Slashdot Mirror


A Sound Server For X

An anonymous reader writes "X.org, the organization that governs the evolution of the X11R6 specifications, has released a sound server for X, called MAS. According to their site: 'MAS integrates with a compatible X11 server on your desktop. It processes graphic information locally, alleviating the need for network transmission of uncompressed graphical content. Graphic events are easily synchronized with audio events for professional-quality multimedia and accessibility-enabled applications.'" The X.org site describes MAS as an "affiliated technology" rather than "official," but it is released under the same license. "MAS" stands for "Media Application Server," and it's developed by Shiman Associates.

55 of 220 comments (clear)

  1. What's wrong with the old ones? by martinde · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There are already a bunch of remote sound servers. I happen to like rplay, but there is also artsd, nas, esd, etc... Was the problem simply NIH syndrome?

    1. Re:What's wrong with the old ones? by akeru · · Score: 5, Informative
      1. esound sucks, I mean, really
      2. network transparent sound (ala X)
      3. tightly coupled video and audio (check out their page for the latency requirements)
      4. cooperates with the X server:
        can send audio data over a number of different transports, including CORE X


      I could go on, but I can summarize with: MAS is a much, much better solution than those you mentioned for X applications. To top it all off, I'm pretty sure it doesn't require X, and can be used for console apps as well. (mpg321, etc.)
      --

      Let's hope that there's intelligent life somewhere out in space 'Cause there's bugger-all down here on Earth.

    2. Re:What's wrong with the old ones? by optikSmoke · · Score: 3, Interesting

      arts = network-transparent, can be configured to send data over X, works with console apps, includes a plugin architecture for combining sound streams and applying funky effects and whatnot, and is already well-developed and stable. Also, it supports multiple underlying sound architectures (OSS, ALSA, and some for non-linux unices). Plus, it can play formats such as ogg and mp3, and can route normal oss apps to use it using artsdsp. Why the need to constantly be reinventing the wheel?

    3. Re:What's wrong with the old ones? by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 4, Interesting

      For one thing, I've wanted for a long time the convenience of being able, in one setting, to describe the remote-relationship for all media. I don't want to have to say, "send my $DISPLAY to this host, and then here's a command-line arg to do the same thing for this one music file I want to play." I want to be able to say, "Send all my media to $DISPLAY, both visual and audio" and then be able to have all X programs pick up on that.

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

    4. Re:What's wrong with the old ones? by VistaBoy · · Score: 3, Informative

      I have much to bitch about aRts...Quake 3 for Linux crashes at startup with it on, and artsdsp doesn't work very well with Quake 3. Not only do you have to do "artsdsp -m quake3", but when you fire a shot, you see the shot, and about two seconds later you hear it. To alleviate that little problem, you have to turn down the buffer that the aRts server has. However, in doing that, you make the sound stutter like a mofo. OSS works properly with Quake3, but aRts is a stumbling block.

      Remember: The first thing you should do when you log into KDE for the first time is go to the KDE sound server window and turn off the aRts server.

    5. Re:What's wrong with the old ones? by eviltypeguy · · Score: 5, Informative

      You only need the sound server if you want "gee neato" sound effects from KDE or Gnome. I'm not aware of any game or program personally that specifically requires one of these sound servers to be active. XMMS for example can output directly to /dev/dsp using the OSS driver.

    6. Re:What's wrong with the old ones? by dozer · · Score: 4, Informative

      aRts is every bit as bad as esd. That performance/latency slider is impossible to set such that sound has decent latency and doesn't stutter.

      This is life with aRts:

      Open control panel. Tweak slider down. Launch MAME.
      Open control panel. Tweak slider way up. Play mp3s while I work.
      Open control panel. Tweak slider down. Launch Quake3.
      Open control panel. Tweak slider up. Launch Xine. Live with audio and video being ~300ms out of sync because anything less causes horrible stutter.

      The worst part is, if aRts were designed properly, this slider would be totally unnecessary. aRts also uses an insane amount of CPU time.

