The case for open source

[Steven Yi]

Hi All,

I just saw a link to this from a Linux Audio mailing list that Tascam
is ceasing development of Gigastudio:

http://www.filmmusicmag.com/?p=1738

This kind of thing has really been an issue for me, that closed source
software that goes into an unsupported state severely limits the
lifespan and history of computer music works.  I've discussed
long-term software in lectures and about considering what you are
investing time/money in in terms of future work.  I have referenced
the issues that affected Apple users moving from OS9 to OSX, then
again from PPC to Intel, how my friend was affected in half of his
plugins were never ported to Intel, thus severely limiting his ability
to open or reuse aspects of his project (basically he would need to
keep an OSX PPC machine around if he ever wanted to look at the
project again).

Anyways, it's these kinds of situations that I am very concerned about
when I think about computer music and the history of it.  I am a
strong advocate for open source as well as investing in technologies
based on virtual machines or interpreters where possible to protect
investments of time/work.  Just wanted to bring this up for discussion
as I think it's an important point involving our our work.

Thanks,
steven


Send bugs reports to this list.
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body "unsubscribe csound"

[Michael Bechard]

It becomes an even bigger issue when you take into account anti-piracy measures being taken by many of these companies on their sound-production software, and even with the music itself in the form of DRM (consumers have already been left high and dry by online music stores peddling DRM-ladden music and subsequently going out of business). Open source becomes a much more sound investment when you take these things into consideration. I don't want to have to learn any other sound synthesis software with the depth and scope of CSound ever again, that's why I chose it over something proprietary like Reaktor.

I'm currently trying to make the move to an entirely Linux-based DAW, once I get a new machine. The core bits of audio software like a heavy-duty sampler, mixer, audio editor, etc. are all well on their way towards impressive feature lists and stability. I can't wait.

Michael Bechard



----- Original Message ----
From: Steven Yi <stevenyi@...>
To: csound@...; blue users mailing list <bluemusic-users@...>
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 12:22:29 PM
Subject: [Csnd] The case for open source

Hi All,

I just saw a link to this from a Linux Audio mailing list that Tascam
is ceasing development of Gigastudio:

http://www.filmmusicmag.com/?p=1738

This kind of thing has really been an issue for me, that closed source
software that goes into an unsupported state severely limits the
lifespan and history of computer music works.  I've discussed
long-term software in lectures and about considering what you are
investing time/money in in terms of future work.  I have referenced
the issues that affected Apple users moving from OS9 to OSX, then
again from PPC to Intel, how my friend was affected in half of his
plugins were never ported to Intel, thus severely limiting his ability
to open or reuse aspects of his project (basically he would need to
keep an OSX PPC machine around if he ever wanted to look at the
project again).

Anyways, it's these kinds of situations that I am very concerned about
when I think about computer music and the history of it.  I am a
strong advocate for open source as well as investing in technologies
based on virtual machines or interpreters where possible to protect
investments of time/work.  Just wanted to bring this up for discussion
as I think it's an important point involving our our work.

Thanks,
steven


Send bugs reports to this list.
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body "unsubscribe csound"



     


Send bugs reports to this list.
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body "unsubscribe csound"

[Michael Gogins]

Thanks for raising this important issue!

I've been concerned about this ever since I started working with computer music. As you may or may not know, there are several classic works of computer music, or computer music software, that have been lost due to the obsolescence of their computer hardware, operating system, or programming language -- including John Chowning's classic pieces, initially realized in SAIL, now fortunately re-realized.

I've personally experienced this kind of obsolescence. I used to use a freebie PC sequencer that went obsolete, so all the pieces I did in this sequencer are now toast. I have the MIDI sequences so I can re-render them in Csound, but I can't edit the compositions (which were hierarchies of sequences).

