Slashdot Mirror
Ask Slashdot: Best Cross-Platform (Linux-Only) Audio Software?
blogologue writes "I have played the guitar for some years now, and these days I think it's good therapy to be creative with music, learning the piano and singing as well. So far I've been using Audacity as the tool to compose improvisations and demos. I haven't done much audio work before, but it is already becoming too limited for my needs. Being a Linux-fanboy since the mid-nineties, I'm now looking for a good audio processing/editing/enhancing setup that can run on different platforms, the most important being Linux. Are there any suggestions for Open Source or proprietary audio editing software that run on Linux?"
Great mutlitracking software, simple enough and straightforward if you know your way around other DAW environments like Pro-Tools or Cubase, keyboard shortcuts can be easily customized.
Ardour
or read this
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Top-10-Linux-Distributions-for-Audio-Production-64552.shtml
use google next time
For quite some years now, Ardour has been the apparent frontrunner in the area you are asking about.
"Cross-Platform"
"Linux-Only"
Pick one.
Forget using an audio editor for song composition, what you need is a proper audio host (commonly called a DAW).
The options for Linux have been a bit lacking but that is about to change with the impending release of Bitwig. Developed for Mac / Win / Linux, it functions similar to Ableton Live, which is incredibly popular for a good reason - it's unique take on music arrangement means it is great for jamming, live performance and experimenting with ideas. Check it out here:
https://bitwig.com/en/bitwig-studio
Peace,
Andy.
There is another option for Linux which is open source - PyDAW. Check out the project here:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/libmodsynth/
Although I have no experience with PyDAW, it has been in development for some time and should be very stable.
Peace,
Andy.
When it comes to proprietary audio software for Linux my favourite is Renoise: http://renoise.com/
Why is the very first thing that you ask for a severe restriction in your options? Go to an Apple store and have a look at Garageband.
Why is the very first advice that you give is a severe restriction of his options? Go to a google.com and have a look at better software/OS.
that said. My experience with linux daws are a bit limited. Ardour would be the first one for me to try if i moved my audio editting to linux.
Well, that was certainly an ironic answer.
They are porting it to Linux, http://www.tracktion.com/,
it is low cost.
I'm looking for contradictory things.
Qtractor:
Qtractor is an Audio/MIDI multi-track sequencer application written in C++ with the Qt4 framework. Target platform is Linux, where the Jack Audio Connection Kit (JACK) for audio, and the Advanced Linux Sound Architecture (ALSA) for MIDI, are the main infrastructures to evolve as a fairly-featured Linux desktop audio workstation GUI, specially dedicated to the personal home-studio.
Qtractor is free, open-source software, distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public License (GPL) version 2 or later.
http://qtractor.sourceforge.net/qtractor-index.html
Posted by someone named "iliketrash" and with a heading of "Flamebait", at least you are living up to your advertising.
Don't make ridiculous OS constraints. Linux has it's place and this is not it.
So, how again is your post helpful to this discussion? It's more like a random rant that sounds(reads) like a fart. You could have posted your favorite tool here, mentioning it only runs windows/mac but that you think the functionality is worth it.
However, you did not provide any other information than that you think 'linux is for retards'. Calling fine software (audacity) that millions of users use 'crap', just because it does not suit each and every situation, not really aids your case either. Also you did not mention why exactly this other platform would be better and what issues it would fix.
So please leave a reply, say what software _you_ would like to use, and argue why this software is better - and let us readers decide or rethink this choice of platform if it has to be so to support this piece of software.