      I'd like to see Gnome and KDE adopt Jack. Jack works. MAS sounds interesting too. I look forward to seeing comparisons.

    7. Re:What's wrong with the old ones? by Rysc · · Score: 2, Informative

      me@box2$ ssh box1
      Password:
      me@box1$ export SPEAKER="box2:0"
      me@box1$ ogg123 cool_sounds.ogg

      And hear it where I'm sitting, at box 2. Try THAt with esound or artsd.

      --
      I want my Cowboyneal
    8. Re:What's wrong with the old ones? by Phexro · · Score: 2, Informative

      Have you ever tried to use aRts' network transparancy? It's a sick joke. Neraly impossible to get functioning correctly, impossible to get working acceptably, and lacking any useful documentation or examples. I tried setting it up so I could have network audio on a (net-booted, diskless, Debian) X-terminal. I had to install aRtsd on the X-terminal (no problem), but ran in to problems because the aRts server must run as the same user that's logged in to the server. Small problem, since I use LDAP, but this destroyed my dreams of zero-administration on the X-Terminal. Oh, and aRtsd needs to be spawned on the X-Terminal at login time, and it doesn't die when you log out, so you need to manually kill off all the artsd processes, or restart the terminal.

      When I did (finally) get it to work at all, the sound stuttered when playing any kind of audio. Upped the buffers, to no avail. This is on a 100mbit switched network.

      Filed a bunch of bugs with the KDE/aRts folks, posted to the mailing lists and never got a satisfactory reply or fix.

      Bring on MAS.

  2. About time by InterruptDescriptorT · · Score: 3, Interesting

    From all the experience I've had with X applications, a sound server is the first thing that they need.

    I've used a lot of X apps that have crashed due to bad requests (especially those dealing with unsupported colourmaps), and it makes sense that someone would shore up the current state of the code and work on stability. But why has it taken so long?

    At any rate, this is a good step forward--hopefully we'll see more X-based apps improved as to stability and speed (X isn't the speediest thing in the world).

    --
    Karma: Excellent Birds (mostly as a result of listening to Laurie Anderson)
    1. Re:About time by damiam · · Score: 2, Funny

      A sound server for X. Think about it.

      --
      It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
  3. cool! by Domingos+Neto · · Score: 2, Funny
    Now this is a ground breaking technology: now I can listen to my mp3 collection even when I'm accessing my workstation remotely!

    Wait a few days and you'll see RIAA trying to sue them :o)

  4. Is it something like... by cronot · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ESound? Asd? ARTs? It seems a little different in concept, but I just can't get it. If it is, so cheers to the guys that made it... Linux at least (as I understand this is for X, so *BSDs and other *nix should benefit too) need a more standardized sound architecture (Yeah, I know about ALSA, but I mean something more higher level - like DirectSound)

    1. Re:Is it something like... by FooBarWidget · · Score: 2, Informative

      "but I mean something more higher level - like DirectSound"

      SDL?

    2. Re:Is it something like... by ikewillis · · Score: 5, Informative
      "ESound? Asd? ARTs? It seems a little different in concept"

      You should've read a little more about it. It's quite a bit more than a sound server, it's a graph-based media architecture, similar to DirectShow in Windows.

    3. Re:Is it something like... by stem · · Score: 2, Informative

      No, you can still use GStreamer. We're working with the GStreamer guys to get the integration right.

  5. I'll have to see the bandwidth tests first. by FreeLinux · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It processes graphic information locally, alleviating the need for network transmission of uncompressed graphical content.

    Since it relies on X11 I suspect the bandwidth requirements are going to be really high. X11 over the network is a bandwidth hog, that's all there is to it. Now they're adding sound?

    X11 needs a new protocol. Graphical applications run across the network consume ridiculous amounts of bandwidth. If you want to do a test try running the XMMS gui across the network via X11. The last time I did it, XMMS was using 11 megabits per second. It would really suck to try that over a modem or a 64K frame-relay link.