And I've experienced it in my own software! I have migrated my compositional algorithms from standalone Windows C++ programs, to the Java version of Silence, to CsoundAC. Pieces done in the old software are now dead. I still have the MIDI sequences and the Csound orcs and scos, so I can improve the Csound arrangements and rendering quality, but I can't edit or vary the compositional algorithms any more.

Obviously, open source tools are essential for serious music that has some aspiration to live for more than a few years.

The hope is that basic programs such as Csound and Python will continue to be maintained with backward compatibility, and if backward compatibility breaks, it will still be possible to rebuild the older versions from sources and run them, if necessary on emulators. After all, people are still making "chip tunes" for the Yamaha SID and Commodore 64 on PC emulator software. This is the model for us!

I think that if the software in question is central enough -- C, C++, Python, Java, let's hope Csound -- it will still be possible to build and run the software indefinitely into the future, thanks to scholarly interest in the history of computing and the maintenance of compilers, emulators, and so on.

Regards,
Mike

-----Original Message-----

>From: Steven Yi <stevenyi@...>
>Sent: Jul 23, 2008 1:22 PM
>To: csound@..., blue users mailing list <bluemusic-users@...>
>Subject: [Csnd] The case for open source
>
>Hi All,
>
>I just saw a link to this from a Linux Audio mailing list that Tascam
>is ceasing development of Gigastudio:
>
>http://www.filmmusicmag.com/?p=1738
>
>This kind of thing has really been an issue for me, that closed source
>software that goes into an unsupported state severely limits the
>lifespan and history of computer music works.  I've discussed
>long-term software in lectures and about considering what you are
>investing time/money in in terms of future work.  I have referenced
>the issues that affected Apple users moving from OS9 to OSX, then
>again from PPC to Intel, how my friend was affected in half of his
>plugins were never ported to Intel, thus severely limiting his ability
>to open or reuse aspects of his project (basically he would need to
>keep an OSX PPC machine around if he ever wanted to look at the
>project again).
>
>Anyways, it's these kinds of situations that I am very concerned about
>when I think about computer music and the history of it.  I am a
>strong advocate for open source as well as investing in technologies
>based on virtual machines or interpreters where possible to protect
>investments of time/work.  Just wanted to bring this up for discussion
>as I think it's an important point involving our our work.
>
>Thanks,
>steven
>
>
>Send bugs reports to this list.
>To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body "unsubscribe csound"

Send bugs reports to this list.
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body "unsubscribe csound"

[Mark Van Peteghem-2]

I recall an article on Slashdot about software companies (I can't
remember which) that couldn't sell their software with a profit anymore,
and released it as open source. That would be the best solution for
everybody. Of course there still would have to be enough developers that
want to work on it. That is actually something that can happen to open
source software as well, if programmers lose interest in an open source
product, it dies.

Steven Yi schreef:

> Hi All,
>
> I just saw a link to this from a Linux Audio mailing list that Tascam
> is ceasing development of Gigastudio:
>
> http://www.filmmusicmag.com/?p=1738
>
> This kind of thing has really been an issue for me, that closed source
> software that goes into an unsupported state severely limits the
> lifespan and history of computer music works.  I've discussed
> long-term software in lectures and about considering what you are
> investing time/money in in terms of future work.  I have referenced
> the issues that affected Apple users moving from OS9 to OSX, then
> again from PPC to Intel, how my friend was affected in half of his
> plugins were never ported to Intel, thus severely limiting his ability
> to open or reuse aspects of his project (basically he would need to
> keep an OSX PPC machine around if he ever wanted to look at the
> project again).
>
> Anyways, it's these kinds of situations that I am very concerned about
> when I think about computer music and the history of it.  I am a
> strong advocate for open source as well as investing in technologies
> based on virtual machines or interpreters where possible to protect
> investments of time/work.  Just wanted to bring this up for discussion
> as I think it's an important point involving our our work.
>
> Thanks,
> steven
>
>
> Send bugs reports to this list.
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body "unsubscribe csound"
>
>
>  

--
  Mark
  _________________________________________
  When you get lemons, you make lemonade.
  When you get hardware, you make software.



