[HN Gopher] Music Production on Guix System
___________________________________________________________________
Music Production on Guix System
Author : rekado
Score : 134 points
Date : 2020-11-26 15:17 UTC (7 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (guix.gnu.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (guix.gnu.org)
| olivierestsage wrote:
| Amazing timing to see this on the front page. I used to do hobby
| electronic music production using proprietary tools, but as I
| gradually grew more passionate about the free software movement
| (and more fatigued with the constant, expensive DAW upgrades/new
| versions), I stopped in favor of other hobbies. But recently I've
| realized how far free software tooling has come in terms of
| usability, especially for amateurs like me. Writing beats and
| melodies in Sonic Pi [1] and mastering/mixing them in Ardour/LMMS
| [2] has rekindled my love of music production.
|
| [1] https://sonic-pi.net/
|
| [2] https://lmms.io/
| jcelerier wrote:
| And there's a vibrant community ! We are having the linux audio
| conference online right now : https://lac2020.sciencesconf.org/
| with tons of cool talks and workshops
| jtmoulia wrote:
| I love that the soul of this post is about music production on
| Guix using FOSS -- over the years I've used most of the tools the
| author listed.
|
| That being said, I have been super impressed with the non-free
| DAW Bitwig [1]. It was built by some ex-Ableton folk and has a
| similar polish and depth. I'm running it on Linux and have no
| problems connecting to audio or midi devices. I'm even able to
| load Windows VST plugins, e.g. Serum, via a wine emulator. It
| contains some pretty novel features, too, like being able to
| build complex audio FX as if from legos [2]
|
| 1. https://www.bitwig.com/ 2.
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-wHHbV8Zw4g&feature=emb_logo
| stevefolta wrote:
| Reaper [1] is another excellent proprietary DAW that has a
| Linux version (albeit "experimental"). At this point, if only a
| couple of plugin companies started releasing for Linux, I could
| seriously consider switching. And as Apple becomes more locked-
| down, I would like to be able to.
|
| 1. https://www.reaper.fm
| andrewzah wrote:
| Lilypond is a marvel. I use it for transcription currently as it
| can easily generate tabs as well as regular notation.
|
| Seeing others use linux for music production is inspiring. I'm
| currently in the stages of building a home music studio and I'm
| strongly considering giving linux a go instead of going with a
| mac mini. However it's really hard giving up Pro Tools...
| zwp wrote:
| Ha, that's funny, I abandonned lilypond precisely to create
| combined stave/tab scores more easily. I found that flipping
| back and forth between the lilypond "source" and the rendered
| result was too slow. I read music notation much better than
| lilypond's "musical LaTex" notation and I found it hard to
| remember the nuances each time I came back to it. (Adding
| lyrics to an existing piece was the last straw).
|
| I switched to Musecore. Although I generally eschew GUI apps I
| much prefer it to LP: I can see my editing changes directly
| without the "compile, run" steps. My efforts are less DRY, to
| continue the programming metaphor (eg copy/paste the chorus)
| but that's acceptable. I don't plan on writing any massive
| symphonies. As @rekado elsewhere on this page, I don't have to
| act-as-programmer when I'm making music.
|
| Musecore has had lots of criticism of its design but that area
| has apparently improved a lot recently. It might be "Word for
| music" but it's a mostly-complete-but-simple version (so...
| Word 6? AbiWord?). Works for me.
| rusk wrote:
| I've seen Guix pop up a few times and I'm intrigued ...
| ostensibly a package manager but this article says it can work as
| an operating system in its own right. Can somebody explain this
| to me? Is this HURD? Or does it have a kernel? Is it some sort of
| hypervisor or application container? I always found HURD to be
| exciting in a sci-fi kind of way but from what I've heard this
| sounds like it's actually something that could be practically
| useful. Where would I start? Does it make any sense running in
| VirtualBox let's say?
| cbaines wrote:
| > I've seen Guix pop up a few times and I'm intrigued ...
| ostensibly a package manager but this article says it can work
| as an operating system in its own right. Can somebody explain
| this to me?
|
| Guix as a package manager knows how to build software, and how
| to manage all the files. If you build the right software, plus
| a few more things with some files, then you end up with
| something that'll boot.
|
| One really neat thing about this is that this is set out in one
| Git repository, making it pretty easy to reason about.
