Do any serious music enthusiasts use Linux?

[Linuxmusician01]

[...]
Then we only need to find some stores that will sell a pc with Linux pre-installed.

[off topic] A Chromebook is almost there. Activate Crostini and install a Desktop Environment.

[on topic] Anyway, that still doesn't explain why newcomers here here ask general audio questions instead of Linux audio questions...

[Gps]

Good point, to which I don't have an answer.

[sunrat]

Harrison Mixbus and Mixbus 32C - commercial software based on Ardour, cross platform and I think is developed on Linux. Is used by a number of pro studios from what I see on the Mixbus forums. Best DAW for audio production IMO, although it's MIDI capabilities, while adequate. are not quite up with the industry leading MIDI software yet.
Harrison are one of the most respected makers of high-end audio consoles, several of which I have had the pleasure of using. That they support Linux is high praise. Also a number of other hardware console makers such as Midas use Linux as the OS for their consoles.
I really dislike ProTools, both the software itself and it's business model. I have a licence for Reaper but don't really use it. Tracktion Waveform and Bitwig Studio are other commercial DAWs which have solid Linux versions.
Bottom line is yes, some serious audio professionals use Linux.

[novalix]

There is no such thing as "serious music enthusiasts" in my book.
And from what i know, the revolution will not be televised.

[wjl]

What novalix said - "serious music enthusiasts" don't exist, and if they did then they wouldn't probably know about Linux.
But pros do... go figure...

[Linuxmusician01]

Harrison Mixbus and Mixbus 32C - commercial software based on Ardour, cross platform and I think is developed on Linux. Is used by a number of pro studios from what I see on the Mixbus forums. Best DAW for audio production IMO, although it's MIDI capabilities, while adequate. are not quite up with the industry leading MIDI software yet.
Harrison are one of the most respected makers of high-end audio consoles, several of which I have had the pleasure of using. That they support Linux is high praise. Also a number of other hardware console makers such as Midas use Linux as the OS for their consoles.
I really dislike ProTools, both the software itself and it's business model. I have a licence for Reaper but don't really use it. Tracktion Waveform and Bitwig Studio are other commercial DAWs which have solid Linux versions.
Bottom line is yes, some serious audio professionals use Linux.

Good point. Thanks.

[bluzee]

[...]
Then we only need to find some stores that will sell a pc with Linux pre-installed.

[off topic] A Chromebook is almost there. Activate Crostini and install a Desktop Environment.

[on topic] Anyway, that still doesn't explain why newcomers here here ask general audio questions instead of Linux audio questions...

Is there an assumption that people coming here already have a windows background in music production on a computer? They should only need to ask about Linux nuances? I started out directly in Linux so if this forum had existed way back when I expect I would have been asking similar questions. Back then windows wasn't even in the ball game.

Regardless, there is a new users section to this forum and I think all questions should be welcomed and answered as best we can.

[tavasti]

Is there an assumption that people coming here already have a windows background in music production on a computer? They should only need to ask about Linux nuances? I started out directly in Linux so if this forum had existed way back when I expect I would have been asking similar questions. Back then windows wasn't even in the ball game.

Regardless, there is a new users section to this forum and I think all questions should be welcomed and answered as best we can.

For example me: Started using linux 1993, and after 1994 haven't used windows. Started with music 2014.

[Linuxmusician01]

[...]
[on topic] Anyway, that still doesn't explain why newcomers here here ask general audio questions instead of Linux audio questions...

Is there an assumption that people coming here already have a windows background in music production on a computer? They should only need to ask about Linux nuances? I started out directly in Linux so if this forum had existed way back when I expect I would have been asking similar questions. Back then windows wasn't even in the ball game.

Regardless, there is a new users section to this forum and I think all questions should be welcomed and answered as best we can.

Good point. Indeed, without realizing it I assumed that people:

1. start with music long before "starting" with computers;
2. switch from Windows to Linux instead of simply starting out with it.

Obviously, that is not always the case.

For example me: Started using linux 1993, and after 1994 haven't used windows. Started with music 2014.

You so right and it's an answer to the question in my top post.

[folderol]

My first experience with music on computers was the Music 5000 hardware and software on the BBC Microcomputer in the 1980s. I then went on to using software on the 32bit Acorn Archimedes to control a Yamaha SY22 and Roland Sound Canvas.
I briefly looked at Windows 95 (but never for music), hated it and quickly moved back to Acorn machines. From there I moved on to Linux, and eventually Soft Synths.

For the kids
https://www.retro-kit.co.uk/page.cfm/co ... nthesiser/

[glowrak guy]

Pro musicians go where the pro music hardware/software is supported.

And that ain't linux.

snip

Linux has none of that. And there's no movement to correct that dilemma. And that's why it's not overcoming the chicken/egg scenario.

You describe the situation well, and very politely, hope you didn't bite your tongue too often
But there is one movement, and it's gaining momentum across platforms from respected industry developers.
The CLAP plugin format. Steinberg have not been making friends in high places lately, and their vst formats
will soon face an effective and open-source challenge, so linux devs can have a shot at how it plays out
in coming years, if so desired.

