[Ardour-Users] Multiple USB Input recording ___IS___ needed. No it is not "DUMMB" to want this feature
marco at bertorello.ns0.it
Tue Jan 14 09:02:18 PST 2014
2014/1/14 Ralf Mardorf <ralf.mardorf at alice-dsl.net>:
> On Tue, 2014-01-14 at 16:49 +0100, Marco Bertorello wrote:
>> Ok, I assume that most people in this lists usually doesn't read the
>> email to which they are responding. I repeat, this is not my point, I
>> know what is jack and what is ardour, I know what their job are.
> I did read it, my apologize since English isn't my native language.
no problem, me too am not english native speaking.
> What's the point?
That I don't understand why Ardour must be focused only to what
pro-people do and cannot fit also what amatour-people do.
For example, using the problem that started this delirious thread in a
very wrong way, it's true that Ardour job isn't manage hardware
interfaces, but thinks that is not wrong to say that, if the backend
used can manage multiple usb interfaces (like jack do), Ardour should
manage them (not only use, but also sync them, for example).
Please, pay attention here: i'm not saing what ardour develop team
must do or not must do. Everythings the they do is allways appreciate
by me. I just saing that close the focus only to pro-related things
cut-off many people that can use ardour much as pros (just because
pros don't want use a software without assistance and for many of them
money is not a problem).
> JFTR I personally knew some famous professional audio engineers/famous
> professional studios and still know some amateurs. I've seen them
> neither using Ardour nor using USB microphones. Who cares?
> Robin gave some hints, that are interesting . What's bad with those
> On Tue, 2014-01-14 at 12:00 +0100, Marco Bertorello wrote:
> 2014/1/14 John Rigg <au2 at jrigg.co.uk>:
>> I agree, but cannot understand where is the problem asking ardour
>> people to not consider only professional usage of ardour but also who
>> accept the "degraded" quality in order to save money.
> Ardour isn't the application that handles the USB microphones.
> If the authors won't add amateur features, then the authors won't add
> amateur features. Perhaps they do it because of limited time and/or
> because most Ardour users would dislike amateur features?
> Would you add a new doorbell to my home if I ask you to do it?
>> As far as I known, NASA also use Ardour.
> And they don't do it as a hobby.
of course, recording audio is the NASA main goal, as everybody known :)
>> I don't know why, but I thinks that is not for record pro-quality
>> music for the next summer hit :)
> No, but it's also no amateur usage. IIRC they are recording their
> communication, for professional analysis of the communication, for one
> project and perhaps other projects too.
>> IMHO, supporting low-profile usage of Ardour is not a sin, but an
>> extra value for this great software.
> What exactly are you missing? Does other software provide it? E.g.
> Qtractor, Rosegarden or what ever other software? Take a look, I for
> example used more often Qtractor then Ardour.
But who in the world use those software as big professional? Please, I
asked this many many times and nobody replied! WHO? This is not a
silly question just to provocate somebody, I really need this
information 'cause many people asked me what the fuck is Ardour,
'cause them never heard about it. But all them known ProTools just
'cause is used in real world.
When compare Ardour with other pros DAW, you can say ProTools, for
example, Traktor is another competitor, something that in the real
world, pro-people really use.
> -------- Forwarded Message --------
> From: Robin Gareus
> To: ChaosEsque Team
> Subject: Re: [Ardour-Users] Ardour with multiple cheap (USB) audio
> Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2014 02:57:02 +0100
> Mailer: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:10.0.12) Gecko/20130116
> On 01/11/2014 02:25 AM, ChaosEsque Team wrote:
>> Hi, I'm really interested in helping people who want to use Ardour
>> with multiple cheap (USB) audio interfaces. It doesn't seem very easy
>> right now to do this sort of thing - in fact, I'm not even clear if
>> it is possible
> It is possible, but you're quite right that it's not very accessible,
> mainly because there is no GUI to set this up. You'll need to resort to
> a few terminal commands.
> Ardour uses JACK, so the goal is go add an additional soundcard to jack.
> There are various options to do this, most of which are described at
>> and I'd appreciate some guidance because I think
>> this is really important group of people: folks that can't afford
>> multichannel interfaces and lots of amps, the sort of people who
>> might really be attracted to a tool like Ardour.
> Fair point. As explained on the linked page, it is not ideal to use
> multiple un-synced soundcards, but it can be good enough for many cases.
> The easiest way to do so on GNU/Linux is to to use alsa_in/out:
> First start jackd as usual with one soundcard - and then add the others
> as needed. This is as easy as opening a terminal and running
> alsa_in -d hw:1
> This adds the 1st soundcard (hw:1) inputs to an already running jackd.
> Instead of numeric IDs you can also use the name of the soundcard.
> Device and their names can be listed with 'aplay -l'. For example
> card 3: UA25 [UA-25], device 0: USB Audio [USB Audio]
> Subdevices: 1/1
> Subdevice #0: subdevice #0
> in this case 'alsa_in -d hw:3' is equivalent to 'alsa_in -d hw:UA-25'
> To add outputs use the sister of alsa_in: 'alsa_out -d hw:DEVICE'
> Hope that helps,
> PS. there are ways to automate this process as well as auto-detect,
> auto-launch. Yet, this is mostly undocumented territory and requires a
> bit of scripting which builds upon above concept. More later if you're
Ehm... I'm not ChaosEsque Team, maybe there is some misunderstand.
"prima di sgomberarci sgombratevi il cervello
noi siamo la comunità toglietevi il cappello"
More information about the Ardour-Users