... good community around it too: http://lmms.sourceforge.net/lsp/index.php
The submitter already uses Audacity, you fuckwit.
in my experience ALL pc audio hardware has been (i believe deliberately) crippled, since the late nineties. when i began writing recording software for myself, under OSS, in the previous millenium, there was a simple "set and trigger" function that allowed you to fire off the record and playback devices simultaneously, resulting in true zero latency recording. suddenly, within a very few years, this functionality began to disappear, until we arrive at the present, when it appears to be lacking completely. since, as far as i know, virtually every audio chip runs both devices off the same clock, it seems utterly ludicrous that modern multi-track, at least outside of very high end professional hardware, seems satisfied with latencies accurate to within a "few tens" of samples, as "guessed" by the driver. while this might seem a tiny offset, at 44k samples per second, it is variable, and never consistent, at least not on any "standard" hardware i have been able to test. for my own satisfaction, i have been reduced to using an external loopback, and measuring true "sync" by direct observation of the recorded output thus returned. the difference, to my ears, is stunning, especially when doubling vocals. true zero latency is very important, in any even halfway professional studio. am i missing something? as far as i can see, from fairly extensive duckducking (anti-googling, to those who care) the industry continues to ignore this most important, and essentially trivial, basic requirement. does anyone know why, or can explain what i am missing?
If Audacity is becoming too limited, perhaps you
1. Need more multitrack features (Audacity is more an editing tool than a mixing one)
2. Need a DSP (Digital Signal Processing) package so you can create your own audio processing patches
As Audacity uses LADSPA plugins, you'll have the same ones in Ardour and any other DAW (Digital Audio Workstation) software. Another DAW would give you other analysis and another UI, but unless it goes beyond LADSPA/LV2, you'll have the same audio processing plugins. A "next step" here would be working with audio directly by programming, designing synthesis models, filters and so on. Usually that's not easy, but that's what many contemporary music composers do all the time.
For the asked "good audio processing/editing/enhancing setup that can run on different platforms", I suggest you try AudioLazy (https://github.com/danilobellini/audiolazy) as part of this setup. It's an open source DSP for Python. Functions like "lowpass", "highpass", "resonator" gives you some common linear filters, and you can make your own [time variant] linear filter with the "z" object, besides basic operations (e.g. multiplying signals), synthesis (ADSR model, table lookup, FM synthesis, etc.), non-linear processing (e.g. getting the "arctan" of a signal to distort it), etc..
As per the title.
This is a bit of a sidetrack, but never, ever admit to being a fanboy of something. You can certainly be a fan, nothing wrong with that, because a fan (a true fan) is someone who is capable of enjoying and supporting something while still recognizing the limitations or problems that exist with the thing they're a fan of. Fanboys do not, they are loud and miserable to anyone who points out flaws in what they're defending, and are some of the most annoying pricks ever to grace the Internet and completely ruin any form of intelligent discourse. Hopefully you're just a fan of Linux (like I am), and not a fanboy who makes us look like childish idiots*.
As for your question, I use Audacity as my main audio editor software as well. To be honest I have yet to encounter something with my (relatively modest) requirements for audio editing that Audacity couldn't do. It's pretty impressive. In terms of actually making music, I've dabbled with LMMS (mostly because unlike Ardour, I can still use it in Windows and prefer true cross-platform tools) but I'm not sure I'd could use it for much except simpler tracks.
* There are also Windows fanboys, believe it or not. Neowin.net is a prime location for said folk. Just be aware that they cannot destroy the reputation of Windows, whereas the vocal minority of Linux fanboys certainly can, which is why I'm deeply annoyed about fanboys in general. They can ruin a good thing.
There's lots of open-source audio production software out there. Ardour, mentioned by others, and for midi composition I quite like rosegarden. There's also a bunch of other software which follows a more unixy philosophy - it does one thing and does it well but it's designed to be chained together. For example, there's jack, a low latency audio framework designed for audio production. It has a nice patch panel which allows you to link the output of any jack-enabled software to the input of any other jack-enabled software, ad nauseum. There's also an insanely huge pile of LADSPA plugins available for any software which supports them (most open-source stuff). There are many, many open-source software synths: timidity and fluidsynth being only the tip of the iceberg. One which may be of interest is bristol - it's an emulator for many popular and famous old synths.
But when it comes down to it, I use FL studio. It's proprietary and not very highly regarded amongst some (snobby) audiophiles, but FL Studio runs quite well in wine, though it may require some tweaking to get it working smoothly. I like FL studio for its intuitive interface and bundled synthesizers. It's easy to use for a beginner with little audio production experience but it has enough knobs and dials that you're not lacking for options when you want to start getting more technical.