There will still remain the problems you mention, but at least coders will have more options.
A linux user can make rewarding music with existing compatible hardware and software, but then
must learn how to get that music noticed and heard by people likely not to instantly turn it off
for lack of dancing girls. Arguably, modern promotion is as hard as mastering instruments and recording tools.
Some people just loathe self-promotion, or fear rejection, and will remain largely unheard.
But still might be personally happier than someone else who grinds out a carreer against the odds.
The music industry has a self-feeding playback loop that is very difficult to enter for outsiders.
So some people create just bear down and create their own personal loop.

I think Mary Spender is a good example of the self-promotion skill and energy needed to succeed
in various aspects of the music business. I think she tolerates the self promotion, as opposed to
craving it, but enjoys the teaching and sharing aspects of her career. Every person is different,
and can maximize what they have on offer, without becoming a warped ego-maniac.
mi dos centavos
Cheers

[glowrak guy]

They ask more general music questions as if they've never made music or music on a computer before.

If you count the numbers of kids that left the nest, and must supply their own computer, with the numbers
of people facing crashed operating systems, there is a good sized pool of possible linux users.
If 5% of those have musical interests, or bad experiences on corporate operating systems, there should be
good numbers showing up here, and some with very basic questions. Come one, come all!

[j_e_f_f_g]

In my earlier post I wrote about what Linux audio needs to get done (ie, easier-to-use API, better documentation, stricter adherence to industry standards, abandonment of add-on "audio servers" like JACK, PulseAudio, Pipewire in favor of widespread use of ALSA exclusively).

I conclude that there isn't any movement toward those goals. But I didn't detail why I think that's so. I will now.

Torvalds runs a good, tight ship when it comes to subsystems that are important to servers. He's good at decapitating misguided developers who come up with "solutions" that are just a reinvention of the wheel. (Why do Linux devs constantly reinvent the wheel? Because OSS devs are notoriously bad at not commenting/documenting their code. So when another dev comes along to work on the code, he realizes that it will actually take him longer to come "up to speed" with someone's else's undocumented code, than if he just started from scratch. The latter is more appealing, so devs keep writing new code that does pretty much what the old code did, but in a different way. Then they fail to comment/document it, so the cycle keeps repeating. Torvalds is good at spotting, and discouraging that.)

But the audio system is irrelevant to servers. (In fact, it's one of the first things that gets removed from a server). Torvalds seems to not be interested in it. So he leaves its development almost entirely to the whims of ALSA's primary developers. It was started by Jaroslav Kysela, who set out to create software to load samples into his Gravis Ultrasound, which is a gamer's card, and not at all what a musician would have used at that time. Later on, a SUSE dev named Takashi Iwai took the lead, because he wanted to load samples into his Creative Lab's card, also not musician quality.

I don't know these guys personally, but based upon what I've seen, they don't appear to be musicians, nor familiar with the sorts of tools pro musicians use. That's a problem in getting ALSA geared for pro music use and support. Iwai is good at adding support for new motherboard chipsets, but that's not at all relevant to the music market. I can't say that I have ever seen anything developed by the likes of Iwai, Pottering, etc, that has been applicable beyond generic run-of-the-mill audio use. It's stuff that you want/need when playing back YouTube videos, but has no relevance to musicians. So, my conclusion is that ALSA is not going to make any progress in appealing to music manufacturers/devs until/unless Iwai turns over the lead role to someone whose vision for the API is a lot more ambitious. And hopefully someone who is much better at documenting code than the current ALSA guys. Of all the audio APIs I've looked at, ALSA has the most functions. In fact, it has an extreme amount of functions compared to most APIs. And yet it also is one of the least documented. That's a big problem.

[milo]

I had been using Linux for 15 years and making music for 20+ years before I ever showed up on this forum, but I have learned a lot of music craft here. Probably I have learned more craft than I have software on this site, but I'm not sure. Whatever the ratio, I am grateful for the helpful people and largely gentle and helpful critiques that I have found on this forum. Go LM!

[folderol]

I think some people misunderstand the Linux audio architecture. ALSA is an incredibly complex piece of software because it has to be. It manages a vast range of completely different hardware interfaces and turns them into a consistent interface. Nothing else does that. Not Pulse Audio, not JACK, not PipeWire. They all sit on top of ALSA. If you have the necessary software skills there is everything you need for whatever quality of audio you want, without having to worry about obscure hardware variations. ALSA will tell you exactly what is available and considering how much is involved is remarkably up-to-date.

Linus et al aren't concerned with audio, because they don't need to be.

I've done a fair bit of work with ALSA while working on Yoshimi, and the only thing I'd want to see improved is the documentation. However, I've also learned a bit about doing that too, and I can assure you it's a mind boggling and thankless task

There is nothing like this on the other platforms. On these, just about everything needs its own driver - which may, or may not, work.