    1. Re:I'll have to see the bandwidth tests first. by akeru · · Score: 5, Interesting

      If XMMS is using that much, then it is seriously broken. Admittedly, X *can* use a lot of bandwidth, but the onus for this is almost entirely on the application (toolkit) developer. Gtk+ and QT used to be really bad at this, but have since improved dramatically. Even so, there are a lot of variables to consider and using a light-weight theme in your respective toolkit can make a large impact on network performance.

      When I work from home, I do so *entirely* out of an ssh-forwarded X connection, including, but not limited to, multiple XEmacs sessions, terminals and occasionally a remote Mozilla. The *only* problems I have encountered involved XEmacs doing silly things with the cut-buffer and pausing momentarily.

      I am, admittedly, not an expert on the X11 wire protocol, but from what I have read from those who are, it is not inherently bandwidth heavy, but any protocol can be abused.

      Additionally, sound is surprisingly light on a LAN. Doing some tests with K12LTSP esd integration Eric Harrison discovered that streaming audio frequently takes up less bandwidth than moving a window in "opaque" mode (contents continually updated)

      --

      Let's hope that there's intelligent life somewhere out in space 'Cause there's bugger-all down here on Earth.

    2. Re:I'll have to see the bandwidth tests first. by aardvarkjoe · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Your problem is that you're trying to use a program that relies on eye-candy over the network. (At least, I think that's the idea. I can't imagine any other reason for the incredibly bizarre interface of XMMS.) Of course it's going to be slow without a fast link. How is a "new protocol" going to help?

      This will essentially be the same as streaming audio from the network. (You might be able to cache some sounds locally, for improvement, but for playing music or whatever that's probably not much of an option.) No, the modem users probably won't find this useful. But those of us with a fast connection to the other computer can benefit greatly.

      --

      How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
    3. Re:I'll have to see the bandwidth tests first. by xeniten · · Score: 5, Informative
      It sounds like ( pun intended ) that they have taken bandwidth into account. There are a number of references to bandwidth performance on the MAS site.


      "MAS enables low-latency Internet conferencing and telephony. Automatic bandwidth measurements and MAS's dynamically-switchable CODECs insure that the conference quality scales from 56K modems to T1 lines. "


      "MAS integrates with a compatible X11 server on your desktop. It processes graphic information locally, alleviating the need for network transmission of uncompressed graphical content. Graphic events are easily synchronized with audio events for professional-quality multimedia and accessibility-enabled applications. "


      "MAS handles network-distributed media processing and intricate format configuration tasks. It continually measures system performance and adjusts its actions depending on the available system resources. The longer it runs, the better it knows your system."

      --
      Romana: "How did you know?" Doctor Who: "Ah, well, knowing is easy. Everyone does THAT ad nauseum. I just sort of hope"
    4. Re:I'll have to see the bandwidth tests first. by eviltypeguy · · Score: 5, Informative

      Actually, MAS may integrate with X11, but it doesn't use the X11 protocol, it uses the "RTP" (Real Time Protocl RFC 1889, January 1996) for all communications. Except for multicast mode or in multi-participant mode. RTP is obviously very efficient for this type of data payload...

    5. Re:I'll have to see the bandwidth tests first. by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 2, Informative
      Okay, CD quality sound in stereo 44Khz * 2 = 88Khz.

      Assumin a 16 bit sample rate, That 88,000 * 16 = 1.4 MB/sec. Worst case scenario, uncompressed. Everything in real life will be cutting some kind of corner, so this is the uber high-ball. (Drop your bir rate in half by going to 8 bit sampling, and again by going to 22Khz.)

      That really isn't all that outrageous.

      Now, if you are trying to make sound work over a modem, JUST USE THE PHONE INSTEAD.

      --
      "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
      --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
    6. Re:I'll have to see the bandwidth tests first. by Dynedain · · Score: 2, Informative

      If you have ever seen WinAmp, then you would understand the "incredibly bizzarde interface of XMMS". XMMS is designed to act like WinAmp, and use the thousands and thousands of WinAmp skins available.