|
| > Is this HURD? Or does it have a kernel? Is it some sort of
| hypervisor or application container? I always found HURD to be
| exciting in a sci-fi kind of way but from what I've heard this
| sounds like it's actually something that could be practically
| useful. Where would I start? Does it make any sense running in
| VirtualBox let's say?
|
| Guix by default uses Linux-libre, but you can run it with the
| Hurd.
|
| You can start by using Guix as a package manager, it'll fit
| alongside your existing operating system (providing it's
| something using Linux). There's also a VM image you can
| download from the website if that's of interest.
| clone1 wrote:
| Guix system uses linux-libre currently
| rusk wrote:
| So that's just the kernel and it provides it's own user land?
| Is that user land itself some a kind of app container host I
| could run Linux apps in for instance - but at arms length
| from each other? Am I getting this right?
| mbakke wrote:
| guix-the-package-manager can be installed on any GNU/Linux
| distribution. It's a great way to access bleeding-edge
| software on a "stable" distro such as Debian or CentOS.
|
| It has some nice properties such as not needing root
| privileges to install things, atomic upgrades and
| rollbacks, reproducible builds, multiple or transient
| (optionally containerized) "environments" (collections of
| packages), etc.
|
| Guix System is a full distro built around the package
| manager. It gives you atomic upgrades and roll-backs for
| the entire system (you can choose any previous "generation"
| in the boot loader).
| rusk wrote:
| This sounds quite exciting. I could use this right away,
| with all the software I'm used to, and get all the
| benefits.
| Avshalom wrote:
| aside from the standard GNU utils right now it's mostly
| just guix the package manager and
| https://www.gnu.org/software/shepherd/
| rekado wrote:
| It's a whole GNU system distribution using Guix to build
| the system reproducibly, providing roll-backs at the
| system level, using Guile Scheme even as early as the
| initrd, etc. I don't know what you mean by "GNU utils",
| but "Guix System" is _quite_ a bit more than just
| Shepherd and coreutils.
| verytrivial wrote:
| For anyone wondering specifically why Guix, the author is playing
| a Chapman Stick[1] so clearly enjoys a challenge.
|
| [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2GS0nKIebCc
| rekado wrote:
| Hah, it would seem so. I'm no Bob Culbertson, but I should say
| that I find the Stick to be rather easy to learn. Its inverted
| fifths tuning for the bass side makes a whole lot of sense to
| this recovering guitarist.
|
| What's certainly not easy is to play patterns between hands
| that are not merely interlocking or interlaced but truly
| independent. I have given up on trying to do this without
| breaking down the pattern and learning them chunk by chunk.
| Perhaps true independence is a myth or a well-guarded secret.
| Rochus wrote:
| Never heard of Guix, but it's interesting to read what tools they
| used to produce the song on Linux. Ardour looks pretty
| impressive.
| PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
| Ardour is riddled with bugs. The GUI is incredibly ugly. MIDI
| workflow is terrible. The developers seem slow, old, and very
| opposed to new ideas. You can't run Windows plugins in it, so
| goodbye productive work. No professional anywhere uses it. You
| have to use C++ (!!) to write support for control surfaces
| instead of scripting in a real language. Setting up your
| audio/MIDI hardware settings has its own window instead of
| being part of Preferences like any real DAW. And of course, no
| proper DAW workflow like Live or FL Studio. You can't make
| beats with Ardour, you need actual musicians which is just
| stupid.
|
| I would definitely stick to Audacity.
| [deleted]
| Rochus wrote:
| I will take a look at it anyway. Using C++ to implement a DAW
| is a very good idea IMHO. Audacity is a mastering tool, not a
| DAW. I'm actually a musician myself but don't use Linux yet
| for music productions, but for everything else.
| rhizome31 wrote:
| To those who wouldn't realize, this message is from the
| creator of Ardour. I suppose he's tired of hearing the same
| complaints again and again so he decided to pack them all in
| a single message.
|
| I'm not going to talk about how much I like Ardour because I
| feel guilty for not having donated yet.
| PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
| The author is honest enough to admit their "superficial" reasons
| for using the CALF plugin suite, but unfortunately then claims
| that they also "sound really good".
|
| People should be aware that we (the developers of Ardour)
| _STRONGLY_ recommend against the use of the CALF plugin suite.
