https://manual.ardour.org/working-with-plugins/getting-plugi...
- andrewzah 6y ago
  There are better alternatives for every single plugin the CALF suite" Is there a list of these anywhere?
  - grawprog 6y ago
    Check out the LSP plugins. Don't think they can replace all calf plugins but I've been starting to replace the calf plugins I use with them. I like their equalizers better than the calf ones. Been starting to check out their filters. Their room builder looks pretty awesome but I haven't played with it. https://lsp-plug.in/ https://lsp-plug.in/
- AndrewUnmuted 6y ago
  Ah, yes, I remember the days when I would try to use the CALF Reverb plugin, only to have its use result in numerous "audio explosions" while working on mixes. Luckily none of my gear ever got damaged but it was possible given the wacky setup I was using at the time. I discovered the Dragonfly Reverb [0] at some point and I never looked back. PS, every time I encounter you on the internet I make sure to say, THANK YOU for Ardour! [0] https://github.com/michaelwillis/dragonfly-reverb https://github.com/michaelwillis/dragonfly-reverb
grawprog 6y ago
I'm curious about why the author's using Jack1 rather than Jack2. Is Jack2 not available for guix? Jack1 has a bunch of limitations compared to jack2 and hasn't been in active development for a while apart from bugfixes. In general though, it looks much the same as music production on linux, which I absolutely love the workflow of. Being able to arbitrarily patch the inputs and outputs to any other input and output between jack aware software is honestly one of the coolest things i've seen. I started making music on the computer back on windows. After switching to linux for regular usage, I started looking into music production stuff, as soon as I figured out how it all worked, i was amazed. I couldn't imagine going back to a system where you're confined to a DAW. Your entire computer becomes one big modular DAW that you can combine nearly endlessly. There may not be as wide a selection of proprietary plugins as on windows or Mac, but what is there can be up there in quality and there's so many available, you're bound to find something with a sound you like. The calf plugins mentioned in the article are phenomenal. Also a fan of the LSP plugins, the togu audio line ones are always pretty decent. There's a ton available and new ones appearing all the time. https://www.kvraudio.com/plugins/the-newest-plugins/linux https://www.kvraudio.com/plugins/the-newest-plugins/linux
- AndrewUnmuted 6y ago
  > I'm curious about why the author's using Jack1 rather than Jack2. Is Jack2 not available for guix? Jack1 has a bunch of limitations compared to jack2 and hasn't been in active development for a while apart from bugfixes. I write in a rambling little post I made last year about my Linux audio mastering workflow [0], >> We will be using jack2 because using jack1 in 2019 is stupid! The multi-threading, MIDI, and other various features of jack2 are deal-breakers, not nice-to-haves. In my experience, the need for jack2 is amplified even further when you want to work with modern plugins like the ones you mention at KVR. > Being able to arbitrarily patch the inputs and outputs to any other input and output between jack aware software is honestly one of the coolest things i've seen. Indeed! When I was a studying audio engineering at university this was a huge revelation and few of the professors & professionals I was surrounded by had any idea this functionality was out there. The fact that it was FOSS blew their minds. If you want to go even further down the modularity rabbit hole, check out non-daw [1]. [0] https://grathwohl.me/2019/05/05/linuxmasteringflow-1.html https://grathwohl.me/2019/05/05/linuxmasteringflow-1.html [1] https://non.tuxfamily.org/ https://non.tuxfamily.org/
verytrivial 6y ago
For anyone wondering specifically why Guix, the author is playing a Chapman Stick[1] so clearly enjoys a challenge. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2GS0nKIebCc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2GS0nKIebCc
- rekado 6y ago
  Hah, it would seem so. I'm no Bob Culbertson, but I should say that I find the Stick to be rather easy to learn. Its inverted fifths tuning for the bass side makes a whole lot of sense to this recovering guitarist. What's certainly not easy is to play patterns between hands that are not merely interlocking or interlaced but truly independent. I have given up on trying to do this without breaking down the pattern and learning them chunk by chunk. Perhaps true independence is a myth or a well-guarded secret.
jfb 6y ago
This is the nerdiest thing I've seen in a long, long, long time (a Chapman Stick?!?) and I love it.
rusk 6y ago
I’ve seen Guix pop up a few times and I’m intrigued ... ostensibly a package manager but this article says it can work as an operating system in its own right. Can somebody explain this to me? Is this HURD? Or does it have a kernel? Is it some sort of hypervisor or application container? I always found HURD to be exciting in a sci-fi kind of way but from what I’ve heard this sounds like it’s actually something that could be practically useful. Where would I start? Does it make any sense running in VirtualBox let’s say?
- clone1 6y ago
  Guix system uses linux-libre currently
  - rusk 6y ago
    So that’s just the kernel and it provides it’s own user land? Is that user land itself some a kind of app container host I could run Linux apps in for instance - but at arms length from each other? Am I getting this right?
    - mbakke 6y ago
      guix-the-package-manager can be installed on any GNU/Linux distribution. It's a great way to access bleeding-edge software on a "stable" distro such as Debian or CentOS. It has some nice properties such as not needing root privileges to install things, atomic upgrades and rollbacks, reproducible builds, multiple or transient (optionally containerized) "environments" (collections of packages), etc. Guix System is a full distro built around the package manager. It gives you atomic upgrades and roll-backs for the entire system (you can choose any previous "generation" in the boot loader).
      - rusk 6y ago
        This sounds quite exciting. I could use this right away, with all the software I’m used to, and get all the benefits.
    - 6y ago
jtmoulia 6y ago
I love that the soul of this post is about music production on Guix using FOSS -- over the years I've used most of the tools the author listed. That being said, I have been super impressed with the non-free DAW Bitwig [1]. It was built by some ex-Ableton folk and has a similar polish and depth. I'm running it on Linux and have no problems connecting to audio or midi devices. I'm even able to load Windows VST plugins, e.g. Serum, via a wine emulator. It contains some pretty novel features, too, like being able to build complex audio FX as if from legos [2] 1. https://www.bitwig.com/ https://www.bitwig.com/ 2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-wHHbV8Zw4g&feature=emb_logo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-wHHbV8Zw4g&feature=emb_logo
- stevefolta 6y ago
  Reaper [1] is another excellent proprietary DAW that has a Linux version (albeit "experimental"). At this point, if only a couple of plugin companies started releasing for Linux, I could seriously consider switching. And as Apple becomes more locked-down, I would like to be able to. 1. https://www.reaper.fm https://www.reaper.fm
  - jtmoulia 6y ago
    Late to response, but I'm a big fan of reaper also -- its fantastic comping tools in particular keep me coming back.
pabs3 6y ago
I wonder if the author will release their source data under a free license.
- rekado 6y ago
  Yes, that's the plan. I've been really busy these days, so even finishing the blog post was very difficult, but I intend to upload everything to my own blog at https://elephly.net https://elephly.net within a month or so. The license will either be CC-BY-SA or CC0 / public domain.
  - pabs3 6y ago
    Excellent! Thanks for that! It is extremely rare that people think about releasing source data for multimedia assets.

