Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Audacity 1.2.0 Released

timothy posted more than 10 years ago | from the cross-platform-and-smooth dept.

Software 329

mbrubeck writes "After almost two years of development, the free cross-platform sound editor Audacity has released a new stable version for Linux, Mac OS X, and Windows. Audacity 1.2 has major improvements including professional-quality dithering and resampling, and new pitch- and speed-changing effects. Our previous stable release was announced on Slashdot in June 2002. More recently, Audacity was presented at this year's CodeCon in San Francisco."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

third post! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8439109)

3th post I say!

Woohhoooooooo!!!!! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8439118)

No, goddamn it, I can't believe it!!!

It ain't third post, it's...it's....*FIRST POST*!!!

Whoohoo! Finally!

In your face, suckers!!!!!

BREAKING NEWS (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8439112)

Barry Bonds is a dirty negro steroid user [sfgate.com] ! With the current trend of drug-using baseball players, including Mark McGwire (andro), and Sammy Sosa (steroids), I say we return the single season home run record [infoplease.com] back to its rightful owner: Roger Maris.

Fedora (1)

geogeek6_7 (566395) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439120)

Good job, Audacity! Hopefully this release makes it into the Fedora repository.

Re:Fedora (1, Troll)

Jameth (664111) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439208)

Just make a package yourself and send it as a contrib. What's with the pathetic 'hoping'?

Re:Fedora (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8439254)

Maybe the comment poster doesn't have [time|knowledge] to do this [him|her]self. What's with the pathetic "make it yourself" trolling?

Re:Fedora (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8439244)

You can get it from

http://ccrma-www.stanford.edu/planetccrma/softwa re /

using apt.

Never had... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8439123)

...a reply this far up...

Indeed! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8439144)

Never did I!

I'm SOOOO happy! (yes, I'm a sad geeky nerd, I know ;-)

I finally made a first post! After 2 years of slashdot I finally made a FIRST POST!

I mean, geez, the furthest I EVER got was third post, once. I've tried a zillion times toget a first post!

It feels so good! I'm king of the hill! (Well, at least for this measely topic)

I feel like kissing every slashdotter!

Whoo timestretch and pitch shift ! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8439130)


the next thing you know its 1987 all over again, i think my 12bit Akai s900 has those features

still, good luck to the Audacity gang, when i can get something like CubaseSX and protools on Linux (without a single damm console window to be seen, im a musician not a unix junkie) ill switch, until then good luck, keep pushing

comparing the wrong things (4, Interesting)

qortra (591818) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439171)

Audacity is a fantasic wave editor, but it is neither a sampler (like the s900) nor a multitracker (like cubase) nor a proprietary hardware money-making machine (like protools). If you're looking for a computer based DAW, check out Ardour; it's quite nice, and its all graphical (so long as you have jack running somewhere).

Re:comparing the wrong things (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8439192)

and i never got it to work as it should (tm), though i use linux since uhm 4 years.

Re:comparing the wrong things (4, Informative)

torpor (458) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439195)

Duh, Ardour isn't a sampler, either.

For that, though, you've got tons of options in Linux. Specimen [gazuga.net] , for example, is a great sampler for Linux. JACK-friendly too, which means you can run it alongside Ardour or Audacity or whatever, and away you go ...

I think we agree (1)

qortra (591818) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439229)

I never claimed that Ardour was a sampler; just that it was a DAW (digital audio workstation).

That being said, thank you for the link. Another up-and-coming project to watch is the Linux Sampler Project [linuxsampler.org] . They don't seem to have any major releases yet, but it looks promising (also built on Jack).

Re:I think we agree (2, Informative)

torpor (458) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439260)

We do agree: Ardour rocks.

But it just sounded like the way you were framing it, it was an answer to the problem of Audacity not being a sampler, nor a DAW.

Regardless though, the division between DAW and Audio Sample Editor is a good one - I think its good to have smaller, lighter tools for things like editing ... and that said, I know that you can integrate Audacity with Ardour if you prefer to use it for your edits, which is a really nice capability.

Linux Audio apps may not have the ProTools, or the Cubases, but hell. There is some *freakin'* nice audio hacking going on in Linux land...

Re:comparing the wrong things (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8439302)

Does that mean you can't use it to take, say a 128 kbs mp3 and make it a 64?
Seems like you'd want that functionality in an audio program. If there are other free options to do this, why not add them to audacity?

Re:comparing the wrong things (1)

0x0d0a (568518) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439450)

That's an extremely specialized function. It's something that a dedicated MP3 encoder might worry about, but most software (which just wants to shove a bunch of audio to an encoder) doesn't want to deal with.

Furthermore, I suspect that in most cases, this sort of thing would be best done in a non-interactive, batch-processing manner. Audacity is an interactive program.