I highly recommend running FL studio in it's own wineprefix so that you can tweak to your heart's content and so that other wine programs don't interfere with it. Since wine and FL both support ASIO you can plug FL studio into jack and use all the awesome open-source jack-based tools out there in conjunction with FL.
For the open-source crowd, there's the inevitable open-source recreation: LMMS (Linux Multimedia Studio). When I last played with it it was very new and immature but it did support using VSTs through wine and it looks like it has matured well - I'd definitely recommend giving it a try.
Runs on all three. Windows with ASIO, OSX with core audio, and Linux via wine with wineasio + jack. Realtime latency is the best on a properly tweaked Linux system.
As everyone has noted, Ardour is great for recording. Another really useful tool is Guitarix which is a fantastic guitar amp and effects modelling piece of open source software. Plug your electric guitar directly into your computer via a USB interface (I use my Rocksmith connector) and you can amp/effect model in Guitarix and record as you play in Ardour. Add the Hydrogen and you've also got your drums playing and sync'ed as you record. As well recording, these make a great set of tools for guitar practice.
That's all you need. Nothing else comes close under Linux. Nothing. Get the Ubuntu Studio distro from http://torrent.ubuntu.com:6969/ and go to town.
www.ardour.org
Personaly i use Ubuntustudio, which has quite e lot of Audiosoftware bootstrapped and ready to use.
http://ubuntustudio.org/
Ardour and the Audio jack System are just two prominent examples. And the kernel used has some optimization for low latency audio.
Cheers
Metasepp
He needs a DAW, not a toy.
Calling fine software (audacity) that millions of users use 'crap'...
No, he was talking about "Adaucity", which is apparently so obscure, not even Google can find any developers associated with it. So that program might indeed be crap, but we'll never know.
The windows release of LMMS is a bit buggy and finicky, but once I installed it in Ubuntu Studio (I could go source-only route, but letting someone else manage the package dependencies is easier, k?) it ran very well. With JACK handling the low latency interconnects between the usb midi adapter and the soft synth, and from the soft synth into LMMS, or from a simple app with some ALSA out to a software effects rack (Ubuntu Studio comes with a few) with JACK connecting that to LMMS, it all just seems to work. JACK is the glue that ends up tying all the pieces together, but if you are a Linux audio geek you either know that or are going to get very familiar with it very quickly. The other two I have very little personal experience with, but they are other big name DAW in the Linux world that I have yet to see mentioned.
AV Linux (http://www.bandshed.net/AVLinux.html)
Has Ardour, LMMS, JACK and many other multimedia tools configured to work together. Can run either as live DVD or install to your harddisk.
Don't try to out wierd me, three-eyes. I get stranger things than you, free with my breakfast cereal. --Zaphod Beeblebr
Dynbolic is a linux distro I tooled around with for a bit, made specifically for musical editing and such, it's loaded with tools, can't hurt to give it a shot, I was using a live USB or CD version but you can probably install it aswell.
non.tuxfamily.org
Unlike Ardour it won't bring your system on it's knees.
He needs a DAW, not a toy.
Other than pretending you know the music "jive", you have no idea if he does. He didn't list his requirements, his experience, the sort of hardware he's willing to invest in. The GP's answer, as much as OSX blows chow for most stuff, is probably the right one for the VAST majority of people asking that sort of question.
You may like Linux (I do to for things it is good at) but when it comes to professional music software there is very little available. There are some multitrack recording and sequencing solutions but they often lack in available effects and virtual instruments as writing good sounding and efficient filters and instruments is extremely hard. You should seriously consider having a look at the options available for OSX or even Windows. I know apple hardware is high in price but Apple's Logic is relatively cheap (compared to the competition) and contains many high quality filters and outstanding virtual instruments (they have samples on their website). For big compositions you can even use multiple macs either by syncing them using MIDI over ethernet or by harnishing the processing power using xgrid to cluster them.
You might want to look into Renoise (www.renoise.com).
