In windows at present and wondering about conversion. I Use cakewalk sonar , acid and soundforge to create my music. Can I convert the sonar files for use in Linux and if so what program. This is the lead of a very large group of questions the big one is of course can it be done and is it a hassle?
I use a firefire 410 soundcard with XP at present. Any pointing in the right direction is greatly appreciated.

I'm not a music expert, or even a novice, so I had to look around using Google.
For sound file format conversion, look at sox. Not finding any reference to sonar in the "info sox" guide, I tried Google with the terms "rosegarden sonar import" and found this page: http://www.tutorials-blog.com/midi/ANNOUNCE-Rosegarden/

Check out 64studio.com

It might be easier to get specific questions answered on their forums. Probably not as fast as here tho, if someone comes along who knows the answers

Digital sound studios are available for linux - many for high-end professionals as well as the home-studio user.

There is a plugin for sonar to create ogg/vorbis output - so you can transfer your music to linux OK - but you will want to keep working with midi files... these are supported also.

I didn't find your soundcard in the HCL: did you mean firewire 410?



Some reading:

A bit about Sonar and Linux - there seems to have been rumours for a while that Sonar will be ported to linux.
http://forum.cakewalk.com/printable.asp?m=830955
http://freshmeat.net/articles/view/354/

A bit about digital sound studios for linux - will provide a bit of an overview.
http://www.newsforge.com/article.pl?.../10/20/1418231
http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/7205

Firewire midi devices are supported under the freebob project:
http://parumi.wordpress.com/2006/12/...work-on-linux/
http://www.linux1394.org/

http://freebob.sourceforge.net/index...ported_Devices
... m-audio firewire 410 is on the list of supported devices. Bad news is there is no "bebob" firmware. Basically, you are a victim of vendor lockin...

Note: Cakewalk Sonar 3 has been tested under wine:
http://appdb.winehq.org/appview.php?...TestingId=1690

it is hard to answer because we are Linux users and don't know alot about sonar and what it does.
there is a Linux project that can convert some windows music formats called lilypond
lilipond is integrated into at least three Linux music programs. Rosegarden, NoteEdit, and denemo.
it is doubtfull you can use your windows formatted files.

by and large usng Linux will mean ALOT of doing things a new and harder and more powerfull way.

am also afraid to inform that so far the m-audio 410 has been a hard nut to crack.
we here at linux have to reverse engeneer all our drivers so when companies don't use standards or comunicate with us about drivers and commands we are screwed.

consequently Linux audio hardare support doesn't go way beyond hammerfalls and simple cards like
m-audio Audiophile 2496 and simple usb devices.
so linux audio hardwaare support yes sucks and you need hardware that will work or you are out of luck.
the fw 410 has been something the freebob project has been working on and m-audio has been NOT cooperative which is odd given the generaly freindly way they treat Linux. so for now at least we can't controll those i don't think.

Thank you all for your input, it is very helpful. My problem is to be able to continue working in my present files under linux. If Sonar is supported then that will take care of that problem but then there are the Acid files to deal with. For those unfamiliar Acid is a loop program that takes small .wav files and assembles them to create loop base music. These can then be rendered into larger files that can be imported into Sonar for assembly into songs. Midi is not a factor for me as I don't use it [too convoluted]. My reading tells me that all is possible, I just have to sort out the how to which is a community base thing. From the looks of this forum I'd say that help is readily available. I only hope I am Geek enough to sort it out. Presently I am thinking of a separate box for learning purposes.
Thank you all once again you are a great group.

Regards,

William

may i suggest debian testing "etch" as the distribution you install.
debian etch contains all of the huge and functional debian multimedia distribution save the kernel whch you will have to build yourself but is easy.
other distributions will not do music well !

Careful here - it isn't "multimedia support" which is the issue. Does debian etch contain the kind of music production software that is needed here? Do you know for a fact that the soundcard drivers are available in debian etch?

This sort of information tells us if this is an informed suggestion or an exclamation of fandom. (Though I suspect a mix.)