If you make a small component, people are free to choose the best component of each type and let it do the job.

If you make a large set of integrated software, you have to take the package or leave the package as a whole. This has a habit of not leading to the greatest software.

Give credit where credit is due. (-1)

Seth Finklestein (582901) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439132)

Recently on eBay, I found a piece of software called Luxuriousity Audio [luxuriousity.com] . It does everything that Audacity does, and more! For only $9.99, you get high-quality compact disc recordable media, an e-paper manual, and community-supported forums for support!

I'd highly recommend Luxuriousity Audio to my followers and colleagues. You can also buy it using eBay, the world's favourite auction house [ebay.com] .

Thank you for your time. Please send me money.

Sincerely,
Seth Finklestein
Luxuriousity - The Name Says It All! (TM)

PARENT IS A FRAUD. HIS NAME IS GREGG COLLINS. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8439246)

$ whois www.luxuriousity.com

Registrant:
Luxuriousity, Inc.
PO BOX 5670
Santa Monica, CA 90409-5670
US

Domain Name: LUXURIOUSITY.COM

Administrative Contact:
Luxuriousity, Inc.
PO BOX 5670
Santa Monica, CA 90409-5670
US
310-657-2367
greglosang@yahoo.com

Technical Contact, Zone Contact:
Luxuriousity, Inc.
Gregg Collins
PO BOX 5670
Santa Monica, CA 90409-5670
US
310-657-2367
greglosang@yahoo.com

Domain created on 20-Jul-1998
Domain expires on 19-Jul-2004
Last updated on 12-Nov-2003

Domain servers in listed order:

NS1.BELAHOST.COM
NS2.BELAHOST.COM

-- --
OS Server Last changed IP address Netblock Owner
Linux Apache/1.3.29 (Unix) 2-Mar-2004 66.9.85.114 KazServ Inc
mod_auth_passthrough/1.8
mod_bwprotect/0.2
mod_log_bytes/1.2
mod_bwlimited/1.4
PHP/4.3.4
FrontPage/5.0.2.2634
mod_ssl/2.8.16
OpenSSL/0.9.7a

Re:PARENT IS A FRAUD. HIS NAME IS GREGG COLLINS. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8439523)

What are you going to do about it?

Nothing. You can't do anything. You open-source losers grant a free license for me to sell your intellectual property, and then you bitch when people like me act within their rights.

Go ahead. Write me a letter. I'll cry myself to sleep in my giant mansion, which was bought with the money I made selling your software.

Sincerely,
Gregg Collins
Tycoon
(note: troll)

Slashdot math... (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8439136)

2004-2000 = ~ 2 years

Re:Slashdot math... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8439150)

~2 == 01 years

Finally (5, Informative)

Underholdning (758194) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439137)

Anyone interested in Audacity should pay their Audacity Wiki! [audacityteam.org] homepage a visit. Audacity is open source, cross platform and it actually works. If you haven't tried it yet, now is the time.

Re:Finally (-1)

Seth Finklestein (582901) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439149)

I agree. I've been using Audacity (actually its commercial equivalent, Luxuriousity Audio [ebay.com] ) for a few months now. It really blows all other software out of the market. I can mix together all the tracks for my nationally-syndicated radio show, "Seth Finklestein's Cybersecurity Update and Top 40 Countdown" and then encode the results in high-quality codices like Ogg Vorbis.

In conclusion, Audacity gets the Seth Finklestein seal of approval.

Sincerely,
Seth Finklestein
Host
Seth Finklestein's Cybersecurity Update and Top 40 Countdown

Hopefully studio costs going down (3, Interesting)

192939495969798999 (58312) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439141)

Hopefully open source software will help make studio recording costs go down... it costs a freaking fortune to record a band/etc., and that's part of the reason that artists get little out of their gross profits.

Re:Hopefully studio costs going down (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8439162)

With Ardour, JAMin, and Audacity my cost (software) to record is $0.00.

Re:Hopefully studio costs going down (5, Insightful)

m00nun1t (588082) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439197)

Software is a trivial cost in the grand scheme of things. Mixing desks, monitors, amps, sound proofing, mics, and of course rent & engineer fees are far more.

For example, you can get a top of the line recording package such as Logic Audio for around $1000. However, a decent vocal microphone such as a Neumann U87 will set you back around $3000.

Re:Hopefully studio costs going down (5, Interesting)

LizardKing (5245) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439226)

Software is a trivial cost in the grand scheme of things

That really depends on what you are trying to acheive. If you want a respectable home setup, then software is likely a major part of the cost. Most amateur and semi-pro setups now consist largely of direct to disk recorders and editing suites. Effects, synths and samplers implemented in software are increasingly replacing standalone hardware.

a decent vocal microphone such as a Neumann U87 will set you back around $3000

That's not a "decent" vocal mic, it's an exceptional one. For most people recording popular music styles (be it rock or dance stuff) will not need anything more sophisticated than a Shure SM mic which will set them back $100.

