Posted by
emmett
on from the it's-hot-it's-cool-it's-jazz dept.
lactose99 writes: "For all you musicians, head over to Jazzware and get Jazz++ v4.0. It's free, it's GPLed, and it looks like a nice improvement over v3.2. You can download versions for Linux (.RPM and .tar.gz), Windows, and the source code." You like music? You like MIDI? Go get this right now.
Re:Good, but not good enough
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 3
Where is the moderation here at Slashdot? I tried Jazz for Windows years ago and found it difficult to use (compared with some other midi software), but if there have been any improvements + open source this is great news for Linux. Jazz++ does have some nice features and does do what it promises to to - provide a way to create midi tracks (not necessarily the latest audio effets) either with real time input through a midi device or with score or piano roll tracks plus some nice tools for composition. You dumbasses who whine because this lacks the latest proprietary gimmick found on Win or Mac - which has only to do with audio effects and not music composition - know nothing about music composition. What is needed is a way for a musician to quickly input and record midi tracks which are not the same as audio cuts (although these can optionally be mixed in or be synched to a midi track). A great musician or any creative person wants to COMPOSE, not produce sound effects only for immature persons who don't understand the difference. I will certainly give Jazz++ another try - this time on the Linux side.
In the words of my father, shortly after I explained to him the current problems with mp3s and dvds, "Why don't you people who are making open source software start making music and movies the same way?"
The future structure of entertainment will be decentralized. The artist on the street will be able to be an artist, and the suits will go on building factories to manufacture suits.
Hey, if this is going to be freshmeat.net, that's fine, I understand, but can we get a little more info on what the software does? This posting reads like all the spam e-mails that clutter my in-box.
Take a look at the article posted about Lego today, and notice how descriptive it is while still maintaining the same length. It's just a matter of exchanging one sentence of hype for one sentence of description about what the software does. Can we pull that off? Thanks!
GramoFile is built exactly for removing clicks and pops from digitized LPs. Here's the homepage for GramoFile:
http://panic.et.tudelft.nl/~costar/gramofile/
GramoFile will not only remove clicks and pops, but it does so on the fly, and it will also automatically split the tracks for you... it's a neat program. Unfortunatley, it doesn't do noise reduction. You can check out:
http://www.sci.fi/~mjkoskin/
For dnr and denoi, two command-line denoising programs. I've used them a little, and they seemed okay, but I haven't gotten around to really testing them out.
You can also apparently use Broadcast 2000 for noise reduction, but I couldn't get it to work. It's homepage is:
http://heroine.linuxave.net/bcast2000.html
-- To within half a percent, pi seconds is a
nanocentury. -- Tom Duff
Lets make some mirrors before their site is/.'ed (Server located in Denmark/Europe)
http://www.iot.dk/~laursen/jazz/
Re:Music as source code: Off-topic
by
spiralx
·
· Score: 3
Hmm, a tricky question, but I'll give it my expert IANAL opinion:) MIDI files are simply a method of encoding instructions for playing a piece of music - they are a digital equivalent of a musical score. Since a musical score is protected as free speech, so really should a MIDI file - it allows the musician to "express" the ideas they have about music.
But an MP3 cannot be used to exchange information or express anything about music in that way - its only use is for playing back a *finished* piece of music. This is the key difference between the two formats - one can communicate the idea behind the music, one can only play a finished product. So MIDI files would count as free speech, and MP3s wouldn't.
Re:Good, but not good enough
by
guran
·
· Score: 3
Yet another piece of open source "wishware" which claims to be the equal of any commercial offering on the market...
Isn't the point of Open Source that someone else can turn A Good Start into KillerApp 7.2?
If [program X] is Open and [standard Y] is open... well what is keeping you (or someone else) from releasing Y-enabled X?
--
All opinions are my own - until criticized
Re:What's up with music apps on linx????
by
bfree
·
· Score: 3
It's simple, linux is a viable platform for most things, but NOT audio....yet I have a friend who amongst other things even sells linux boxes but he doesn't run it himself as he is a audio artist primarily, until he has a solid sequencer and soundforge type app he can't consider it (unless vmware). We need to plug this hole in our software soon otherwise the support Be is receiving as an audio platform (from Steinberg et al) will mean linux will never be acceptable as an audio platform. Not everyone needs high power audio capabilities, but if every home can use there PC with a simple midi controller as a piano type tool (with free software) thats yet another reason why joe bloggs will go there.