Send bugs reports to this list.
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body "unsubscribe csound"

[Darren Landrum]

Mark Van Peteghem wrote:
> I recall an article on Slashdot about software companies (I can't
> remember which) that couldn't sell their software with a profit anymore,
> and released it as open source. That would be the best solution for
> everybody. Of course there still would have to be enough developers that
> want to work on it. That is actually something that can happen to open
> source software as well, if programmers lose interest in an open source
> product, it dies.

I would be willing to bet that there is a lot of third-party licensed
code in GigaStudio that would prevent its being open-sourced. I also
heard a rumor about the possibility of Nemesys taking the product back
and continuing support, though that one definitely remains to be seen.

I've been putting out messages and feelers looking for coders who might
want to join me on an open source sampler project, which could also turn
into various synthesis and effects projects. I'm a substandard C++ coder
myself, being a sophomore engineering student, but I have been inspired
lately to try to shake things up a little.

-- Darren Landrum


Send bugs reports to this list.
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body "unsubscribe csound"

[Michael Gogins]

If open source software dies, it is legal to bring it back to life. The same is not true of most commercial software.

Regards,
Mike

-----Original Message-----

>From: Mark Van Peteghem <Mark.Van.Peteghem@...>
>Sent: Jul 23, 2008 4:33 PM
>To: csound@...
>Subject: [Csnd] Re: The case for open source
>
>I recall an article on Slashdot about software companies (I can't
>remember which) that couldn't sell their software with a profit anymore,
>and released it as open source. That would be the best solution for
>everybody. Of course there still would have to be enough developers that
>want to work on it. That is actually something that can happen to open
>source software as well, if programmers lose interest in an open source
>product, it dies.
>
>Steven Yi schreef:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I just saw a link to this from a Linux Audio mailing list that Tascam
>> is ceasing development of Gigastudio:
>>
>> http://www.filmmusicmag.com/?p=1738
>>
>> This kind of thing has really been an issue for me, that closed source
>> software that goes into an unsupported state severely limits the
>> lifespan and history of computer music works.  I've discussed
>> long-term software in lectures and about considering what you are
>> investing time/money in in terms of future work.  I have referenced
>> the issues that affected Apple users moving from OS9 to OSX, then
>> again from PPC to Intel, how my friend was affected in half of his
>> plugins were never ported to Intel, thus severely limiting his ability
>> to open or reuse aspects of his project (basically he would need to
>> keep an OSX PPC machine around if he ever wanted to look at the
>> project again).
>>
>> Anyways, it's these kinds of situations that I am very concerned about
>> when I think about computer music and the history of it.  I am a
>> strong advocate for open source as well as investing in technologies
>> based on virtual machines or interpreters where possible to protect
>> investments of time/work.  Just wanted to bring this up for discussion
>> as I think it's an important point involving our our work.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> steven
>>
>>
>> Send bugs reports to this list.
>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body "unsubscribe csound"
>>
>>
>>  
>
>--
>  Mark
>  _________________________________________
>  When you get lemons, you make lemonade.
>  When you get hardware, you make software.
>
>
>
>Send bugs reports to this list.
>To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body "unsubscribe csound"

Send bugs reports to this list.
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body "unsubscribe csound"

[luis jure]

on 2008-07-23 at 16:40 Darren Landrum wrote:

>I've been putting out messages and feelers looking for coders who
>might want to join me on an open source sampler project,

there is linuxsampler: http://www.linuxsampler.org/



Send bugs reports to this list.
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body "unsubscribe csound"

[Brad Fuller-4]

On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 1:33 PM, Mark Van Peteghem
<Mark.Van.Peteghem@...> wrote:
> I recall an article on Slashdot about software companies (I can't remember
> which) that couldn't sell their software with a profit anymore, and released
> it as open source. That would be the best solution for everybody. Of course
> there still would have to be enough developers that want to work on it. That
> is actually something that can happen to open source software as well, if
> programmers lose interest in an open source product, it dies.