Chris

Re:Hopefully studio costs going down (2, Informative)

BlackHawk-666 (560896) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439345)

A Rode NT 2 would be a better choice for home studio use since it is a cheap but decent capacitor mic. They go for around the 200 mark IIRC. CuBase however is more like 600 - 1000 (Nuendo) so even in a project studio this is going to make little difference to the setup costs.

Re:Hopefully studio costs going down (2, Informative)

m00nun1t (588082) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439424)

Most rock music with any budget would be done with a decent mic such as a U87 (I don't use the word exceptional as better mics are available). The difference between a U87 and an SM58 is enormous, can't even begin to compare the two. I wouldn't use an SM58 even for a demo tape. A rode would be good for a demo as another poster suggested.

Re:Hopefully studio costs going down (2, Interesting)

LizardKing (5245) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439498)

Most rock music with any budget would be done with a decent mic such as a U87

Again, it depends on the budget. I have recorded on top flight digital stuff as well as two inch analogue tape, and the difference in quality was not noticable to the human ear. The overall quality of the recording is rarely down to the equipment used, more often it depends on the ability of the engineer / producer.

Chris

Re:Hopefully studio costs going down (4, Informative)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439583)

exactly. I know of almost NO studios that put >$200.00 mic's in front of artists espically rock or rap artists.

sound proofing is dirt cheap... you don't have to buy real sonex and citiscape ceiling tiles at $100.00 per 2foot X 2foot panel. a mixing console will cost very VERY little today. no you don't need a 200 channel automated mixing station. Most studios now get away with a single 24 channel mackie and have the software controlling the 24 track soundcard do most of the work... as well as 99% of all mixing is done in the computer now.

you can set up a good quality recording studio in your basement for less than $10,000.00 with open source tools.
I know, I recently hepled one artist build his.

Re:Hopefully studio costs going down (1, Funny)

Gabrill (556503) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439238)

$1000 is trivial? You must must be one of those successful nerds [zpub.com] .

Re:Hopefully studio costs going down (2, Interesting)

0x0d0a (568518) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439420)

I've always wondered how unnecessarily inflated those prices are.

I was skimming through some audio forums a while ago when considering getting a nice (well, by my standards) pair of headphones. I was surprised by what a lot of musicians were using for live performances -- relatively inexpensive microphones and headphones. Unless the standard for recording is *far* higher than for live performances, it just seems that musicians are getting overcharged.

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure a zillion dollar amp and zillion dollar microphone sound nice...but are they worth the order of magnitude increase over the next-lower grade of audio hardware?

Re:Hopefully studio costs going down (4, Informative)

gordguide (307383) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439461)

" ... unless the standard for recording is *far* higher than for live performances, it just seems that musicians are getting overcharged. ..."

Bingo.

Live performing requires rugged microphones. Workhorses like the Shures mentioned earlier are preferred.

A Neumann will explode if you blow on it. Send in for repair. Spend $2000.

But, there is no comparison in the sound.

Re:Hopefully studio costs going down (4, Informative)

m00nun1t (588082) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439549)

Live equipment has a whole different set of requirements than studio gear, so you can't say the standard is "higher", just different. Let's compare the top two mics, live is SM58, studio is U87.
They are fundamentally different, SM58 is a dynamic mic, U87 is condenser. Dynamic mics tend to be less sensitive (a good thing on a loud stage), are very robust (it's live, stuff gets dropped & thrown around), have good feedback rejection, and a frequency response that gives them maximum cut through in a live mix. A u87 has none of these things. It is designed to be sensitive and sound beautiful. It is designed to be treated with kid gloves. Is $3000 a rip off? Maybe, maybe not. But if someone else comes up with a mic that sounds as good for less, I'm all ears.

Remember when you look around audio forums and look at what "most musicians" are using, remember that "most musicians" have little money and have either no ear or just never been exposed to high end gear to appreciate the real difference. Find a good shop and a helpful sales person, bring along a well mixed CD you know well, and listen to a few pairs of headphones - listen to the $50 ones and the $500 ones and make up your own mind. Personally, I have a set of Beyer DT770 headphones. Not the *best* sounding for the money, but good for studio work where isolation is also important. A good balance, around $220.

(Note: while I like it, the U87 isn't my favourite studio vocal mic. I prefer the TLM 170 - the warmth of a U87 but much clearer).

Re:Hopefully studio costs going down (1)

millahtime (710421) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439263)

Does Audiocity really rank up there with Protools, reason and/or other expensive software apps that are used now??