181 points by rekado 6y ago

Never heard of Guix, but it's interesting to read what tools they used to produce the song on Linux. Ardour looks pretty impressive.

PaulDavisThe1st 6y ago
Ardour is riddled with bugs. The GUI is incredibly ugly. MIDI workflow is terrible. The developers seem slow, old, and very opposed to new ideas. You can't run Windows plugins in it, so goodbye productive work. No professional anywhere uses it. You have to use C++ (!!) to write support for control surfaces instead of scripting in a real language. Setting up your audio/MIDI hardware settings has its own window instead of being part of Preferences like any real DAW. And of course, no proper DAW workflow like Live or FL Studio. You can't make beats with Ardour, you need actual musicians which is just stupid. I would definitely stick to Audacity.
- rhizome31 6y ago
  To those who wouldn't realize, this message is from the creator of Ardour. I suppose he's tired of hearing the same complaints again and again so he decided to pack them all in a single message. I'm not going to talk about how much I like Ardour because I feel guilty for not having donated yet.
  - grawprog 6y ago
    Well, as Ardour's the only DAW i've paid for and you saved me from making a fool of myself countering all the things said above allow me to step in and say. I really love ardour, thank you for all the hard work to the creator and devs that have worked hard making an amazing piece of open source software I obnoxiously like to point out every time people complain about a lack of professional quality open source tools.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- Rochus 6y ago
  I will take a look at it anyway. Using C++ to implement a DAW is a very good idea IMHO. Audacity is a mastering tool, not a DAW. I'm actually a musician myself but don't use Linux yet for music productions, but for everything else.

olivierestsage 6y ago

Amazing timing to see this on the front page. I used to do hobby electronic music production using proprietary tools, but as I gradually grew more passionate about the free software movement (and more fatigued with the constant, expensive DAW upgrades/new versions), I stopped in favor of other hobbies. But recently I've realized how far free software tooling has come in terms of usability, especially for amateurs like me. Writing beats and melodies in Sonic Pi [1] and mastering/mixing them in Ardour/LMMS [2] has rekindled my love of music production. [1] https://sonic-pi.net/ https://sonic-pi.net/ [2] https://lmms.io/ https://lmms.io/

jcelerier 6y ago
And there's a vibrant community ! We are having the linux audio conference online right now : https://lac2020.sciencesconf.org/ https://lac2020.sciencesconf.org/ with tons of cool talks and workshops

andrewzah 6y ago

Lilypond is a marvel. I use it for transcription currently as it can easily generate tabs as well as regular notation. Seeing others use linux for music production is inspiring. I'm currently in the stages of building a home music studio and I'm strongly considering giving linux a go instead of going with a mac mini. However it's really hard giving up Pro Tools...