      --
      I'm out of my mind right now, but feel free to leave a message.....
  6. no mas! by prockcore · · Score: 4, Funny

    Great, all the people who think X is too bloated as it is will now be crying "No mas!"

  7. Virtual Environments - Network Monitors by VoidEngineer · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Lots of neat applications, actually. One of my favorites is a network monitoring room... For instance: network monitoring apps sample your network traffic once a second... while bandwidth and processor utilization of your servers is within preset values, an audio file of a creek is played over your X-enabled speaker system. When congestion occurs, you here a new audio file played (which is, of course, mixed into the original creek audio-file) of a herd of cows drinking water, or something... When a router or server goes down, an alarm is triggered, and a flock of crows start caw-ing; or an elephant trumpets, or whatever...

    The point is, when everything is going fine, the audio environment of your network control room sounds like a peacefull woodland setting, or something. When something goes wrong, you hear the animals going crazy. It's a really, really great way to monitor a large network, without being glued to a network monitor all the time.

    Typically, an X-server would alert you to each of these above mentioned alerts and statistics by displaying a video-file of some sort, which is displayed on your video monitor (CRT, LCD). With an X-sound-server, you can pipe the same alerts and statistics to audio-files which are 'displayed' on your sound monitors (speakers).

    1. Re:Virtual Environments - Network Monitors by Greedo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You're talking about Peep, right?

      --
      Tuus crepidae innexilis sunt.
    2. Re:Virtual Environments - Network Monitors by itallushrt · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Sorry that is off-topic, but after working in a large NOC for several years I think I can speak from experience by saying that the last thing I want to hear when my network starts going haywire is a bunch of loud ass crows or some elephant blathering about who knows what.

      Anyone who has ever dealt with a network down emergency will probably agree that in reality you would want your example sound samples reversed. You need the annoying stuff while everything is operating properly to help you stay awake, and the mellow "creek sounds" when your in all out panic mode ready to explode.

    3. Re:Virtual Environments - Network Monitors by stor · · Score: 2

      What's wrong with logfiles?

      Cheers
      Stor

      --
      "Yeah well there's a lot of stuff that should be, but isn't"
    4. Re:Virtual Environments - Network Monitors by ryanvm · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'm surely getting some of the details wrong, but I believe that one of the big tech universities had something like this. It was a big cable that extended from the floor to the ceiling, and it moved according to the amount of network congestion being experienced. So if utilization was down around 5 or 10 percent it would be gently wiggling, but as utilization increased the degree to which it would thrash and flail increased too.

      I always thought that would be wicked in a server room.

  8. But does it go to 11 by niall2 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Thats the real question...

    --
    Today is a gift. Save the receipt.
    1. Re:But does it go to 11 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny


      apparently so!

      devices/anx/mixer.c, line 96:
      (100 seems to be max volume)

      int16
      dbvol_to_linear( int16 dbvol )
      { .....
      if ( lvol > 110 ) lvol = 110; /* clamp at 110. It's one louder */ .....

    2. Re:But does it go to 11 by stem · · Score: 3, Funny

      The official reason is that we're going to restrict the volume settings to 0-100 for non-privileged users, and allow privileged users to set the volume up to 110. This way, privileged users can always punch through the mix with something that's a little bit louder. How much louder, you ask? One louder.

      There's also a db scale, but... it's just not the same thing.

      -Mike

  9. Poor name choice by soupdevil · · Score: 3, Informative

    There is already a MAS associated with audio -- MOTU Audio System plugins.
    (http://www.motu.com/english/software/gl obal/index .html)

    Perhaps they should have done a bit of name research.

  10. Stability at last! by YetAnotherName · · Score: 3, Funny

    A sound, solid server will certainly help with all sorts of stability problems I've experienced with X over the years.

    Oh wait ... you meant sound as in audio? Oh, nevermind.