Just from what I have seen, those apps have more to them. Am I missing something??

Re:Hopefully studio costs going down (1)

BlackHawk-666 (560896) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439336)

I don't see the cost of an audio editing program affecting the overall cost of record production. Records cost so much because they hire engineers, prodcuers, marketeers (like bucaneers but robbing your cash not your jewels) and then have to also pay the band. Let's not forget the prohibitive cost of a Neve console or an Appoge sound channel. The 200 or so they will save on a commercial audio product is not really going to make a noticeable difference here.

Re:Hopefully studio costs going down (2, Interesting)

LizardKing (5245) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439532)

Another thing that adds to the recording costs of major label artists is that they frequently go into the studio with no completed material. The label demands a new album when the band has just finished touring to support the last one. Enthusiasm and energy are at a low ebb, and the band spend ages knocking new material together. This often gets written off as "pre-production".

Chris

Linux On The Desktop (3, Insightful)

osewa77 (603622) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439142)

Programs like this are a big step forward for the dream of "Linux on the Desktop"

Re:Linux On The Desktop (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8439233)

haha, uhh not quite :)

Re:Linux On The Desktop (4, Insightful)

Underholdning (758194) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439235)

I'd like to see linux on the desktop as much as the next guy, but I really don't see why this program, albeit great, helps. Linux on the desktop will not happen until my mother can install linux. She can install Win XP, but she's not even close to installing a standard Debian. Since Audacity is cross platform, it really doesn't give linux any edge at all.

Insightful?? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8439245)

This is funny because it is so obviously false. It is actually mocking the people who think it is insightful.

Whats this? Freshmeat? (-1, Flamebait)

madsdyd (228464) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439148)

OK, this is a first for me; Audacity is a great application, but do we need announcements on /.?

Really, what exciting new features makes that neccesary?

OK, part of it is envy. I contribute to a number of projects (beginplug) including kino - the greatest DV editor for Linux [schirmacher.de] (endplug) and would love for /. to carry news about its releases. But isn't that what Freshmeat is for...?

Re:Whats this? Freshmeat? (1)

tuxnduke (665112) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439267)

Now you've seem to have received attension.. can't open screenshots-- slashdotted already? Happy now :)

Re:Whats this? Freshmeat? (1)

Deusy (455433) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439289)

Audacity is a great application, but do we need announcements on /.? ...part of it is envy. I contribute to a number of projects (beginplug) including kino...

Bzzzzzzzzt... wrong answer. Slashdot does not announce KDE software kos apparently it's krap. Viva la Free Software!

Re:Whats this? Freshmeat? (1)

madsdyd (228464) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439402)

Hmmm. Kino is not KDE software. Actually it uses gtk2 - and I even think some Gnome2 stuff (although it is in the process of getting removed)

Re:Whats this? Freshmeat? (2, Interesting)

0x0d0a (568518) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439395)

Not many people know about Linux audio software -- the Linux audio world is surprisingly quiet (no pun intended). It's easy to lose track of how usable Linux is for audio work...this is kind of like a new version of Apache is for the Linux webserver world. Audacity has at least the potential to be the best-in-field for what it does at the moment, so it's a bit of a big deal.

To be honest, if Linux video editing becomes significantly more feasible suddenly, where one can swap out a Windows or Mac box and use Linux in its place happily, and kino is to credit for this, then I suspect that kino will be on Slashdot before long...

Re:Whats this? Freshmeat? (1)

nutznboltz (473437) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439492)

Freshmeat? What's an omelette [slashdot.org] without some fresh meat?

Version 1 (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8439154)

Did anyone else have a problem with Version 1.0 where the tracks were misaligned after you recorded them and the audio popped really bad unless you turned the volume way down and then set the amplification to a negative number?

The world of Out Of Phase Stereo (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8439156)

I use Audacity a lot to do "Out Of Phase Stereo" or OOPS to remove the "center" of a stereo recording.
Many songs put the vocalist at the center so this is a useful way to remove vocals from a song.
1) Load your favorite .MP3, .OGG, or .WAV song
2) one click to split into two tracks (left & right)
3) click on either left or right track, select "Invert" from the Effects menu...this is the key step.
4) click-select both tracks and select "Quick Mix"
5) you are left with a mono recording that has the former "center channel" (usually the vocals) removed!

This won't work on "live" concert recordings and works best with "Pop/Rock" from the 1960s & 1970s

Thomas Dz.

Re:The world of Out Of Phase Stereo (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8439210)

Stop him! He's trying to make more songs available for Karaoke!

Re:The world of Out Of Phase Stereo (5, Funny)

Captain Large Face (559804) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439567)

O O O O O O O O O OO O O O O O O
Stop him! He's trying to make more songs available for Karaoke!