It's a tracker-style DAW which runs on Linux, MacOS and Linux which has a bunch of features and good plugins from the get-go. It also supports all plugin formats you need on those platforms (VST, LADSPA, DSSI, AU). It can also use samples as instruments just like the classic trackers did, which helps if you don't have any instrument plugins around.
It's closed-source, but it's only a fraction of the price of other DAWs and the development is very community driven. It's also customizable via LUA scripts.
I've got about a half terabyte library, and all the linux audio players couldn't handle them without crashing. Rhythmbox, banshee, and the other popular ones couldn't even import all my songs without crashing. Guayadeque seems to handle it just fine, and has all the features of the others.
If you think an operating system or software is going to help your musical creativity, you best not quit your day job.
I know ur looking for linux stuff, but I really really really think you should give mac a chance. A few minutes playing with garage band and you will understand what I'm talking about. After a few months playing with it, move to something more professional (I like and recommend Apple Logic).
I used Linux only for 7 years and then I was exactly where you are now (looking for a better way to record my songs on Linux), then I tried MacOSX and Garage Band. That was like a gift from heaven ;P
Good luck anyway.
It hard to go wrong with audacity if you just need a basic multi track audio editor although i will admit it is not as powerful as an editor like reaper or Ardour but then again it dose not need to be. it's not a full fledged DAW but it more the gets the job done. if your looking for a cross platform DAW you might want to look into Sunvox sure it's aimed mostly at synth users but it's surprisingly versatile. Heck Sunvox is even available for android and the files work on all platforms as they are self-contained.
Being a Linux-fanboy since the mid-nineties...
There's your first problem. Get over it; an OS is only a tool, a means to an end."I'm a Craftsman fanboy". "I'm a Snap-On fanboy." Sounds pretty silly, right? That's because it is silly. A tool is just that. It is either high-end and suitable, or it is junk and unsuitable for the task at hand.
If you're serious at all about your music, you use OS X or Windows. That's where the action is. Full stop. That's where the the real music software will be found; nowhere else. Swallow your pride, choose one of those 2 OS's, and get on with making music. Honestly, this is like GiMP vs. PhotoShop, but on a whole other level. There is NO comparison. Get on with life, and leave Linux in the server room, where it belongs. ALL of the pro-level tools (and most of the toy stuff, too) is on OS X and Windows. Why are you restricting yourself? You're killing your potential and being held back by insisting on using third-rate tools. And for what? Because you're a "fanboy"? Good God, man, grow up!
I say this as someone who makes their living as a Linux sysadmin. I use OS X at home, because I don't let a misguided sense pride get in the way of making music, among other things. You use the right tool for the job. PERIOD. Honestly, who intentionally sabotages themselves?
Mod me down, boys...
There is nothing. There is no good solution for you. That was the answer in 2005 when I first asked it, and that is the answer today.
Even an ancient copy of Cool Edit Pro running on Widows XP is more usable, useful, and powerful than any audio software available natively on Linux. Your non-professional, non-Windows options all share many (if not all) of these problems:
1. Limited basic functionality
2. Extensible only through writing your own code
3. Difficult (impossible) to configure
4. Literally the worst UIs you will ever see in your entire life
5. Often unable to work with digital mixers and audio interfaces
In the time it would take you to get something useful and functional working in Linux, you could spend the cash you would have made working minimum wage on Windows and Audition (or just pirate a copy of Cool Edit Pro).
GeekNights!
Late Night Radio for Geeks!
I think you would find it difficult these days to find an OS that could not meet your requirements. However, any software package requires practice (lots of it) to get the most out of it. If the O/P is familiar and comfortable with Linux then why change? Audacity was a good choice for the O/P as a starter, as it has a shallow learning curve. Ardour will do much more (including very valuable non-destructive editing) but will take some time to get to grips with. The version coming out soon will also have extensive MIDI capabilities.
If the O/P is going down the road of keyboard instruments, he/she can save an enormous amount of money and buy a dumb keyboard then link to one of the many excellent free soft-synths - more learning of course, so maybe stick to the accoustic material first then gradually bring in other stuff. A recipe for disaster is to try and do it all at once.