There's also cost associated with moving the source to FOSS. Even if
the entire tree is owned by Tascam, they may not be willing to make it
open because of the cost. Then again, they probably have the money
(which maybe they could write off) and they would be seen as HEROES in
the audio world.


Send bugs reports to this list.
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body "unsubscribe csound"

[Darren Landrum]

luis jure wrote:
> on 2008-07-23 at 16:40 Darren Landrum wrote:
>
>> I've been putting out messages and feelers looking for coders who
>> might want to join me on an open source sampler project,
>
> there is linuxsampler: http://www.linuxsampler.org/

I'm well aware of LinuxSampler. I have my reasons for not wanting to
pursue that codebase, not the least of which being that my plan (such as
it is) could make a lot more than just a sampler.

-- Darren


Send bugs reports to this list.
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body "unsubscribe csound"

[Richard Dobson]

Probably the sticking point would be that Gigasampler's (or rather,
Nemesys's / Tascam's) patent on zero-latency playback from disk is still
alive, and regardless of what arguments can be made against the patent,
it is hard to see Tascam themselves making it Open Source when a patent
is involved.

Richard Dobson


Brad Fuller wrote:

> On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 1:33 PM, Mark Van Peteghem
> <Mark.Van.Peteghem@...> wrote:
>> I recall an article on Slashdot about software companies (I can't remember
>> which) that couldn't sell their software with a profit anymore, and released
>> it as open source. That would be the best solution for everybody. Of course
>> there still would have to be enough developers that want to work on it. That
>> is actually something that can happen to open source software as well, if
>> programmers lose interest in an open source product, it dies.
>
> There's also cost associated with moving the source to FOSS. Even if
> the entire tree is owned by Tascam, they may not be willing to make it
> open because of the cost. Then again, they probably have the money
> (which maybe they could write off) and they would be seen as HEROES in
> the audio world.
>

Send bugs reports to this list.
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body "unsubscribe csound"

[Erik de Castro Lopo-10]

Brad Fuller wrote:

> There's also cost associated with moving the source to FOSS. Even if
> the entire tree is owned by Tascam, they may not be willing to make it
> open because of the cost.

The case of Blender is every interesting:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blender_(software)#History

It was closed source and was "bought" by the open source community.

Erik
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Erik de Castro Lopo
-----------------------------------------------------------------
"There are two kinds of people in the world, those that have children
and those that ARE children". Children are selfish, or more accurately
ego-centric. Children have a very short-sighted view of the world.
Offer a child one lolly now or the whole bag later and before you can
say ''Don't chop the dinosaur Daddy!'', it's in the gob."
-- my friend Scott


Send bugs reports to this list.
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body "unsubscribe csound"

[Brian Redfern-2]

I think what we really need is for csound to become the standard sound engine for linux, similar to the function it plays on OLPC. If say ubuntu linux had that kind of audio/midi functionality "out of the box" it would be really powerful. Then you don't need seperate sampler or synthesis programs, csound could act as the "defacto" softsynth and have easy to use programs like Tam Tam in OLPC.

On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 4:03 PM, Erik de Castro Lopo <mle%2Bla@...> wrote:

Brad Fuller wrote:

> There's also cost associated with moving the source to FOSS. Even if
> the entire tree is owned by Tascam, they may not be willing to make it
> open because of the cost.

The case of Blender is every interesting:

   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blender_(software)#History

It was closed source and was "bought" by the open source community.

