[LAD] Do professionals use Pulse Audio? ; xfce4-mixer

[Philip Rhoades]

People,

I am not a professional LA user but I have regard for what serious LA
users have to say. A post turned up on the Fedora XFCE list about
removing xfce4-mixer for F29 - I responded with:

"Every time I upgrade I immediately UNinstall PA and use ALSA only - so
I still depend on xfce4-mixer . ."

Someone replied that PA has greatly improved since the early days
especially and "controlling streams separately is an added feature" -
but I can do that with the .asoundrc I have now - are there any good
reasons for me to reconsider the situation the next time I do a fresh
install? (I realise I am likely to get biased comments here but I am
not going to post on a PA list . .).

Thanks,

Phil.

[Paul Davis]

PulseAudio is not a part of the signal flow of any pro-audio workflow.

That said, its control applications that adjust the hardware mixer work in
just the same way that any other hardware mixer application does, so if you
like it, there's no reason not to use it.

Post by Philip Rhoades
People,
I am not a professional LA user but I have regard for what serious LA
users have to say. A post turned up on the Fedora XFCE list about removing
"Every time I upgrade I immediately UNinstall PA and use ALSA only - so I
still depend on xfce4-mixer . ."
Someone replied that PA has greatly improved since the early days
especially and "controlling streams separately is an added feature" - but I
can do that with the .asoundrc I have now - are there any good reasons for
me to reconsider the situation the next time I do a fresh install? (I
realise I am likely to get biased comments here but I am not going to post
on a PA list . .).
Thanks,
Phil.
--
Philip Rhoades
PO Box 896
Cowra NSW 2794
Australia
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
https://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev

[Neil C Smith]

Post by Paul Davis
PulseAudio is not a part of the signal flow of any pro-audio workflow.

True! Although likewise I'm not sure pure Alsa or JACK suit a consumer
audio workflow very well. I like PA for what it is, and used for what it's
for, it generally works well these days.

OTOH mentioning PA on here can be a little like poking an ants nest. :-)

Best wishes,

Neil

Post by Paul Davis
--

Neil C Smith
Artist & Technologist
www.neilcsmith.net

Praxis LIVE - hybrid visual IDE for creative coding - www.praxislive.org

[Spencer Jackson]

I know of several linux pro-audio users who do not have pulse installed,
but I think more of the ones I talk with are like me: we have pulseaudio
for most "desktop audio" stuff like web browsing, listening to music,
etc... all generic tasks. Its perfectly good for that! But as soon as we go
to produce some music we use pasuspender or other methods that bypass
pulseaudio and use JACK or pure alsa. I don't have any real numbers but I
think thats pretty common. So my suggestion is if you aren't actually doing
audio production don't fear pulse.

_Spencer

Post by Philip Rhoades
People,
I am not a professional LA user but I have regard for what serious LA
users have to say. A post turned up on the Fedora XFCE list about removing
"Every time I upgrade I immediately UNinstall PA and use ALSA only - so I
still depend on xfce4-mixer . ."
Someone replied that PA has greatly improved since the early days
especially and "controlling streams separately is an added feature" - but I
can do that with the .asoundrc I have now - are there any good reasons for
me to reconsider the situation the next time I do a fresh install? (I
realise I am likely to get biased comments here but I am not going to post
on a PA list . .).
Thanks,
Phil.
--
Philip Rhoades
PO Box 896
Cowra NSW 2794
Australia
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
https://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev

[Brett McCoy]

Post by Spencer Jackson
I know of several linux pro-audio users who do not have pulse installed,
but I think more of the ones I talk with are like me: we have pulseaudio
for most "desktop audio" stuff like web browsing, listening to music,
etc... all generic tasks. Its perfectly good for that! But as soon as we go
to produce some music we use pasuspender or other methods that bypass
pulseaudio and use JACK or pure alsa. I don't have any real numbers but I
think thats pretty common. So my suggestion is if you aren't actually doing
audio production don't fear pulse.

I typically run Jack 100% of the time and just have PA running as a client,
so I can still use web browser, VLC, etc, as needed.

[Will J Godfrey]

I use one machine specifically for music, permanently connected to Keyboards
etc. and PA was removed with extreme prejudice. On the audio side it's working
entirely Jack - MIDI is mostly ALSA.

On my other 'office' machine it's there and I don't pay any attention to it.

[Len Ovens]

Post by Philip Rhoades
I am not a professional LA user but I have regard for what serious LA
users have to say. A post turned up on the Fedora XFCE list about
"Every time I upgrade I immediately UNinstall PA and use ALSA only - so
I still depend on xfce4-mixer . ."
Someone replied that PA has greatly improved since the early days
especially and "controlling streams separately is an added feature" -
but I can do that with the .asoundrc I have now - are there any good
reasons for me to reconsider the situation the next time I do a fresh
install? (I realise I am likely to get biased comments here but I am
not going to post on a PA list . .).