The bottom line is that you don't need a lot of expensive hardware and software to produce first class results, but you do need to know how to make the best use of what you have and, most important of all, you need to develop you musical abilites as far as possible. I have heard astonishingly good music produced on the simplest of kit, and utter rubbish using top-line professional stuff.
But as a hobbyist recording musician, the best free stuf out there all runs on Windows. And there is tons of it, from sequencers, editors, effects, synths, amp models and lots of fun experimental stuff. If you love Linux more than the potential all these free goodies offer for your music making then you will have to miss out on them. I would suggest, however, that the purchase of a cheap second hand Windows PC with a decent sound card would be greatly beneficial to your enjoyment of music making (my main music PC still runs Win 98 and it's fast and stable enough for all my needs : being more lightweight than subsequent Windows versions seems a real plus when it comes to issues like audio latency which are a potentail problem when running emulation layers such as Wine).
It's good that there is stuff for Linux, but an investment of a few bucks will allow you access to the best of both worlds.
BTW in my paid work, my systems run exclisively on Linux, as it is FAR superior to Windows as a server operating system.
I'm looking for the same thing, something better than Audacity. Since I've been buying recordings for almost half a century I have a lot of analog recordings that I've been digitizing. I have an ancient Dell tower running Windows XP, and the only thing I use that computer for is digitizing using EAC, a free but Windows-only program. I can sample an LP or cassette (which of course takes as much time as playing the record) then spend five minutes telling EAC where it changes tracks, then burn it to CD. I havent' found the tools to do this in Audacity.
I hope I can find a good Linux program, otherwise I'll have to unplug my modem every time I fire up the sampling computer. I'd rather just throw kubuntu or Mint on it.
So I'll be looking at responses and checking out any linked sites.
Free Martian Whores!
In the other hand, doing it in a way that nobody (or at least, most of the big/herd following) does is creativity. Don't follow the same as everyone else, try to build it yourself with brick and mortar, and you could end with something truly different, and maybe good. Those tools are there (both the open source and the commercial ones) because people use it and not as a toy, may be different (or lack something that you consider "essential", or adds something that they consider essential but you dismiss/ignore) to what you are used to, but could work anyway, and be useful in ways you don't imagine.
He needs a DAW, not a toy.
It looks like some mini-DAW like Garageband might be hit the sweet spot for his needs.
[non](http://non.tuxfamily.org/wiki/About)
[lmms](http://lmms.sourceforge.net/)
[nama](http://freeshell.de/~bolangi/nama)
Why are you such a Linux retard? You're killing yourself creatively by asking for this kind of of software for Linux.
Exactly. I do not personally support the RMS attitude of using something just because it's OpEn SoUrCe, if it actually makes the task too clunky to be enjoyable, or, as you said, limits your creativity. Use the best tool for the job, I says. Software which works is the primary thing IMO. Now, I use Linux and all that good stuff, but I prefer to use it for things which it is actually the best tool for the job, one example being programming.
Not if your serious about music with the way Apple has been going with its emphasis on consumer ios
I have to second PopeRatzo's high opinion of Reaper. It's try-before-you-buy with no restrictions, and a purchase price low enough that you feel like a heel until you pay Cockos. Excellent value!
Mixbus is a commercialized version of Ardour that runs on Windows, OSX, and Linux. It includes some proprietary mixing plugins and a more musician-friendly UI. For those who aren't familiar with them, Harrison is an American company that started making mixers in the heyday of albums, and they were associated with a lot of huge pop records. Now they focus on film sound mixers, many of which are linux-based. That's how the Ardour connection came about.
Mixbus is still based on Ardour v2, which doesn't have MIDI tracks, but the user didn't mention MIDI so that may not be an issue. Future versions of Mixbus will have all the features of Ardour v3.
Some of the proceeds from Mixbus sales goes to the main Ardour developer, and Harrison is also a heavy contributor to the source code. So contributing to Mixbus is contributing to Ardour, as well as getting a more polished user experience.
The other benefit of Mixbus is that they provide commercial email support and they publish a LOT of videos which are also applicable to Ardour and audio recording in general.