| Not only do numerous of these plugins have basic DSP mistakes in
| them, but they are also one of the most regular source of crashes
| for Ardour users.
|
| There are better alternatives for every single plugin the CALF
| suite, and we encourage you to use try them, even if they don't
| look quite so "pretty".
| AndrewUnmuted wrote:
| Ah, yes, I remember the days when I would try to use the CALF
| Reverb plugin, only to have its use result in numerous "audio
| explosions" while working on mixes. Luckily none of my gear
| ever got damaged but it was possible given the wacky setup I
| was using at the time.
|
| I discovered the Dragonfly Reverb [0] at some point and I never
| looked back.
|
| PS, every time I encounter you on the internet I make sure to
| say, THANK YOU for Ardour!
|
| [0] https://github.com/michaelwillis/dragonfly-reverb
| ubercow13 wrote:
| Is there a list of suggestions or alternatives for Ardour?
| PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
| We don't keep this list as up to date as I'd like:
|
| https://manual.ardour.org/working-with-plugins/getting-
| plugi...
| andrewzah wrote:
| There are better alternatives for every single plugin the CALF
| suite"
|
| Is there a list of these anywhere?
| grawprog wrote:
| Check out the LSP plugins. Don't think they can replace all
| calf plugins but I've been starting to replace the calf
| plugins I use with them. I like their equalizers better than
| the calf ones. Been starting to check out their filters.
| Their room builder looks pretty awesome but I haven't played
| with it.
|
| https://lsp-plug.in/
| rekado wrote:
| Honest author here -- I'm very happy that you noticed my humble
| blog post! I'm a big fan of Ardour and have been using it in my
| amateurish ways on and off since 200...7?
|
| I wasn't aware of the Calf plugins being a source of crashes.
| Recent versions of Ardour have _never_ crashed on me (different
| story for earlier versions). "Basic DSP mistakes" also sounds
| alarming. I'll take note of that for future projects.
|
| Perhaps the pretty UI could be adapted for suggested
| alternatives. It would help all those superficial people like
| me to migrate :)
|
| On a more serious note I like how _intuitive_ the Calf UI is;
| almost every plugin lays out its primary parameters in a way
| that is very compatible with how I approach my work. I 'm a
| command line person, so I certainly could make do with
| automatically generated interfaces from the LV2 manifests, but
| ... I try to shed my developer persona when having fun with
| audio, so anything pretty that keeps me from thinking too much
| helps to keep me in the zone.
| afro88 wrote:
| > "Basic DSP mistakes" also sounds alarming.
|
| It does, but as a musician, I don't think anyone should care
| so much about this. If you like how it sounds, and it's
| working in your productions - great!
| PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
| Zipper noise when adjusting parameters? This is about as
| basic as it gets. If you can't hear it, you probably
| shouldn't be mixing your own music, because lots of other
| people will.
|
| (of course, "DSP mistakes" can often be used creatively and
| there's nothing wrong with that)
| te_chris wrote:
| Dude, chill. End result is what matters, if it's music,
| it's music.
| soperj wrote:
| Lol. The guy wrote Ardour. Might know a thing or two.
| grawprog wrote:
| I'm curious about why the author's using Jack1 rather than Jack2.
| Is Jack2 not available for guix? Jack1 has a bunch of limitations
| compared to jack2 and hasn't been in active development for a
| while apart from bugfixes.
|
| In general though, it looks much the same as music production on
| linux, which I absolutely love the workflow of.
|
| Being able to arbitrarily patch the inputs and outputs to any
| other input and output between jack aware software is honestly
| one of the coolest things i've seen.
|
| I started making music on the computer back on windows. After
| switching to linux for regular usage, I started looking into
| music production stuff, as soon as I figured out how it all
| worked, i was amazed. I couldn't imagine going back to a system
| where you're confined to a DAW.
|
| Your entire computer becomes one big modular DAW that you can
| combine nearly endlessly.
|
| There may not be as wide a selection of proprietary plugins as on
| windows or Mac, but what is there can be up there in quality and
| there's so many available, you're bound to find something with a
| sound you like.
|
| The calf plugins mentioned in the article are phenomenal. Also a
| fan of the LSP plugins, the togu audio line ones are always
| pretty decent.
|
| There's a ton available and new ones appearing all the time.