  11. Is the X Consortium relevant anymore? by GGardner · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Is the X Consortium (err, the Open Group), even relevant anymore? Substantially all the good work for X is done under the auspices of the XFree86 folks, or the higher level toolkits (GTK, KDE, etc.).

    The last big push from the Open Group was Broadway, which was an X protocol based plugin for web browsers. Look at how popular it is today! Their XPrint work is just as successful.

    1. Re:Is the X Consortium relevant anymore? by akeru · · Score: 2, Insightful

      XFree86 is the "Official" X.Org references implementation, if that answers your question.

      And XPrint is pretty successful, if you count non-Linux platforms (where XFree86's Xprt XPrint server is horribly broken)

      --

      Let's hope that there's intelligent life somewhere out in space 'Cause there's bugger-all down here on Earth.

    2. Re:Is the X Consortium relevant anymore? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      > XFree86 is the "Official" X.Org references implementation, if that answers your question.

      For a long time, x.org snubbed XFree86. It was finally accepted into the fold because the popularity of XFree86 had gone way above and beyond any other, and X.org had thus become quite irrelevent compared to Xfree86.

  12. NIH = Not Invented Here. by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What does the National Institutes of Health have to do with this? :_|

    NIH = Not Invented Here. (Implication: So let's ignore it and reinvent this wheel our own way. Like maybe without that obnoxious radial symmetry. Besides, a round wheel might violate some patent. So let's have lots of engineer fun and waste lots of money, instead of pulling an existing design off the shelf, filing off a few rough spots so it will fit, and installing it.)

    NIH goes along with management that thinks you need young developers who are constantly creating (and will reinvent the bubble sort), rather than experienced developers who already have the answers in the can (and will pull down their copy of Knuth Vol III and pick the right sort for the job.)

    Which is not to say that I agree with the poster's conclusion that they may be ignoring fine solutions in order to construct one of their own. Integrating the video and audio server and protocols - rather than grafting audio onto an existing video server (which is in turn grafted onto something originally designed for more static displays) - is the right solution for synchronized video/audio. And the integration may have different problems than gluing the bag onto the side of the kludge.

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    1. Re:NIH = Not Invented Here. by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 2, Interesting

      With your line of logic we should still be using the Bi-plane.

      One of the things an experienced engineer is better at than a newbie is knowing WHEN to use a well-known, well-debugged solution, and WHEN to go invent a new one.

      It is unthinking reinvention that led to abortions like BART, which I could deconstruct at length. Hint: Using aerospace engineers - whose only experience with wheels-on-surface is landing gear - to reinvent the train results in discarding nearly two centuries of well-debugged solutions and gives you a very rough ride. And an expensive one: The only manufacturer of new rolling stock is in France, and charges over 6 million bux for a single car.

      Another case is the old AK-47 verses the M16 debate. Yes the M16 shoots straighter, and farther. But the AK-47 can be repaired in the field, has a higher rate of fire, and is dirt cheap to make. Depending on your needs, one works or the other.

      If given proper ammunition the M16 does very well in the field and doesn't NEED repair. And the gas system is self-cleaning, so you don't need to take it down and clean it in the field. Just keep reloading and firing.

      Unfortunately, immediately after its introduction an admiral decided to have a bunch of going-out-of-date ball powder for naval guns remanufactured into rounds for he M16. Now a single round of a big navy gun uses a LOT more powder than a single round of an M16 - so one lot of power redone as .222 can supply the whole war for several months, which is exactly what happened, JUST as they were going into general service.

      Given the correct powder the M16's gas system is self-cleaning. But fouling isn't a big problem for a navy biggun, so not leaving a cloud of carbon wasn't high on the design parameters for ship gun powder. So the out-of-spec rounds smoked something fierce, to the point that firing a few boxes totally clogged the gas system, turning the M16 into a single-shot slide-action, typically at some inopportune moment when it was being used heavily.

      So the M16 got a rep as a tight-tolerance jam-prone turkey. Once the problem with the out-of-spec powder was discovered (and a few heads quietly rolled) the M16s stopped jamming and no longer needed to be "repaired in the field".