--
Never underestimate the dark side of the Source
Has anybody gotten this to work?
by
Holger
·
· Score: 4
I see a serious problem with the "free music software helps free music" point of view. Musicians are not usually the most computer literate people around, and Jazz is still kind of difficult to install (this is not the first version I tried to check out). OK, so they have a rpm now - guess what it does? It contains the single file/tmp/jazz/jazz-bin-4.0.0.tar.gz and installs from there, then deletes the file. rpm deinstallation is of course not possible that way.
Then it complains about ALSA missing - well, I am using OSS, but that should be supported too. No problem - just a quick look in the documentation (no man page, btw, just some html) to find out that there is a.cfg file with options that can neither be altered from the program nor from the command line. So I configure the program for OSS there. Then it looks for/dev/sequencer2 or/dev/music, neither of which are standard linux devices according to/dev/MAKEDEV. And when I simply link/dev/music to/dev/sequencer, it asks me if I want to use my AWE64 as Midi output (so it kinda works), but when I try to play the demo song jazz.mid, it keeps spitting out errors ("sndctl_tmr_tempo: Invalid argument ioctl time_base: Invalid argument ioctl speed: Invalid argument unknown sequencer status 08" and so on). I stopped here. I doubt the average musician would even have gotten so far without help.
So now I am asking for some - is anybody able to enlighten me what I might be doing wrong?
If music was GPLed, and you released it with all samples and scores etc. (including Licence Agreeement...), forcing other people to do the same if they used your samples, etc.
Just a thought - does this trend exist someplace?
My Minor $0.02. Domini.
Reasons for music on Linux
by
TuRRIcaNEd
·
· Score: 4
Point No. 1: The generally agreed (stereotypical) musician is usually not very high up on the financial food chain (especially so if said musician is unsigned). OK, so the prices of Windows PC's (and usable Macs to a certain degree) is coming down. Unfortunately, the price of musical software on these platforms (At least musical software that is stable and is actually useful) is unacceptably high, bordering on extortionate. A good *free* (even as in beer) system would be a serious boon to those budding musicians who can't afford the overheads. With a free OS and a free package, the offer is seriously inviting. (This point is slightly negated by the fact that Jazz++ is also available for Windows, although Windows 9x's inherent instability could cause a problem, and most home musicians won't fork out for NT or 2k. The loss of DirectX plugins may be a downer on the Linux front, however)
Point No. 2 It is a documented fact that many computer freaks are avid followers of music too (Maybe the combination of form and artistry makes music appeal to them as much as programming). Many of these people (myself included) are not avid Microsoft fans, so the opportunity to have a usable music program on the OS of choice is a very cool idea.
The only worry is that RMS will inflict on us ever longer versions of the Free Software Song, with him on lead vocal;-)
-- - "How do we do it? Volume!" - The Bursar of Unseen University.
Slashdot Mirror
Where is the moderation here at Slashdot? I tried Jazz for Windows years ago and found it difficult to use (compared with some other midi software), but if there have been any improvements + open source this is great news for Linux. Jazz++ does have some nice features and does do what it promises to to - provide a way to create midi tracks (not necessarily the latest audio effets) either with real time input through a midi device or with score or piano roll tracks plus some nice tools for composition. You dumbasses who whine because this lacks the latest proprietary gimmick found on Win or Mac - which has only to do with audio effects and not music composition - know nothing about music composition. What is needed is a way for a musician to quickly input and record midi tracks which are not the same as audio cuts (although these can optionally be mixed in or be synched to a midi track). A great musician or any creative person wants to COMPOSE, not produce sound effects only for immature persons who don't understand the difference. I will certainly give Jazz++ another try - this time on the Linux side.
An open source application that sucks people away from its commercial competitors in droves.
Sometimes it pulls so hard that they switch hardware platforms to run a *nix so that they can use it.
In the words of my father, shortly after I explained to him the current problems with mp3s and dvds, "Why don't you people who are making open source software start making music and movies the same way?"
The future structure of entertainment will be decentralized. The artist on the street will be able to be an artist, and the suits will go on building factories to manufacture suits.
Hey, if this is going to be freshmeat.net, that's fine, I understand, but can we get a little more info on what the software does? This posting reads like all the spam e-mails that clutter my in-box.
Take a look at the article posted about Lego today, and notice how descriptive it is while still maintaining the same length. It's just a matter of exchanging one sentence of hype for one sentence of description about what the software does. Can we pull that off? Thanks!
What's your damage, Heather?
http://panic.et.tudelft.nl/~costar/gramofile/
GramoFile will not only remove clicks and pops, but it does so on the fly, and it will also automatically split the tracks for you... it's a neat program. Unfortunatley, it doesn't do noise reduction. You can check out:
http://www.sci.fi/~mjkoskin/
For dnr and denoi, two command-line denoising programs. I've used them a little, and they seemed okay, but I haven't gotten around to really testing them out.