Compared to Live or the other DAW platforms Audacity is very limited compared to actual dedicated audio editors like Sonys forge even more so - fo ra limited use like and voice podcasts its ok but still a lot of work eg removing mains hum is 10 seconds in Live but using audacity not sure how long that would take.
yes i program just by touching two wires together to create binary code instead of using an IDE - a DAW is the musical equivalent of an IDE
Waitress: Morning!
Man: Well, what've you got?
Waitress: Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam; spam bacon sausage and spam; spam egg spam spam bacon and spam; spam sausage spam spam bacon spam tomato and spam;
Vikings: Spam spam spam spam...
Waitress: ...spam spam spam egg and spam; spam spam spam spam spam spam baked beans spam spam spam...
Vikings: Spam! Lovely spam! Lovely spam!
Waitress: ...or Lobster Thermidor a Crevette with a mornay sauce served in a Provencale manner with shallots and aubergines garnished with truffle pate, brandy and with a fried egg on top and spam.
Wife: Have you got anything without spam?
hint: the parent post is spam
Free Martian Whores!
This question has been closed as not constructive by ... oh wait, wrong forum.
Best DAW on Linux? Renoise. Period.
Best cross platform .... Linux only ...
What exactly are we describing as cross platform and what exact shitty software won't work on one Linux box versus the next?
I read it as "It needs to be cross platform as I'm a Linux-only user".
Or to put it another way: No need to submit Mac OS X-only or Windows-only software, I can't run them. I need cross platform software to be able to use them in my Linux environment.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
If you're trying to get an all-singing, all-dancing system going which will suck in your playing, act as a mixer, let you do post production and all that, Ardour is as good as it gets.
Muse is not bad, after ardour.
If you want to write sheet music, musescore is actually pretty good.
If you want to use something like a tracker with the ability to slide in a few MIDI or similar streams, why not try sunvox? Nightradio is an old hand in the demo scene, and his tools are cross platform and very effective.
Look into a program called Harrison Mixbus. It's a DAW (Digital Audio Workstation) made by Harrison Audio Consoles, which is a company that has made and continues to make professional recording/mixing consoles. Those consoles are the real deal and have had some huge stuff recorded and mixed through them (Elton John, Queen, Led Zeppelin, Michael Jackson, Pearl Harbor, Transformers, etc).
Recently, someone at Harrison Mixbus decided they wanted to make a DAW. The goal is to have a DAW with the character of an analog console, so each track adds a little of bit saturation and such to the sound, emulating what happens when sound signal go through the circuits of an analog board (specifically, Harrison analog boards). The DAW also aesthetically resembles an analog board, which is kind of cool, and every channel in the mix window has a good EQ and compressor built in (or you can ignore them if you don't want to fool with them). They're really targeting the niche of those in the audio crowd that need the efficiency and convenience of the digital world, but miss the analog character and experience of large format consoles. It runs on Windows, Mac, and Linux. If you have to work in Linux, then I would say this is the best DAW for it. It's built on top of Ardour, but they've done a lot to it. Unfortunately, there is no demo for the software. That's really, really stupid, in my opinion. There's only a small team working on the software, so perhaps you can email someone and ask them for a demo. Maybe they'll cave if you say not having a demo is a deal breaker for you. They have a subscription option, too, which is $50 + $9 a month, but that seems silly to me when the one-time price is only $150 right now.
I was given a free copy of Harrison Mixbus from the company (they visited my college and gave some copies away) and I'm glad to have it, but I work faster in Pro Tools and I can approximate that analog sound through plugins in ProTools and Reaper when I want to. I don't run Linux and am already accustomed to ProTools and Reaper, so there's not a lot of reason for me to switch. I do keep it around, though, in case some band says they want that old school analog sound, but don't have the budget to rent a mixing studio with a large console. I would do the mix on Harrison Mixbus for that.
Do your research before plopping down the money. There are several good videos on Youtube discussing it. If I had to start doing audio work on a Linux only machine for some reason, Mixbus is what I would be using.