Re:The world of Out Of Phase Stereo (0)

Flingles (698457) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439278)

Hasn't worked for me yet on quite a few 60's 70's songs. I don't know if I'm doing it right...
I have no idea what you mean in step 2 but I click mix->split stereo track to select a single side. Well anyway no success yet...

Re:The world of Out Of Phase Stereo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8439322)

No, after you load your song file, click on the little down arrow thing next to the waveform, not up on the menu....one of the options should be "split stereo track"
When you do that, Audacity will show you TWO waveforms now where you only previously had one. One is the waveform for the left channel and the other is for the right.
Now only select ONE of the left or right tracks and select Effect-->Invert
That will invert only one of the two channels.
Then do a Project-->Quick Mix to combine the one original (left or right) track and one inverted (left or right) track.

Thomas fping Dzubin

Re:The world of Out Of Phase Stereo (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8439364)

Oh crap, I left out a crucial step.
After step 2), but before step 3)
2a) you have to convert both channels to mono before you do the invert. You can do that with the little down-arrow icon next to each (left & right) waveform.

Thomas "fping" Dz.

Re:The world of Out Of Phase Stereo (1)

millahtime (710421) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439317)

I have tried this exactly as instructed and it didn't work. Not sure if it's missing a step or what but this doesn't work.

Re:The world of Out Of Phase Stereo (4, Funny)

Golantig (231102) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439340)

It also removes the kick drum and anything else placed right in the centre. Good job...

Re:The world of Out Of Phase Stereo (1)

rokzy (687636) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439594)

If you need help working out the kick drum for a song then you have other problems.

Re:The world of Out Of Phase Stereo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8439381)

Oh crap, I left out a crucial step.
After step 2), but before step 3)
2a) you have to convert both channels to mono before you do the invert. You can do that with the little down-arrow icon next to each (left & right) waveform.

Thomas "fping" Dz.

still lack vital ui feature? (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8439157)

i remembered testing it and being really satisfied with its editing features. but, i had no index while playing a project, of where the sound-head was in the file. i am used to seeing a line that shows which audio data is played at the moment, yet audacity lacks that features? is this now available?

Re:still lack vital ui feature? (2, Informative)

Ben Hutchings (4651) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439253)

While playing it shows a red triangle above the tracks and a vertical red line through all the tracks at the playing position. When you pause the line goes away but the triangle stays.

Good point! (1)

haggar (72771) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439257)

For me, Audacity 1.0 is just fine for what I do - digitizing tapes and records, simple home-studio recordings. What I always missed:
-fade in and out tools
-what you said
-and to be able to chose the soundcard, if you have more than 1 installed

!Cool! (3, Interesting)

tcdk (173945) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439173)

And I was looking around for a new sound edit program. I've been using CoolEdit for a long time but Audacity seems to do everything I need.

Just took it for a spin and it looks good. It even have a noise reduction function...

Hey, just checked the undo feature and you can even undo the mp3 import.

The mp3 export function seems a bit lacking, but thats what programs like CDex is for (on windows).

Rock on Linux!!! (5, Informative)

torpor (458) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439184)

There's some great audio stuff happening in linux land lately. I'll give you the two examples I've been playing with today alone, for example:

GALAN - Graphical Audio Language [sourceforge.net]

and

Specimen, MIDI sampler for Linux [gazuga.net]

These two apps alone prove that Linux is as ready for Audio applications development as any other, and Audacity proves that its possible to do it in a way that caters to -all- platforms.

Gonna be an interesting year for Audio apps in Linux land this year, I think ... Very interesting.

Re:Rock on Linux!!! (4, Informative)

LizardKing (5245) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439259)

Another "killer app" is Rosegarden [all-day-breakfast.com] , which is rapidly becoming a suitable replacement for Steinberg Cubase. The Hydrogen [sf.net] sample based drum machine is also worth a mention. The exciting thing is that JACK [sourceforge.net] allows easy multiplexing of things like Rosegarden and Hydrogen, and has kickstarted a whole load of audio and MIDI projects.

My only regret is that my preferred operating system lacks an ALSA compatability layer, so things like JACK and Rosegarden are Linux only at the moment.

Chris

The state of Linux content production software (5, Informative)

0x0d0a (568518) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439361)

It's not all rosy:
Smurf, the Linux soundfont editor/creator, seems to have fallen behind the times, and hasn't been updated to GTK2.

XMMS, the Linux WinAMP clone, seems to be primarily static -- I don't see a lot of development on it these days.

Sound servers are still par for the course -- current sound driver systems like OSS and ALSA cannot fall back to software mixing when all hardware channels have been exhausted. Frequently, general audio use is through asound or aRts, which add latency and make it easier for audio to stutter.