Having some kind of ALSA mixer is still required. Pulse controls levels as
a mix of sound card and digital gain stage levels. You have no way of
knowing what it is really doing. This is great for desktop use, absolutely
useless for any kind of profesional use. Note that input levels are worse
as pulse uses a mix of input level, input/mic boost (even on aux inputs)
and digital gain stage.

An interesting experiment is to run alsamixer and watch the audio card
control levels while adjusting pulse's one level control full range.
Input levels on the internal audio card will see the input level go up
then bounce to 0 as the boost is set up a notch then the level goes up
again, then down plus more boost. I have found that each boost level has
it's own unique noise that I can work around with alsamixer that pulse
tramples all over.

Pulse offers no guaranty of any particular audio card being used for sync
or of any source not having SRC applied.

Pulse offers no guaranty of no drop outs or stable latency.

Pulse offers no guaranty that some other application (skype is
particularely bad) will not change your audio card levels for you.

pulse makes a good audio front end for desktop applications so long as
Jackd is it's _only_ output. The Pulse-jackd bridge appears to be set up
as a client (using jack terms) rather than a device or back end. This
means that even when another device connected to pulse is not being used
for output, pulse continues to rely on it for sync :P This means that
jack free wheel will not work correctly if pulse has a connection to any
audio HW.

I personally use jackdbus as my audio server, started at session start. I
use pulse as a desktop front end with the pulse-jack bridge, but with the
udev and alsa modules removed so that jackd is it's only audio in/output.
This means pulse does not ever control audio device levels, and free wheel
works correctly.

Jack (or alsa direct) is the only way to do profesional audio is you want
bit perfect throughput. Pulse offers no such thing. I agree pulseaudio has
improved a whole lot, but it is no replacement for jack or alsa direct.
Alsa direct is great except if you want to be able to mix two audio
sources without stopping your proaudio application.

I have no comments on xfce4-mixer. I don't use it because I have an
ice1712 based card that has it's own much better control utility
(mudita24) and I find qasmixer (and it's extra tools) easier to use. I
also still use alsamix in a terminal because it is faster to access in
many cases :)

So I am not of the "pulse must be removed" community, but I still feel
that pulse is a long way from usable in any kind of profesional audio (or
even semiprofesional) environment. I would even go so far as to say it
never will be because it's original design goal was as an easy to use
desktop application/server. The possibility to do pro-audio would require
starting over not patching.


--
Len Ovens
www.ovenwerks.net

[Nikita Zlobin]

In Wed, 25 Apr 2018 11:38:47 -0700 (PDT)

Post by Len Ovens

Post by Philip Rhoades
I am not a professional LA user but I have regard for what serious
LA users have to say. A post turned up on the Fedora XFCE list
"Every time I upgrade I immediately UNinstall PA and use ALSA only
- so I still depend on xfce4-mixer . ."
Someone replied that PA has greatly improved since the early days
especially and "controlling streams separately is an added feature"
- but I can do that with the .asoundrc I have now - are there any
good reasons for me to reconsider the situation the next time I do
a fresh install? (I realise I am likely to get biased comments
here but I am not going to post on a PA list . .).

Having some kind of ALSA mixer is still required. Pulse controls
levels as a mix of sound card and digital gain stage levels. You have
no way of knowing what it is really doing. This is great for desktop
use, absolutely useless for any kind of profesional use. Note that
input levels are worse as pulse uses a mix of input level, input/mic
boost (even on aux inputs) and digital gain stage.
An interesting experiment is to run alsamixer and watch the audio
card control levels while adjusting pulse's one level control full
range. Input levels on the internal audio card will see the input
level go up then bounce to 0 as the boost is set up a notch then the
level goes up again, then down plus more boost. I have found that
each boost level has it's own unique noise that I can work around
with alsamixer that pulse tramples all over.
Pulse offers no guaranty of any particular audio card being used for
sync or of any source not having SRC applied.
Pulse offers no guaranty of no drop outs or stable latency.
Pulse offers no guaranty that some other application (skype is
particularely bad) will not change your audio card levels for you.
pulse makes a good audio front end for desktop applications so long
as Jackd is it's _only_ output. The Pulse-jackd bridge appears to be
set up as a client (using jack terms) rather than a device or back
end. This means that even when another device connected to pulse is
not being used for output, pulse continues to rely on it for sync :P
This means that jack free wheel will not work correctly if pulse has
a connection to any audio HW.

For complemention, PA may be configured to run with jack sink/source,
without alsa, udev, may be bluetooth - only necessary minimum. Not sure
about PA resampler... Some examples could be found around in web
(places like userquestions, stackexchange, etc).

One question from me - is this enough to fix pulse->jack sync,
including mentioned freewheel issue?