Here's the link:
http://www.harrisonconsoles.com/mixbus/website/
Rosegarden is an amazing piece of software, very close to garageband. Supports midi, notation, sampling, multi tracking, control external synths, really full featured. I don't know why it isn't mentioned more often.
Twinstiq, game news
Planet CCRMA at Home (CCRMA is pronounced ``karma'') is a collection of free, open source rpm packages (RPM stands for RPM Package Manager) that you can add to a computer running Fedora, 17, 18 or 19, or CentOS 5 (not all applications are built on the 64 bit version) to transform it into an audio workstation with a low-latency kernel, current audio drivers and a nice set of music, midi and audio applications (what if you are not using Fedora or CentOS?).
In particular, familiarize yourself with qjackctl and the jack server that it controls; it's a bit like the *nix concept of piping I/O, but for sound and sound apps.
I guess the basic problem with the FOSS premise is that there are far more users than programmers. RMS believes that the best people to write software are those who use it, so in an ideal world, there would be enough audio producers who can program to tailor the software to meet their needs. That's a tough sell, and the prospects are unlikely to change in the near future... as a result, you can make do with mediocre audio software or hone your programming skills enough to code it yourself.
Even then, experts in digital audio are unlikely to be experts in UI design. Hell, most free software written by experts in their fields tends to have crappy user interfaces, designed by programmers for programmers.
Studio 13.37 is the king of Linux DAWs. It does everything, is super easy, and gets superior performance from your hardware.
I think you have your priorities reversed. Ask yourself what tools are best for the job, then leverage the OS that allows you to use those tools. I don't care what OS I'm using, they're all good. I'm going to use the OS that allows me to run the best tools. Linux is certainly cool in its own right, but you're selling yourself short if you refuse to use anything else. I don't know about you, but when inspiration strikes I want to launch my app, plug in my controller and write. There's nothing wrong with using a seperate machine (or dual boot) for windows/Mac so you can get your work done. It doesn't mean you're "selling out" to the "evil corporations".
Seriously, I'm surprised nobody has said anything about Tracktion. It's proprietary but the Linux version is free, and it means you can bounce your projects between Windows / Mac / Linux easily. As a DAW it's not going to outdo protools or anything, but it's quite a step up from Audacity.
http://www.tracktion.com/
I didn't see any recommendations for EnergyXT, so I thought I would chime in. I have been using it since it was called Massiva, and still find it very useful when I want a good with support for audio and virtual instruments. It is also very lightweight in terms of resources, so it works well on many platforms. I used to use it on my Eee PC 701. It has been cross platform for a while now.
The Hurd has been in development for a long time so it must be stable as well.
All kidding aside, you're just making an assumption.
Your best option would be to stick your guitar up your ass you fucking piece of shit.
Tracktion has a new Linux version
Here's an interview with the author of the Non DAW. He wrote a Linux DAW from scratch and then made an album with it:
http://www.zthmusic.com/male/http://www.zthmusic.com/male/
Link to the album:
http://jonliles.bandcamp.com/album/sad-pretty-girl
Use Gimp! It's as good as any professional software that's available on windows!
I think it all depends upon what you want to do with your product.
Are you a singer-songwriter type looking to flesh out your songs with digital instrumentation as a working 'demo', or are you looking at producing your own recordings to some professional standard?
I've done a fair amount of work in the field, and recommend that the technology be tailored to the goal. Usually, I believe people are better off putting their money into decent microphones, preamps, a/d converters, and sound treatment for the recording environment before thinking about the software too much. A software-hooded perspective makes sense if you are an electronic music dude or experimental type, but a good microphone in a nice-sounding room usually eliminates the need for software feature-based turd polishing, unless you can't perform your own compositions effectively. I typically recommend designing your production chain so that you can set your recording computer on fire, go out and haul in an old 16-track Otari or the like, plug it in, and go.
If you are building session mixes intended for portability to other 'pro' studios, you probably need Pro Tools. Sorry about that. Logic is probably better.
If you are publishing your own music online, in mp3 formats or the like, then there are a huge host of products out there that should fit the bill at almost any budget.