On the up side, the 2.6 kernel brings everyone the low-latency and preempt patches, nice for pro audio work. ALSA (Advanced Linux Sound Architecture, a new set of sound drivers) is standard in 2.6, and the aging OSS/Free is finally deprecated as the official Linux sound API. Hardware mixing, wavetable sample loading, and other things not in OSS/Free are now generally available. JACK, the Linux pro audio server, is mature and being used in a ton of projects.

PlanetCCRMA [stanford.edu] , an *excellent* source of packaged software for anyone using a Red Hat distro and interested in audio work, has been maintained and has become a good resource.

The Rosegarden [all-day-breakfast.com] MIDI sequencer is now a complete, pro-class set of composition software.

The main content creation areas:

* Page Layout - Scribus is supposed to fill this gap. I really have no idea how it compares to current pro-class page layout software.

* 3D Modeling - I'm personally not a huge Blender fan (not really comfortable with the interface), but it apparently does a good job. I was always kind of sad that front ends for POVRay never really took off, as that's a renderer with a lot of hours put into it. Not sure what the state of CAD is.

* Vector graphics: Sodipodi is slowly getting there, but there's nothing that I can currently think of that's really on par with Illustrator. For the special case of diagrams, Dia does a pretty good job -- as a matter of fact, I find it to be much faster to enter data into Dia than Visio.

* Natural media raster graphics -- Like Painter, software for producing natural-looking artwork on a computer. Essentially nonexistent in the OSS world -- apparently nobody wants to do a thesis on modelling natural media effects mathematically.

* Video Editing -- not sure what the best of breed is here. I'd be interested in hearing from people about what there is.

* Spreadsheet -- from what I've heard, unless perfect Office compatibility is a primary goal, Gnumeric can pretty much handle anything that Excel can.

* Presentation -- Not sure about how current software adds up. Last time I tried OO.org's presentation module, it was too buggy for day-to-day use and inverted a number of elements of an imported Powerpoint presentation.

* Word Processor -- unless Office compatibility is a primary issue, Open Office seems to be acceptable. I used to run into a number of cosmetic bugs, but it seems to have been cleaned up a lot, even if it is still a bit slow and has a widget set that works differently from native sets.

There are a lot of projects out there, and even a lot of promising ones, but there are few areas that open source content creation apps are on par with their commercial counterparts today, unfortunately (well, as I see it).

Re:The state of Linux content production software (2, Insightful)

torpor (458) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439561)

There are a lot of projects out there, and even a lot of promising ones, but there are few areas that open source content creation apps are on par with their commercial counterparts today, unfortunately (well, as I see it).


Ah, but the point is there is work being done, and progress is being made.

It may not be commercial movement, but it is movement.

Re:Rock on Linux!!! (3, Informative)

JayJay.br (206867) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439536)

And don't forget Ardour [ardour.org] , an excellent project for a Linux DAW. They're releasing new betas every other week and coming close to the 1.0 release. A great substitute for Cakewalk/Sonar.

Sweet!!! (2, Interesting)

Bill Kendrick (19287) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439189)

As a game developer, I need tools like Audacity to make and tweak the lame little sfx in my games. ;)
Congrats guys and gals!!!

Re:Sweet!!! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8439272)

Lame? Bill, drop that mp3 encoder and use ogg.

Thank you, thank you, I'll be here all week...

maybe... (5, Funny)

beware1000 (678753) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439198)

wow! maybe Australian local television networks can actually afford to make their advertisments sound decent now!

Mass converters? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8439199)

What I would like to know: does anyone know if there are (free) mass-converter progs on the Net?

Like, if you have a directory full of mp3's, it auto-convert them all into say, ogg's?

(And idem with pics; gif-files to open-formats?)

Re:Mass converters? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8439315)

yeah, try "bash", it lets you do all sorts of stuff like that.

Most important questions... (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8439201)

Does it support recording to hdd and does it declick recordings from phono?

Re:Most important questions... (2, Informative)

Handpaper (566373) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439324)

Yes, you can use it as a sound recorder
No, it doesn't have an automatic declick function - and declicking manually is no fun.

this is good for OSS (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8439203)

GIMP 2(third release) - 2D almost ready to topple paintshoppro and then on to the long road to victory over photoshop http://www.gimp.org/

SODIPODI - vector 2D maturing nicely http://www.sodipodi.com/

Blender 2.32- 3D models already quite powerful http://www.blender3d.com/

Audacity 1.2.0 - very nice http://audacity.sourceforge.net/

Now all we need is some developers to get into gear helping out with Jahshaka so that it can compete on that "entry level" ticket that will allow it to really take off. But until that time, it hasn't got what it takes. Linux needs a non-linear editor pretty bad these days, so come help out.
http://www.jahshaka.com/

And then maybe an OSS game engine that can keep improving. Many games these days come from the brains of a few mod creators (counter-strike, day of defeat, natural selection) and as proven by counter-strike it isn't graphics, but gameplay (and in the case of single-player, storyline) which matter most. So a good engine that accepts and interfaces well with blender would make OSS quite simply rule.