|
| https://www.kvraudio.com/plugins/the-newest-plugins/linux
| AndrewUnmuted wrote:
| > I'm curious about why the author's using Jack1 rather than
| Jack2. Is Jack2 not available for guix? Jack1 has a bunch of
| limitations compared to jack2 and hasn't been in active
| development for a while apart from bugfixes.
|
| I write in a rambling little post I made last year about my
| Linux audio mastering workflow [0],
|
| >> We will be using jack2 because using jack1 in 2019 is
| stupid! The multi-threading, MIDI, and other various features
| of jack2 are deal-breakers, not nice-to-haves.
|
| In my experience, the need for jack2 is amplified even further
| when you want to work with modern plugins like the ones you
| mention at KVR.
|
| > Being able to arbitrarily patch the inputs and outputs to any
| other input and output between jack aware software is honestly
| one of the coolest things i've seen.
|
| Indeed! When I was a studying audio engineering at university
| this was a huge revelation and few of the professors &
| professionals I was surrounded by had any idea this
| functionality was out there. The fact that it was FOSS blew
| their minds.
|
| If you want to go even further down the modularity rabbit hole,
| check out non-daw [1].
|
| [0] https://grathwohl.me/2019/05/05/linuxmasteringflow-1.html
|
| [1] https://non.tuxfamily.org/
| PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
| JACK2's benefits over JACK1 are: * dbus
| integration * multi-core parallelism * click-
| free port connect/disconnect
|
| But: the first only matters on systems with PulseAudio
| installed (or where you insist on being able to use dbus to
| control JACK). The second only matters if you have actual
| parallel signal flows, which many people do not. The third is
| only possible if you run JACK2 in non-sync mode, which adds
| an extra cycle of latency.
|
| JACK1's continuing benefits over JACK2: *
| integration of a2jmidid so no need to use separate tools to
| make MIDI devices visible * integration of zita-a2j
| making it easy to use multiple audio devices from a single
| JACK instance
|
| I believe that Filipe, the current maintainer of both JACK
| versions, plans to unify these features.
| mxmilkb wrote:
| > If you want to go even further down the modularity rabbit
| hole, check out non-daw
|
| falkTX (of KXStudio/Carla/JACK/etc) made a fork of non-mixer
| that supports LV2 plugins;
|
| https://github.com/falktx/non
|
| Even deeper is JACK/LV2 CV;
|
| https://linuxmusicians.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=20701
| grawprog wrote:
| I've used non, I like it and I like the idea, I wasn't really
| a fan of the ui though. I used non-sequencer for a bit but
| ended up switching to muse and rosegarden before Ardour got
| midi. I find it almost a bit too modular. I do like the idea
| of having ardour as an end point for various things.
|
| I tend to sequence and record audio into ardour then do some
| processing and mixing there.
|
| Then I'll mixdown in ardour then patch that track through
| jamin into a new ardour track for mastering.
|
| I find that setup still gives me flexibility while having a
| sort of centralized 'master console' or something.
| PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
| jamin ... i hate to be a nag, but _please_ _please_
| _please_ stop using this software. Conceptually it 's a
| cool application, but the DSP artifacts it generates are
| just awful.
|
| There are plugins you can use within Ardour that will do a
| much better job than jamin.
| grawprog wrote:
| Could you point me to some? I started using jamin when it
| was pretty much the only mastering available, if there's
| something better now I'd like to check them out.
| PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
| The Harrison XT plugins would be the obvious thing to
| point to, though they are not FLOSS.
|
| LSP multiband compressor. x42 limiter. Zam multiband
| compressor.
| rekado wrote:
| Author here. I use JACK 1 because it serves me well enough. I
| don't need the DBus features JACK 2 has, for example. Up until
| recently the recommendation was to use whichever version you
| want; now I just checked and the JACK authors recommend the use
| of JACK 2.
|
| JACK 2 is, of course, available in Guix and has been for a long
| time.
| grawprog wrote:
| Fair enough. Makes sense. Thanks for responding and for your
| article. I did enjoy the read. It's always good to see more
| stuff on FOSS music production and see how other people work.
| jfb wrote:
| This is the nerdiest thing I've seen in a long, long, long time
| (a _Chapman Stick_?!?) and I _love it_.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2020-11-26 23:00 UTC)