Ardour is an exceptionally good editor and multitrack recorder, if you can figure it out. Audacity is a nice casual editor, but I'd be leery of using it for anything serious. It is great for editing samples, for example. Without unlimited undo, however, you can destroy your source if you arent' careful. I'm leery of its ability to keep sync on multitrack sessions as well.
Every once in a while, I test my little home recording rig (AV Linux, Ardour, running on two old M-Audio Delta 1010's) by yanking the power cable out of the wall in the middle of a casual recording session. Upon reboot, I always get all the audio up to the point of the yank. I would be very nervous performing this same test on a MS-based DAW. Macs are probably safer here.
Choosing linux for audio production means you have to know the capabilities of your hardware. For high-quality audio-based production, this essentially means RME Hammerfall products. MIDI production is a different aspect altogether, depends upon your chosen hardware configuration. I've had issues with MIDI clocking on all three major platforms, mostly due to issues with 'industry standards' and cheap internal computer clocks.
Choice of target format is pretty important. I chose gnu/linux because FLAC is an open format, which fights the 'need' for the latest and greatest. Most of the music I love is still being recorded to tape, or is painstakingly engineered to sound 'tape-like'. There are a lot of reasons for this. Digital recordings at 48khz/24bit on up can sound great, too, but usually require more post-production effort. Some 'semi-pro' modern A/D converters sound fantastic out of the box, others really need an external clock.
...is something I just looked at as a replacement to Audacity (just records, processes and edits). It has some cool features, so check it out.
You might try the kxstudio distribution first. PlanetCCRMA is an excellent choice for pro-audio. Also, you would try not to constrain yourself to just a single DAW for your needs. You can (I do) use ardour (for tracking), rosegarden, qtractor (for sequencing), hydrogen (drum sequencer and sampler), linuxsampler (qsampler, jsampler, can be used as plugin in ardour,rosegarden.....) all together for a single project (jack allows a lot of routing options). Use a session manager too (ladish perhaps). You can also use windows vst and vsti (there is festige, carla, or dssi-vst, fst, festige is a gui frontend to dssi-vst, fst). If you build ardour from source, you can use vst in ardour too.
It records WAVs onto an SD Card. It doesn't crash or create glitchy artifacts in the middle of recording, it has a nice physical interface, and its output can be read by any multitracking software you like.
(1.21 gigawatts) / (88 miles per hour) = 30 757 874 newtons
gosgog:
Take a look at Multimedia on synaptic package
"Realtime latency." I like it.
What's this about, the music or the technology?
If your music is shit, no amount of technology is going to make it great, and if your music is great, you don't need superior technology to demonstrate it. The examples given are proof enough; but I'd add artists like Kraftwerk and Yello to the mix, since their music is more rooted in technology but still informed by the creative human spirit, whether it's Kraftwerk's classical melodic grandeur or Yello's hot Afro-Caribbean body moving funk.
Good god, man, what are you trying to make? Music, or a point?
As a guitarist who works in windows and linux and once in a while mac, one of the issues that confronts live playing and recording live playing is latency. On a six year old quadcore intel processor I am able to run guitarix, a looper, a drum machine (hydrogen) and a simple recorder through jack with 32 samples latency, while the best I can get from windows and asio is 128 samples. WHile perceptually you cannot discretely hear gaps this this short, it turns up in the expressiveness of the playing. longer yet still audibly discretely imperceptible latencies feel sticky and it is harder to get a groove going. If the poster is recording a guitar through a mic and not multitracking then latency is not really an issue, nor is it an issue if sequencing, but for live guitar playing a real time linux kernel available in the debian repos, and some tweaks to services and nice combined with guitarix and jack and a few other programs readily available in the repos can make a mean low latency single purpose linux box a great tool for tracking electric guitar without an external amp. I still do most of my work in windows, but if I need that particular combination, I can go to my older linux box and get one aspect of the performance that it does really well. Also the LV and ladspa plugins have some really interesting spectral effects and other unusual items that are not found as readily in the VST world.
Get one, build your own DJ mixing console, screw analog hardware.
I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.