We have won (there is never total victory) the server market, and the corporate desktop (mozilla+openoffice) is about to crumble - now onto the home desktop! Freesoftware and beyond!

Re:this is good for OSS (1)

torpor (458) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439307)

And then maybe an OSS game engine that can keep improving

Whats wrong with the Blender game engine? Honest question, I don't actually know much about it (I'm an audio hacker, not a graphics hacker) but I seem to remember there being much hooplah being made about Blenders' gaming capabilities.

Is this engine not good enough for 3D games on Linux, or has it just not received enough attention?

Re:this is good for OSS (2, Insightful)

lazy_arabica (750133) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439351)

Well, just had a look at the "new" audacity. I don't find it so innovative ; indeed, I was expecting for many features which were not included here. Some are pretty simple ; for example, I would like the FFT filter to have a "log scale" option, which would make it much more interesting and usable.
Anyway, Audacity is an interesting project. I will keep suggesting it to people wanting a simple and quite powerful audio editor on Linux. But the time we get something like Protools or Adube Audition seems quite far, far away...

Re:this is good for OSS (1)

Chris_Jefferson (581445) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439384)

And in this you see one of the major problems I feel open source has today.

None of the programs you describe are trying to do something new and imaginative, their aim is simply to clone someone else as efficently as possible.

We need more OSS apps which aim to be good in their own right, not simply because they are "a free replacement for X".

Re:this is good for OSS (3, Insightful)

Quarters (18322) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439466)

GIMP 2(third release) - 2D almost ready to topple paintshoppro and then on to the long road to victory over photoshop http://www.gimp.org/

Hyperbole like this only helps to underscore either a)the closed mindedness of OSS developers or b)the ignorance of the person who said it.

Software development is not a war or a contest. A rival piece of software rarely (EXTREMELY RARELY) ever obliterates the market for its competitors. Most of the time, though, the decline/loss of a viable program is due to the developer being lost in a merger or acquisition or by the advertising money spent by a rival to achieve massive market penetration. Mergers, buyouts, and marketing blitzes aren't something for which most OSS projects have the $, time, or inclination.

The GIMP is not going to "topple" PaintShop Pro. Most people aren't OSS savvy but they can buy PSPro off of the shelf at BestBuy--so they'll get what they can acquire. If GIMP shows any detectable difference to Photoshop it will probably only be in the lessening of Photoshop piracy since there is an adequate free tool some people to use. Even then, though, the warez-monkeys will still download Photoshop because it's available to them.

Re:this is good for OSS (1)

Mr_Silver (213637) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439499)

Now all we need is some developers to get into gear helping out with Jahshaka so that it can compete on that "entry level" ticket that will allow it to really take off.

Actually all we need is some developers to get into gear working on an Exchange and Outlook replacement.

As soon as you have that, then you'll find that corporates will find it easier to move away from Windows and that the Joe User will pick Linux for his home computer because thats what he uses at work.

Mandrake package available (5, Informative)

Gtz (18854) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439213)

I've uploaded the Mandrake package of audacity 1.2.0 to the contribs, it's available from any cooker mirror.

If you have Mandrake 9.2, it should be possible to install it there as well.

Toolbar (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8439225)

Audacity + MSN Toolbar = best new software on Win32.

Plugins (1)

FrostedWheat (172733) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439227)

Still no support for plugins on Linux. What's with that?

Re:Plugins are working fine in Linux, with LAPSDA (5, Informative)

zero0w (572225) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439287)

Plugins are working fine in Linux, if you got LADSPA installed. I got my mandrake rpm here and there are many built-in plugins which are not found in the Windows version:

http://rpm.nyvalls.se/sound9.2.html

A question for Audacity users.. (3, Interesting)

Mr Smidge (668120) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439234)

Perhaps I can take advantage of this discussion to ask a quick question..

How might I record from the line in port of my sound card? I generally record vinyls that I own to a digital format to listen to more conveniently, and audacity's GUI option dialog only allows me to record from /dev/dsp, which records everything, i.e. "What U Hear".

I tried changing it to /dev/mixer in the config file, but the effect was the same.

This is annoying, if I'm recording and GAIM happens to make a noise, or something else does. I know I could just kill every other sound-producing process, but I'd rather work out how to record directly from line-in.

Any clues? Thank you, knowledgeable /. crowd.

Before you ask, I have STFW somewhat on this..