You can also apparently use Broadcast 2000 for noise reduction, but I couldn't get it to work. It's homepage is:
http://heroine.linuxave.net/bcast2000.html
To within half a percent, pi seconds is a nanocentury. -- Tom Duff
Lets make some mirrors before their site is /.'ed
(Server located in Denmark/Europe)
http://www.iot.dk/~laursen/jazz/
Hmm, a tricky question, but I'll give it my expert IANAL opinion :) MIDI files are simply a method of encoding instructions for playing a piece of music - they are a digital equivalent of a musical score. Since a musical score is protected as free speech, so really should a MIDI file - it allows the musician to "express" the ideas they have about music.
But an MP3 cannot be used to exchange information or express anything about music in that way - its only use is for playing back a *finished* piece of music. This is the key difference between the two formats - one can communicate the idea behind the music, one can only play a finished product. So MIDI files would count as free speech, and MP3s wouldn't.
Isn't the point of Open Source that someone else can turn A Good Start into KillerApp 7.2?
If [program X] is Open and [standard Y] is open... well what is keeping you (or someone else) from releasing Y-enabled X?
All opinions are my own - until criticized
It's simple, linux is a viable platform for most things, but NOT audio....yet
I have a friend who amongst other things even sells linux boxes but he doesn't run it himself as he is a audio artist primarily, until he has a solid sequencer and soundforge type app he can't consider it (unless vmware).
We need to plug this hole in our software soon otherwise the support Be is receiving as an audio platform (from Steinberg et al) will mean linux will never be acceptable as an audio platform. Not everyone needs high power audio capabilities, but if every home can use there PC with a simple midi controller as a piano type tool (with free software) thats yet another reason why joe bloggs will go there.
Never underestimate the dark side of the Source
I see a serious problem with the "free music software helps free music" point of view. Musicians are not usually the most computer literate people around, and Jazz is still kind of difficult to install (this is not the first version I tried to check out). OK, so they have a rpm now - guess what it does? It contains the single file /tmp/jazz/jazz-bin-4.0.0.tar.gz and installs from there, then deletes the file. rpm deinstallation is of course not possible that way.
.cfg file with options that can neither be altered from the program nor from the command line. So I configure the program for OSS there. Then it looks for /dev/sequencer2 or /dev/music, neither of which are standard linux devices according to /dev/MAKEDEV. And when I simply link /dev/music to /dev/sequencer, it asks me if I want to use my AWE64 as Midi output (so it kinda works), but when I try to play the demo song jazz.mid, it keeps spitting out errors ("sndctl_tmr_tempo: Invalid argument ioctl time_base: Invalid argument ioctl speed: Invalid argument unknown sequencer status 08" and so on). I stopped here. I doubt the average musician would even have gotten so far without help.
Then it complains about ALSA missing - well, I am using OSS, but that should be supported too. No problem - just a quick look in the documentation (no man page, btw, just some html) to find out that there is a
So now I am asking for some - is anybody able to enlighten me what I might be doing wrong?
Wouldn't it be great if...
If music was GPLed, and you released it with all samples and scores etc. (including Licence Agreeement...), forcing other people to do the same if they used your samples, etc.
Just a thought - does this trend exist someplace?
My Minor $0.02.
Domini.
The generally agreed (stereotypical) musician is usually not very high up on the financial food chain (especially so if said musician is unsigned). OK, so the prices of Windows PC's (and usable Macs to a certain degree) is coming down. Unfortunately, the price of musical software on these platforms (At least musical software that is stable and is actually useful) is unacceptably high, bordering on extortionate. A good *free* (even as in beer) system would be a serious boon to those budding musicians who can't afford the overheads. With a free OS and a free package, the offer is seriously inviting. (This point is slightly negated by the fact that Jazz++ is also available for Windows, although Windows 9x's inherent instability could cause a problem, and most home musicians won't fork out for NT or 2k. The loss of DirectX plugins may be a downer on the Linux front, however)
Point No. 2
It is a documented fact that many computer freaks are avid followers of music too (Maybe the combination of form and artistry makes music appeal to them as much as programming). Many of these people (myself included) are not avid Microsoft fans, so the opportunity to have a usable music program on the OS of choice is a very cool idea.
The only worry is that RMS will inflict on us ever longer versions of the Free Software Song, with him on lead vocal ;-)
- "How do we do it? Volume!" - The Bursar of Unseen University.