zwp 6y ago
Ha, that's funny, I abandonned lilypond precisely to create combined stave/tab scores more easily. I found that flipping back and forth between the lilypond "source" and the rendered result was too slow. I read music notation much better than lilypond's "musical LaTex" notation and I found it hard to remember the nuances each time I came back to it. (Adding lyrics to an existing piece was the last straw). I switched to Musecore. Although I generally eschew GUI apps I much prefer it to LP: I can see my editing changes directly without the "compile, run" steps. My efforts are less DRY, to continue the programming metaphor (eg copy/paste the chorus) but that's acceptable. I don't plan on writing any massive symphonies. As @rekado elsewhere on this page, I don't have to act-as-programmer when I'm making music. Musecore has had lots of criticism of its design but that area has apparently improved a lot recently. It might be "Word for music" but it's a mostly-complete-but-simple version (so... Word 6? AbiWord?). Works for me.
- rekado 6y ago
  > I found that flipping back and forth between the lilypond "source" and the rendered result was too slow. I found Frescobaldi to be a decent compromise in that regard as it serves as a decent Lilypond editor while keeping the rendering of the score up to date at the same time. Personally, I'm going to experiment a little more with tighter Emacs and perhaps Org mode integration. I don't care for the full score at all times, so using Lilypond as a server and sending it only short snippets to be displayed in an Org mode babel buffer might be a viable option. (I know that you can tell Lilypond to skip time and only start rendering after some offset, but I'd rather not have to keep adjusting that offset number all the time; it also doesn't work so well for pieces with different odd meters.)

PaulDavisThe1st 6y ago

The author is honest enough to admit their "superficial" reasons for using the CALF plugin suite, but unfortunately then claims that they also "sound really good". People should be aware that we (the developers of Ardour) STRONGLY recommend against the use of the CALF plugin suite. Not only do numerous of these plugins have basic DSP mistakes in them, but they are also one of the most regular source of crashes for Ardour users. There are better alternatives for every single plugin the CALF suite, and we encourage you to use try them, even if they don't look quite so "pretty".

ubercow13 6y ago
Is there a list of suggestions or alternatives for Ardour?
- PaulDavisThe1st 6y ago
  We don't keep this list as up to date as I'd like: https://manual.ardour.org/working-with-plugins/getting-plugins/ https://manual.ardour.org/working-with-plugins/getting-plugi...
andrewzah 6y ago
There are better alternatives for every single plugin the CALF suite" Is there a list of these anywhere?
- grawprog 6y ago
  Check out the LSP plugins. Don't think they can replace all calf plugins but I've been starting to replace the calf plugins I use with them. I like their equalizers better than the calf ones. Been starting to check out their filters. Their room builder looks pretty awesome but I haven't played with it. https://lsp-plug.in/ https://lsp-plug.in/
AndrewUnmuted 6y ago
Ah, yes, I remember the days when I would try to use the CALF Reverb plugin, only to have its use result in numerous "audio explosions" while working on mixes. Luckily none of my gear ever got damaged but it was possible given the wacky setup I was using at the time. I discovered the Dragonfly Reverb [0] at some point and I never looked back. PS, every time I encounter you on the internet I make sure to say, THANK YOU for Ardour! [0] https://github.com/michaelwillis/dragonfly-reverb https://github.com/michaelwillis/dragonfly-reverb

grawprog 6y ago

I'm curious about why the author's using Jack1 rather than Jack2. Is Jack2 not available for guix? Jack1 has a bunch of limitations compared to jack2 and hasn't been in active development for a while apart from bugfixes. In general though, it looks much the same as music production on linux, which I absolutely love the workflow of. Being able to arbitrarily patch the inputs and outputs to any other input and output between jack aware software is honestly one of the coolest things i've seen. I started making music on the computer back on windows. After switching to linux for regular usage, I started looking into music production stuff, as soon as I figured out how it all worked, i was amazed. I couldn't imagine going back to a system where you're confined to a DAW. Your entire computer becomes one big modular DAW that you can combine nearly endlessly. There may not be as wide a selection of proprietary plugins as on windows or Mac, but what is there can be up there in quality and there's so many available, you're bound to find something with a sound you like. The calf plugins mentioned in the article are phenomenal. Also a fan of the LSP plugins, the togu audio line ones are always pretty decent. There's a ton available and new ones appearing all the time. https://www.kvraudio.com/plugins/the-newest-plugins/linux https://www.kvraudio.com/plugins/the-newest-plugins/linux