Re:A question for Audacity users.. (1)

Skater (41976) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439305)

Side question: are you recording straight from the turntable or going through an amp first?

If straight from the turntable, how are you correcting the sound? Does Audacity have that option? (I have it installed but haven't look for that feature.) That'd be cool if it did.

--RJ

Re:A question for Audacity users.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8439410)

If straight from the turntable, how are you correcting the sound?

I don't think there is any way to make connecting a turntable to a PC soundcard to work properly, because the power level from the pick-up is much lower than in the line or mic inputs that soundcards have. The recording, if any, would be noisy. You simply need a pre-amp. Which is easy to get: most any old stereo system that has a phono input and a line-level output (originally there for recording radio or vinyl records to tape, so it usually is labeled "tape") will work.

Re:A question for Audacity users.. (1)

Skater (41976) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439636)

Yeah, I have one with phono inputs, not that I have a turntable. I was just wondering whether the filtering that the pre-amp does could be done in software, thereby removing one link of the chain, possibly improving quality (or at least keeping degradation minimized). Then again, these are albums we're talking about, so degradation is a fact of life...

Thanks.
--RJ

Re:A question for Audacity users.. (3, Informative)

imroy (755) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439310)

It sounds like a fairly simple issue. Just get into a mixer program and set it to "record" or "capture" from line instead of mix/master or whatever it's currently using. If you're using ALSA then I'd recommend gamix. Sorry I can't recommend what to use with the older OSS drivers, I've been using ALSA for so many years. On my SB! Live!! gamix has a seperate "capture" section where I can select from quite a few sources. Console mixers like alsamixer or aumix (which uses OSS not ALSA) just show the capture source as some button or option next to each slider.

Re:A question for Audacity users.. (1)

zero0w (572225) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439431)

If you compile audacity for oss you can select Line In or Mic In, which should not be affected by audio of other programs when recording.

Debian Woody packages? (3, Interesting)

Bill Kendrick (19287) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439268)

I was so excited when I saw "Debian" listed on the download page, til I discovered it was about some _POTATO_ packages! :^(

I tried replacing "potato" with "woody" in the apt source URL, but to no avail. :^( Anyone built Audacity 1.2.0 for Woody yet? C'mon! Backports! Backports! I LIVE off 'em! ;^)

-bill!
(yes, yes, I know about apt-pinning :^P )

Re:Debian Woody packages? (2, Informative)

GuyWithLag (621929) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439366)

At the time of writing, Audacity 1.1.99pre3 is in Debian sid(unstable).

Re:Debian Woody packages? (1)

nutznboltz (473437) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439542)

Knoppix too.

Praise the Audacity team! (1)

Qbertino (265505) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439318)

For suckage-free OSS audio editing!
Audio Editors don't get much attention. But when you need one it's so important to have one that does the basic stuff without a hinch and doesn't suck like the usual non-mainstream experimental OSS stuff that to often doesn't/didn't work as their teams like(d) to advertise.
Audacity was the first one to work as advertised for me. It's one I gladly take to replace the usual suspects like cool edit. It was the first usable audio editor under Linux aswell.
Thanks to the Audacity team for building this brick in the OSS builing and making it a good and reliable one. You rock!
I could only wish for that any project or contribution to OSS I produce will be of equal significance.

Had to be said.

incredibly useful (2, Informative)

breakinbearx (672220) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439320)

This software is a must for ANYBODY who has recording and editing needs, especially if they need it on the cheap. My neighbors and i have a band, which has been just playing around for a year. Being just a lowly garage band, we have no cash for studio time. However, Audacity, a sound card, and a mic have allowed us to record a semi-decent demo! I've even experimented with some friends' tools i.e. ProTools and Acid, and i still haven't found something as productive and useful as this. I'm so glad to hear this is still progressing well and that there is this large of a support base for it.

Good, but not good enough (5, Insightful)

djtrialprice (602555) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439328)

I know that it depends on what you want to use it for, but I don't think Audacity is actually useful for "live recording" i.e. listening to something and concurrently recording alongside it.

I do have to admit that it is a great piece of software with loads of features but when I do some multitrack recording with my full duplex, 24-bit, DMX 6Fire soundcard: I expect good results. I don't expect a latency of about half a second. That's the bottom line - until that problem is addressed I can't swap Audacity for CoolEdit Pro, or Cakewalk. As a user and supporter of GPL stuff, that's what I really want to do.

I guess sometimes there really is a reason why software *can* rightly cost hundreds of thousands of $$$s.

Great recorder too (1)

dubbayu_d_40 (622643) | more than 10 years ago | (#8439531)

I've run my line out to my line in and record 2+ hour streams with it. Last time I looked (years ago), I couldn't find any free recorders that recorded to file.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?