      AKs were designed by a (genius) wounded sergant in WWII, to be manufacturable with the level of steelmaking available in Russia while their still-primitive infrastructure was being pounded by the Germans. They are a solid, reliable, full-auto that could be built to tolerances achievable under such adverse conditions, enabling Russia to rearm its soldiers (which were mostly using bolt-actions at the time). The design stayed popular because it could be manufactured by any Soviet client state that was just starting to get steelmaking going. So it became the insurgents' weapon-of-choice.

      But don't forget to clean them immediately after use, because much of the cold-war era ammo is corrosive-primed. And a rotted-out AK will die in action quite as effectively as a powder-fouled M16.

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  13. About time! by Kickasso · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And for those who are asking what's wrong with existing sound servers: there's no standard mechanism to query whether one of them is running, especially on a remote machine. (No, relying on magic port numbers is wrong.) And not all of these servers run under all Unix variants. I personally have had very hard time trying to make aRTs work under comercial unices. With this stuff you just talk to X server. There's hope big players will support it because X is the industry standard. esd, to put it bluntly, isn't.

    1. Re:About time! by Jace+of+Fuse! · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I know a lot of people get upset thinking that a good standard coming along will make obsolete similar work done by others, but is this not what's good about open source?

      If there are wonderful ideas implimented in existing projects, what's great about them all can be brought together and implimented into a new and accepted standard. Applications that exist to support them all can easily be modified by the community to support the new standard.

      If there are 10 different sound servers out there in use, and they're consolidated down into just 1 or 2 using nothing but the best features, this can be a great thing. If one becomes standard and makes sound applications easier to bring to Unix, this is even better.

      I personally have a lot of problems with X, but I still think something like this is a very good thing.

      --

      "Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"

      Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
  14. Re:What X needs more than a sound server: by diamondc · · Score: 3, Insightful

    No. The X clipboard takes some used to (text copied with left button is different from text that is copied from ctrl+c), but it's been standard for over a decade.

    --
    "I keep looking in the want-ads under 'revolutionary' but there don't seem to be any listings.. "
  15. What about NAS? by axxackall · · Score: 4, Informative
    Why not use NAS, The Network Audio System?

    Key features of the Network Audio System include:

    • Device-independent audio over the network
    • Lots of audio file and data formats
    • Can store sounds in server for rapid replay
    • Extensive mixing, separating, and manipulation of audio data
    • Simultaneous use of audio devices by multiple applications
    • Use by a growing number of ISVs
    • Small size
    • Free! No obnoxious licensing terms
    Applications that support NAS natively: Not a troll
    --

    Less is more !
  16. Linux audio community has potentially better tool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I am a composer/musician using Linux for my needs and from what I've seen so far all of the aforementioned servers esd, asd, artsd etc. are rather rudimentary and incomplete. Furthermore they have monstrous latencies (which is a big problem for any kind of time-sensitive interactive music).

    To this date the best audio server on Linux is JACK, but unfortunately just as any other of the current servers, it is still under development. Nonetheless, its advantages over the given bunch of audio servers is immeasurable:

    1) absolutely the best latencies (including even other OS's) down to 2.5-3 milliseconds (you need to patch the kernel for low-latency operation though since the vanilla Linux kernel 2.4 and down has some big issues with the scheduler). All this is achievable even with the current version, even though it is under development.

    2) integration where the signal could be routed not only to the dsp but also between the apps (so you could theoretically get the signal routed from xmms into your real-time sound processing app and then to the audio recorder and audio output).

    3) Relatively easy to implement and allowing for practically unlimited number of connects

    4) Relatively low overhead

    Unfortunately, as I mentioned before it is still under development and has its own issues that need attention. Furthermore, apps need to be adapted to be compatible with this server (in another words this server is not trying to be compatible with older servers simply because they are inferior, dead-end kinds of implementations). That being said, it is still the best sound server around.