AndrewUnmuted 6y ago
> I'm curious about why the author's using Jack1 rather than Jack2. Is Jack2 not available for guix? Jack1 has a bunch of limitations compared to jack2 and hasn't been in active development for a while apart from bugfixes. I write in a rambling little post I made last year about my Linux audio mastering workflow [0], >> We will be using jack2 because using jack1 in 2019 is stupid! The multi-threading, MIDI, and other various features of jack2 are deal-breakers, not nice-to-haves. In my experience, the need for jack2 is amplified even further when you want to work with modern plugins like the ones you mention at KVR. > Being able to arbitrarily patch the inputs and outputs to any other input and output between jack aware software is honestly one of the coolest things i've seen. Indeed! When I was a studying audio engineering at university this was a huge revelation and few of the professors & professionals I was surrounded by had any idea this functionality was out there. The fact that it was FOSS blew their minds. If you want to go even further down the modularity rabbit hole, check out non-daw [1]. [0] https://grathwohl.me/2019/05/05/linuxmasteringflow-1.html https://grathwohl.me/2019/05/05/linuxmasteringflow-1.html [1] https://non.tuxfamily.org/ https://non.tuxfamily.org/

verytrivial 6y ago

For anyone wondering specifically why Guix, the author is playing a Chapman Stick[1] so clearly enjoys a challenge. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2GS0nKIebCc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2GS0nKIebCc

rekado 6y ago
Hah, it would seem so. I'm no Bob Culbertson, but I should say that I find the Stick to be rather easy to learn. Its inverted fifths tuning for the bass side makes a whole lot of sense to this recovering guitarist. What's certainly not easy is to play patterns between hands that are not merely interlocking or interlaced but truly independent. I have given up on trying to do this without breaking down the pattern and learning them chunk by chunk. Perhaps true independence is a myth or a well-guarded secret.

jfb 6y ago

This is the nerdiest thing I've seen in a long, long, long time (a Chapman Stick?!?) and I love it.

rusk 6y ago

I’ve seen Guix pop up a few times and I’m intrigued ... ostensibly a package manager but this article says it can work as an operating system in its own right. Can somebody explain this to me? Is this HURD? Or does it have a kernel? Is it some sort of hypervisor or application container? I always found HURD to be exciting in a sci-fi kind of way but from what I’ve heard this sounds like it’s actually something that could be practically useful. Where would I start? Does it make any sense running in VirtualBox let’s say?

clone1 6y ago
Guix system uses linux-libre currently
- rusk 6y ago
  So that’s just the kernel and it provides it’s own user land? Is that user land itself some a kind of app container host I could run Linux apps in for instance - but at arms length from each other? Am I getting this right?
  - mbakke 6y ago
    guix-the-package-manager can be installed on any GNU/Linux distribution. It's a great way to access bleeding-edge software on a "stable" distro such as Debian or CentOS. It has some nice properties such as not needing root privileges to install things, atomic upgrades and rollbacks, reproducible builds, multiple or transient (optionally containerized) "environments" (collections of packages), etc. Guix System is a full distro built around the package manager. It gives you atomic upgrades and roll-backs for the entire system (you can choose any previous "generation" in the boot loader).
    - rusk 6y ago
      This sounds quite exciting. I could use this right away, with all the software I’m used to, and get all the benefits.
  - 6y ago

jtmoulia 6y ago

I love that the soul of this post is about music production on Guix using FOSS -- over the years I've used most of the tools the author listed. That being said, I have been super impressed with the non-free DAW Bitwig [1]. It was built by some ex-Ableton folk and has a similar polish and depth. I'm running it on Linux and have no problems connecting to audio or midi devices. I'm even able to load Windows VST plugins, e.g. Serum, via a wine emulator. It contains some pretty novel features, too, like being able to build complex audio FX as if from legos [2] 1. https://www.bitwig.com/ https://www.bitwig.com/ 2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-wHHbV8Zw4g&feature=emb_logo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-wHHbV8Zw4g&feature=emb_logo

stevefolta 6y ago
Reaper [1] is another excellent proprietary DAW that has a Linux version (albeit "experimental"). At this point, if only a couple of plugin companies started releasing for Linux, I could seriously consider switching. And as Apple becomes more locked-down, I would like to be able to. 1. https://www.reaper.fm https://www.reaper.fm
- jtmoulia 6y ago
  Late to response, but I'm a big fan of reaper also -- its fantastic comping tools in particular keep me coming back.

pabs3 6y ago

I wonder if the author will release their source data under a free license.

rekado 6y ago
Yes, that's the plan. I've been really busy these days, so even finishing the blog post was very difficult, but I intend to upload everything to my own blog at https://elephly.net https://elephly.net within a month or so. The license will either be CC-BY-SA or CC0 / public domain.
- pabs3 6y ago
  Excellent! Thanks for that! It is extremely rare that people think about releasing source data for multimedia assets.