Erik
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Erik de Castro Lopo
-----------------------------------------------------------------
"There are two kinds of people in the world, those that have children
and those that ARE children". Children are selfish, or more accurately
ego-centric. Children have a very short-sighted view of the world.
Offer a child one lolly now or the whole bag later and before you can
say ''Don't chop the dinosaur Daddy!'', it's in the gob."
-- my friend Scott


Send bugs reports to this list.
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body "unsubscribe csound"

[Darren Landrum]

Brian Redfern wrote:
> I think what we really need is for csound to become the standard sound
> engine for linux, similar to the function it plays on OLPC. If say
> ubuntu linux had that kind of audio/midi functionality "out of the box"
> it would be really powerful. Then you don't need seperate sampler or
> synthesis programs, csound could act as the "defacto" softsynth and have
> easy to use programs like Tam Tam in OLPC.

Is Csound capable of streaming hundreds of samples at a time from a 4GB
sample set on disk?

Something that would be a real boon to Csound would be a "GUI builder"
program that sent and received OSC messages from its widget set. And
then there's my complaint about oversampling support, but that battle
can be fought another time.

-- Darren


Send bugs reports to this list.
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body "unsubscribe csound"

[Darren Landrum]

Darren Landrum wrote:

> Brian Redfern wrote:
>> I think what we really need is for csound to become the standard sound
>> engine for linux, similar to the function it plays on OLPC. If say
>> ubuntu linux had that kind of audio/midi functionality "out of the
>> box" it would be really powerful. Then you don't need seperate sampler
>> or synthesis programs, csound could act as the "defacto" softsynth and
>> have easy to use programs like Tam Tam in OLPC.
>
> Is Csound capable of streaming hundreds of samples at a time from a 4GB
> sample set on disk?

I forgot three very important words here. "In real time."

-- Darren


Send bugs reports to this list.
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body "unsubscribe csound"

[Brian Redfern-2]

Well that's going to be a problem because of Tascam's patent on that functionality, But with soft synths you don't need to use samples for a lot of things. Waveguide flutes and other physical models run fine on my low end system in realtime.

On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 4:24 PM, Darren Landrum <darren.landrum@...> wrote:

Darren Landrum wrote:

Brian Redfern wrote:

I think what we really need is for csound to become the standard sound engine for linux, similar to the function it plays on OLPC. If say ubuntu linux had that kind of audio/midi functionality "out of the box" it would be really powerful. Then you don't need seperate sampler or synthesis programs, csound could act as the "defacto" softsynth and have easy to use programs like Tam Tam in OLPC.

Is Csound capable of streaming hundreds of samples at a time from a 4GB sample set on disk?

I forgot three very important words here. "In real time."

-- Darren


Send bugs reports to this list.
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body "unsubscribe csound"

[Darren Landrum]

Brian Redfern wrote:
> Well that's going to be a problem because of Tascam's patent on that
> functionality, But with soft synths you don't need to use samples for a
> lot of things. Waveguide flutes and other physical models run fine on my
> low end system in realtime.

Okay, setting that aside for a moment, what about my other point? Could
someone make a GUI builder application that interfaces with Csound via
OSC or the API?

I'm not asking for amazing eye candy. Sometimes, though, a custom
interface goes a long way to making a synth very usable.

-- Darren


Send bugs reports to this list.
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body "unsubscribe csound"

[Brian Redfern-2]

We have jack under linux for audio routing, but given that most laptops or desktops far outshoot the stats of the OLPC, why not migrate Tam Tam / csound to ordinary linux distros.

On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 5:02 PM, Darren Landrum <darren.landrum@...> wrote:

Brian Redfern wrote:

Well that's going to be a problem because of Tascam's patent on that functionality, But with soft synths you don't need to use samples for a lot of things. Waveguide flutes and other physical models run fine on my low end system in realtime.

Okay, setting that aside for a moment, what about my other point? Could someone make a GUI builder application that interfaces with Csound via OSC or the API?

I'm not asking for amazing eye candy. Sometimes, though, a custom interface goes a long way to making a synth very usable.

-- Darren


Send bugs reports to this list.
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@... with body "unsubscribe csound"