    I would really like to see Linux community let the audio programmers/musicians to provide solution to this issue, because they are the ones who know the best how to create the best possible sound server that will suit their highly demanding needs and yet provide a great architecture for the rest of the casual users.

    It is unfortunate though that instead of unifying our efforts everyone feels like they need to make a brand new implementation of the same idea instead of contributing to the projects that are already semi-mature and need further assistance in development. Because of this "so-called-diversity" we now have half-dozen sound servers out of which 90% blow chunks, while the other 10% have a great potential but are incomplete.

  17. Re:So, what do you use, then? by eviltypeguy · · Score: 2, Informative

    XMMS uses /dev/dsp with OSS output. And my games uses OSS with /dev/dsp as well. So no sound server necessary. Sure I don't get network transparency, but I don't need it. I bet you'd find that if you disabled both ESD and Arts that many of your games would still have sound, especially if they're using SDL.

    The only reason I can figure out that some people use sound servers is because their sound card doesn't support multiple opens of /dev/dsp with OSS, their applications don't support OSS directly (so instead they use the sound server) or they need network transparency.

  18. Interesting, but is it Pro Audio? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I got excited when I read the word "synchronized"
    thinking this might be a mixer with SMPTE timecode capabilities. One of the most important distinctions between "pro" A/V and "consumer" A/V is whether the tracks have a standard sync encoding. Without that, the best you can hope for is "close", and that is not acceptable for broadcast or production.

    This requirement is serious enough that pro gear has an input for a real hardware clock.

    Sync capabilities and clock controlled sampling are a few of the keys to us having pro audio production on inexpensive hardware. Unfortunately, the barriers to entry remain outrageously high.

    For most PC users, the sound card is strictly an output device. few will spend more than $100.00 on it, and even fewer will have audio tracks for which the bitrate or noise floor of these cards is a limiting factor. We tend to regard the sound card as a device for playing back audio that is at most, 44.1Khz, and at the deepest, 16 bit.

    For the rest, the sound card is an input device. As such, it theoretically could be as good an input device as that found on a $100,000 audio workstation, and there isn't really a good reason why we CAN'T make the poor-man's DAW if we use one of the better sound cards as a starting point.

    A timecoded 24-bit audio track which has not been resampled for the finished output is a minimum for "professional" work, and we *almost* have it on consumer gear! Everything except real timecode.

    I place this problem in the same category as the absense of colorspace management on The Gimp. Those who understand what it is, realize that it makes the difference of whether they can use it professionally; those who do not understand, don't care, and don't realize the magnitude of the problem.

  19. Slightly OT-Network Audio by mrmag00 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Slightly offtopic, but I figured I might as well take a shot- Has anyone successfuly piped audio from a Unix machine to a windows machine, across the network? I got it working using esd and a java version of esd, however the sound quality sucked (and java's sound support didn't like my 5.1 sound, I wouldn't mind but it had 0 bass).

    I've looked but can not find a native sound server for windows at all, in any form. Even somthing compiled with cygwin would probably work, but no luck there either.

  20. The view of the MAS developers by leon163 · · Score: 5, Informative

    This major code release is only our first step. We're putting the MAS core out there in order to create a useful open standard. We feel that this code represents a radical departure from prior attempts to manage time-critical data on the desktop and across the network. We see this as a valid and innovative architecture with extensive implications for the management of media of all modes. In particular, one of the important applications of this architecture is to time-critical accessibility tasks which can now be handled in a completely generic fashion.

    We encourage close examination of the code and we will do our best in the near term to bring as much of our insight and intention to the open community. We see this as an opportunity for collective and collaborative innovation.

    From our website:

    MAS will provide a complete mechanism for media support, for all pluri-modal media, for all platforms, for all operating systems, for all window systems.

    MAS supports the desktop and, transparently, the network. In particular, MAS will provide complete support for the X Window System, across the network.

    MAS is an open system: the complete core will remain under the original MIT ("X") license, equally supporting open and proprietary use and development.

