[Ardour-Dev] Need a 32 bit Ardour (with VSTs) on an x86_64 linux system
paul at linuxaudiosystems.com
Sun Nov 30 16:04:01 PST 2008
On Sun, 2008-11-30 at 18:52 -0500, Mike Mazarick wrote:
> > in addition, one of linux audio's hard core geniuses and host of next
> > years LA Conference, also works on a fairly big WFS system in which
> > ardour & JACK are key components, again with no VST.
> You must mean Torben Hohn. He's very cool.
torben's very cool but fons adriaensen is at least as cool ;))
> I don't necessarily agree (along with several million other musicians)
> that all Windows/Mac audio software is a 'bad thing'.
not my point at all! my point is that it can be done without VSTs.
> You may wish to reconsider the strategy of (effectively) not using
> VSTs in Linux.
I find this funny. I, along with Kjetil and Torben figure out how to
host VST's from win32/x86 on linux/x86 and it ends up that I have
adopted a strategy of not using them :))
I happen to think that using plugins written for one operating system on
another one is always going to be painful to some extent, and that right
now, using VSTs inside Ardour is so painful that most of the time for
most people its not worth it. Nothing more. I embraced VSTs by
implementing the technology to support them within the host process
(along with Torben) and found the whole thing so hacky and kludge filled
as to be a bit hard to recommend. We can't fix this - these plugins are
not written for linux, and their authors don't want to work at making
them portable, for the most part. Torben has some nice ideas on how we
could make the situation somewhat better, but even then, it will be a
less than joyful experience (witness the current Wine breakage where the
VST GUI is never "parented" by its ardour "parent window" - something we
cannot control at all).
> There is one small point about the 'tone' in your few words:
> > (note: installation means
> > something built and installed somewhere other than a research lab or home experiment).
> There is no reason that the sound of a home WFS system should be any lower in sound quality than a complete professional WFS installation.
Not my point at all.
Somebody who builds their own WFS system is going to be free to use
whatever works for them. Likewise in a lab, people might experiment with
very different technologies as part of their research. An installation
is different only in the sense that someone has done the background work
and decided on a technological "suite" that works well enough that they
feel good about installing it elsewhere. The result could be worse,
better or the same as a WFS system built for other reasons, on other
As it happens right now, it appears that the systems being installed are
based on JACK. Probably :)
> IPhones are really neat, but the WiiMote is very low cost and has a lot of features that make it really useful for controlling 3D info (like accelerometers, Bluetooth, and an IR camera). I hadn't given it much thought to it before this year, but someone shared a few links with me. I'll do the same for others who may not know what I'm talking about (someone had to point out the wiimote's low cost 'coolness' to me recently).
yeah, iphones can't compete on cost. i just prefer a tactile vs. motion
based UI, and i prefer a customized UI to button memorization. other
than that, the wiimote has a lot going for it. i hope sampo gets all the
kinks out of his support soon, because having it control ardour is a
More information about the Ardour-Dev