[Ardour-Dev] Need a 32 bit Ardour (with VSTs) on an x86_64 linux system

Paul Davis paul at linuxaudiosystems.com
Sun Nov 30 13:19:13 PST 2008

On Sun, 2008-11-30 at 16:13 -0500, Mike Mazarick wrote:
> I’ve been searching for a clean way to compile the source and install
> a 32 bit binary/libraries for 2.7 Ardour on my 64 bit Fedora CCRMA

I very very much doubt if you can get ardour's current build system to
cross-compile without several nasty hacks.

also, ardour does not use "configure && make && make install" - it uses

you should check the ARCH option to scons, which theoretically allows
you to set all compiler flags. i don't know if it will work for
cross-compilation. it might.

but - you will need 32 bit versions of every library ardour uses, and
that may not be trivial either.

i think you may be pursuing a less than worthwhile goal.

(other parts answered separately)


>  system, and also to be able to use some native VSTs packaged for
> Windows (which implies why the Ardour app needs to be 32 bits to host
> 32 bit VSTs).    What I am seeing is:
> 1.       I’ve seen lots of warnings to always use rpm’s (or apt-get or
> emerge) and NEVER build from source using downloaded tarballs.   Tough
> luck - I’m already doing it.   I can see the wisdom of having some way
> of packaging what you are installing back into an rpm (or similar
> package), but when you are installing off of the ‘bleeding edge’ to
> get new functionality, packaging it all back into an rpm isn’t always
> practical during the ‘discovery’ process (until after you’ve
> discovered something).   Maybe when I’m done figuring out what I
> really need, there will be time for this.   I’m bringing this up so
> that someone else doesn’t have to figure it out the hard way that once
> you’ve gone down the ‘rpm’  path (or ‘apt-get’ or ‘emerge’),  there is
> a downside to compiling from source tarballs because you lose control
> over your system.   You probably shouldn’t diverge from this path
> without deciding to, and you will always be a certain distance away
> from the ‘bleeding edge’.   I’ve decided to diverge from the path of
> ‘safety’ and head towards the ‘bleeding edge’ so that I can get some
> important functions to work for me.
> 2.      I haven’t seen a clear description anywhere on how to reliably
> build a source package with the “./configure, make, make install”
> stanza and have it build a 32 bit version with all the binaries and
> libraries put in the right place.   Being able to do it as mindlessly
> as possible is the best method for me.  Right now, I’m only concerned
> with Ardour, but next week I may want to look at another 32 bit app
> and will want to apply the same basic ‘rules’ without investigating
> the code at all.   I would imagine that I’ll need to use a
> “DIST_TARGET=i386” or similar during the scons or configure stage to
> get 32 bit binaries and libraries, but I’m not sure of the best way to
> tell the linker/loader to put the 32 bit libraries in the 32 bit
> library directories (which is appropriate for Fedora), or whether it
> is better to go thru some compatibility library or chroot system
> (which may be more appropriate for Ubantu or Debian).   Remember,
> ‘mindless’ is good, ‘thinking/investigating’ is bad.
> Any words of advice on what gory details that are required to
> accomplish what I am setting out to do would be really appreciated.
> As a side note, I will in general be more interested in the x86_64 bit
> versions of Ardour and/or Jack (for my more general needs as a
> musician), but I’ll need to get the VSTs working somehow for the more
> elaborate ‘experiment’/demo that I am doing. 
> 3.      Why are VSTs suddenly so important to me?   I’ll leave aside
> comments about their general usefulness and pervasiveness for the time
> being.   I’m building a ‘home version’ of a Wave Field Synthesis
> system with 32 channels.   I’ve found some VSTs (32 bit Windows VSTs
> to be exact) could do the job of helping me mix/master a regular
> ProTools/Cubase/Ardour recording into something suitable for WFS as a
> small ‘software component’ in the toolchain.   It will save me the
> time/trouble of inventing a different solution or investigating a lot
> of different options for the ‘demo’ system.   If you want to see where
> SOAP is headed, (or any other Object Oriented methodology),
> investigating the strengths and shortcomings of VSTs is a pretty good
> model.
> Getting a WFS mix works by applying a separate delay (and maybe a
> separate volume) for each sound source to each speaker/channel
> according to each source’s ‘virtual position’.   Applying the
> different delays to a lot of different speakers is actually what
> establishes the ‘virtual position’.   I’m planning on using regular
> linux audio tools to do the mixing/mastering, but I’ll eventually need
> to ‘recompute’ everything back into a customized 32 channel (or 64
> channel) ‘mix’.    The speaker placement will become a subject of
> experiment before it becomes ‘fixed’, so I’ll need to vary this delay
> per channel by a different value according to where the speaker is
> placed.   I’ll also need to have the ability to add many different
> sources (each with a different delay) to each speaker and produce a
> new ‘remix’ with a new speaker placement.
> I find it very interesting that you guys are on the same wavelength
> with the Wiimote, because eventually I’d like to have the ability to
> move ‘virtual’ sources around with a Wiimote to new locations, but
> this is for later.   The WiiMote is the 3D equivalent to a mouse.
> It’s probably a slightly different use than using it as a midi
> generator with Bluetooth (control surface), but the hooks needed into
> Ardour are basically the same.  The ‘low rent’ way to accomplish using
> the WiiMote is compute a lot of different sound mixes, but leave one
> sound source out of the mix (which can then be selected and moved) and
> add it in separately when a particular source is selected (each mix of
> 32 channels would need to be computed separately, leaving out the one
> source ‘free to move’).   The only issue would be playing back all the
> mixes at the same time and being able to ‘select’ a mix according to
> which particular source was selected.   It would need to be able to
> ‘switch over’ to a different set of mixes inaudibly.
> If someone else is interested in working with me, learning more about
> it, or otherwise discussing it, please feel free to drop me a note.
> I will try not to tie up the Ardour message board with things that
> only pertain to WFS.  There is absolutely no funding or money in this
> right now, but it is now a feasibility for the first time and it is
> interesting to ‘play’ where others can’t go or haven’t gone.   You
> won’t get many bux from this, but you might have a lot of fun.
> -Mike Mazarick
> mazarick at bellsouth.net
> _______________________________________________
> ardour-dev mailing list
> ardour-dev at lists.ardour.org
> http://lists.ardour.org/listinfo.cgi/ardour-dev-ardour.org

More information about the Ardour-Dev mailing list