    MAS provides mechanisms for structured extension, and will be supported by dedicated testing and certification processes.

    We wish explicitly to thank Sun Microsystems and X.org for their generous support.

    Leon Shiman for the MAS Development Team

  21. Other Applications by VoidEngineer · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Hmmm... people seem to have liked the other post, so I'll offer some other (potential) practical applications for the sound server. Just my 2 cents...

    1. CAVE environments. Anybody who's worked in an X11 CAVE environment knows that X can handle video cube arangements. Maybe not the most elegent way to run a cave, but it's do-able. X-sound-server can then provide 3D sound support to cave applications.

    2. PACS environments (terminal services). Do you have a *nix based picture archiving and communication system (PACS)? For example: a hospital or library kiosk system. Now, your PACS is an audio environment as well.

    3. Video Jockeying (VJ). If you're running a linux based VJ operation at a nightclub or dance hall, audio support is now available via X. You can now synchronize your video panels and speakers with the same daemon... Check out JMAX for more information...

    4. Voice-over-IP kludge. As microphones are basically just speakers operating in reverse, theoretically, the X-sound-server should support microphones at some level... Hack your X11 system to support XVOIP!

  22. Re:what about aRts by stor · · Score: 2, Funny

    Regardless it gives us a new thing to fight about, which is obviously A Good Thing.

    Cheers
    Stor

    --
    "Yeah well there's a lot of stuff that should be, but isn't"
  23. Why not NAS, from a MAS developer by stem · · Score: 5, Informative

    Well, we looked hard at the Network Audio System (NAS), and at DEC AudioFile, and esound and aRTs. And we looked hard at the efforts of Tice and Welch at the X Consortium whose X Common Audio project was to take the best of the NAS and DEC AudioFile to form the standard solution. And, we looked hard at all kinds of other soundserver-related things out there.

    Our conclusion: none of them had the kind of system-pervasive time management one needs to handle sound, let alone video or other time-dependent information. The system that came closest to meeting our timing needs was DEC AudioFile, but it was not extensible enough for our needs, and lacked support for sample rate conversion.

    We didn't take the conclusion lightly. As you say, there's all these applications that support the Network Audio System natively. There's all those old NCD X tubes that support it in firmware, too. And, I really have no interest in stepping away from code that has most of its bugs worked out. But, we just did not see how NAS would scale in both performance and in functionality to handle the kind of high-performance multi-media we all want to see on Linux and UNIX.

    I think MAS is a great platform to handle the timing. It's young, though. We're working hard now on a soundserver-style API to ride on top of the lower level core API that's in the source distribution. Beyond that, there are a host of security issues to work through, and the X.org standards process. (Also on our to-do list is a more detailed developement roadmap for the website!)

    I think there's a ton of cool, useful stuff in the core of MAS now. For instance, we compute a running estimate of your soundcard's actual sampling rate. You can use that estimate to drive the sample rate converter (srate) device to resample audio to the actual rate of your sound card. We've been appalled at how far off some soundcards' crystals have been!

    Please be patient if you e-mail us... We're getting a lot of e-mails for some reason.

    Thanks,
    Mike Andrews
    Lead Developer, Media Application Server (MAS) Project

  24. MAS is not a tool by g4dget · · Score: 2, Insightful
    X11 is not a window system, it's a network protocol. That's its strength. XFree86 is a reference implementation.

    Likewise, we don't need another network audio codebase, we need a good network audio protocol. It looks like MAS provides that. As a bonus, you also get a reference implementation.

  25. 3D audio rendering? by Somnus · · Score: 2

    Does anybody know if MAS (or alternatively jack) can handle a driver for 3D audio rendering, not unlike DRI+Mesa in XF86?

  26. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2, Informative

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  27. Cue Flashback to 1992 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You only need the Windows Sound System for "gee neato" sound effects from Windows. I'm not aware of any game or program personally that specifically requires Windows Sound System to be active. CDPLAY.EXE for example can output directly to a SoundBlaster using a TSR.