Post by Len Ovens
I personally use jackdbus as my audio server, started at session
start. I use pulse as a desktop front end with the pulse-jack bridge,
but with the udev and alsa modules removed so that jackd is it's only
audio in/output. This means pulse does not ever control audio device
levels, and free wheel works correctly.
Jack (or alsa direct) is the only way to do profesional audio is you
want bit perfect throughput. Pulse offers no such thing. I agree
pulseaudio has improved a whole lot, but it is no replacement for
jack or alsa direct. Alsa direct is great except if you want to be
able to mix two audio sources without stopping your proaudio
application.
I have no comments on xfce4-mixer. I don't use it because I have an
ice1712 based card that has it's own much better control utility
(mudita24) and I find qasmixer (and it's extra tools) easier to use.
I also still use alsamix in a terminal because it is faster to access
in many cases :)
So I am not of the "pulse must be removed" community, but I still
feel that pulse is a long way from usable in any kind of profesional
audio (or even semiprofesional) environment. I would even go so far
as to say it never will be because it's original design goal was as
an easy to use desktop application/server. The possibility to do
pro-audio would require starting over not patching.
--
Len Ovens
www.ovenwerks.net
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
https://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev

[Len Ovens]

Post by Nikita Zlobin
In Wed, 25 Apr 2018 11:38:47 -0700 (PDT)

Post by Len Ovens

Post by Philip Rhoades
I am not a professional LA user but I have regard for what serious
LA users have to say. A post turned up on the Fedora XFCE list
"Every time I upgrade I immediately UNinstall PA and use ALSA only
- so I still depend on xfce4-mixer . ."
Someone replied that PA has greatly improved since the early days
especially and "controlling streams separately is an added feature"

Having some kind of ALSA mixer is still required. Pulse controls
levels as a mix of sound card and digital gain stage levels. You have
no way of knowing what it is really doing. This is great for desktop
use, absolutely useless for any kind of profesional use. Note that
input levels are worse as pulse uses a mix of input level, input/mic
boost (even on aux inputs) and digital gain stage.
An interesting experiment is to run alsamixer and watch the audio
card control levels while adjusting pulse's one level control full
range. Input levels on the internal audio card will see the input
level go up then bounce to 0 as the boost is set up a notch then the
level goes up again, then down plus more boost. I have found that
each boost level has it's own unique noise that I can work around
with alsamixer that pulse tramples all over.
Pulse offers no guaranty of any particular audio card being used for
sync or of any source not having SRC applied.
Pulse offers no guaranty of no drop outs or stable latency.
Pulse offers no guaranty that some other application (skype is
particularely bad) will not change your audio card levels for you.
pulse makes a good audio front end for desktop applications so long
as Jackd is it's _only_ output. The Pulse-jackd bridge appears to be
set up as a client (using jack terms) rather than a device or back
end. This means that even when another device connected to pulse is
not being used for output, pulse continues to rely on it for sync :P
This means that jack free wheel will not work correctly if pulse has
a connection to any audio HW.

For complemention, PA may be configured to run with jack sink/source,
without alsa, udev, may be bluetooth - only necessary minimum. Not sure
about PA resampler... Some examples could be found around in web
(places like userquestions, stackexchange, etc).

Either PA or the client must be able to resample in order to mix streams
of varying sample rates or to deal with an audio device (or jack)
requiring a sample rate different from the source. There is no getting
around that. PA tries for the first source to open the device, ask the
device to run at the source's sample rate and if successful no SRC is
needed. A second stream almost always needs SRC. This why a
(semi)profesional audio application should never be a pulse client but
rather be either a jack client or use alsa directly. Using jack allows PA
to send desktop audio as well.

Post by Nikita Zlobin
One question from me - is this enough to fix pulse->jack sync,
including mentioned freewheel issue?

Is it enough for what? It is not enough to use pulse as an audio server
for pro-audio applications. It is enough to make sure pulse doesn't
interfere with jack's operation... it is up to the user to make sure
noises from the desktop don't show up in studio monitors at an
inconvenient time. Many home recording studios do not have acoustic
separation from miced areas to monitoring speakers. I would suggest
turning any system notification sounds off for this reason. The pulse
controller applet has a mute function, but it would be easy to forget to
use it.

So in a pa/jack computer, desktop applications that do not have jack
connection ability (even some that do and do it wrong) use pulse and any
application that can use jack, should do so. An application that does not
allow connecting to jack is not pro-audio and should not be used as such.

Note: "not pro-audio" means in this context. If the application will only
connect directly to a hardware ALSA device and will not allow itself to
connect to PA's psudo-alsa device, that is fine too. However, in this
discusion the system is assumed to want to be able to use jack for some
things and so jack support is needed.

--
Len Ovens
www.ovenwerks.net