In this case, the user is suffering from vendor lockin. The user wants to switch to linux but still use the old windows stuff he's used to. Also wants to use the same hardware. He wants to work with his existing sound files - which are proprietary versions of midi files.

It is unlikely this can be done - certainly not seamlessly.
As usual, the main barrier to migration is the user expectations. You have to change paradigms - change the way you do things. This means taking a trip outside your comfort zone for a bit. It is normally worth it.

(A smattering of articles.)
http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/7205
http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/4814
http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/...ro_studio.html
http://www.synthtopia.com/news/04_11/Linux_Music.html

The move will involve changing hardware (soundcard manufacturer does not support linux) and converting the audio files to formats more OSS/FS friendly. (Though, if the sonar files will play in (full-featured) linux players, then this may not be as much of a problem as I anticipate.

However, this is a bigger change than most migrations. In a professional or semi-pro environment, this could be critical (especially as you're looking at production downtime). In these kinds of cases, migration is delayed until hardware depreciation (or license depreciation) is sufficient to warrent the expense anyway - and the change to an OSS/FS base will involve, at worst, the same cost-balance in terms money and time and comfort.

i.e.
http://www.desktoplinux.com/articles/AT5847717353.html
... GNU/Linux (Mandrake) deployment in a professional music studio.

What the user doesn't want is to install all the linux wizbangs only to find the audio files won't play/edit and the hardware is not or poorly supported.

If the user were setting up a studio from scratch - then the equation heavily favours OSS/FS over proprietary products. OSS/FS as the initial choice, determines all the other variables. It is going in the other direction which is a problem.

There is a lot of information out there. There are a lot of choices.

wow simon you made alot of assumptions about what williamwhite is up to. some not supported by his own comments. in terms of "be carefull here" DEMUDI has merged with debian so debian unlike all other distributions contains all of the available music and audio production software available to Linux users configured in a useable way by a dedicated music studio team. ummmmm drivers are part of the kernel and all linux distributions gots some.

fandom- thats a cool word. i am suspected of fandom.
i'm not really sure i have to tell people here what is publically and easily available elsewhere like what apps are in debian etch.
but yes as suspected i am guilty of enthusiastic enjoyment of my debian etch music studio.
i am a musician for 30 years who now uses Linux for recording and music production.
first try i updated a fedora 1 installation to planet CCRMA and i thought that kind of sucked.
then i built a music system starting with Linux from Scratch and building all the music apps
real-time kernel and whatnot myself and i have done that two or three times now and the box and the studio ran fine til the hot summer killed it. New box and debian etch and debian has it all working better than i expected and untill i build Linux from Scratch on this box debian does great. debian has the largest collection of well built music applications on the planet without exceptio and as far as i know that is actually an "informed" exclamation of fandom.

... he's "creating" his own music on his PC.He's interested in converting Sonar files to something linux can use.A specific concern about hardware support.... how is this not "careful"?

The answer to the first question is that Debian includes DEMUDI ... neet news: I understood that DeMuDi was a debian-based sound-studio. It is a distribution. I guess I am not up to date. What happened to agnula?

You did say that debian etch "includes" the "demudi distribution". Fair's, fair. It would be kinda nice to know if the desired functionality is available. (Managing loops a-la "Acid Loops" for eg.)

The answer to the second question is that the demudi kernel has drivers for the fw410 soundcard being used. (Though you have to specially compile a debian kernel....)

I understood that demudi, like debian, was supposed to be completely free and open source?
Doesn't this mean that it will not include proprietary drivers? I didn't know there were any linux drivers for the fw410 - never mind FSF-approved ones! Could you provide a reference for this please?

http://slashdot.org/articles/01/07/19/1527233.shtml
... slashdot on demudi.

http://www.karoliinasalminen.com/blog/?p=39
... blog entry on Ubuntu/Demudi


You'll find I was being most careful - this is why I posted my comments as questions... this way you get to show me how smart you really are

Much of the last part of the speal - talking about migration in differing environments, is more about how we actually don't know much about the circumstances. However, the user's specifics were addressed.

(Aside: I am somewhat taken aback - in retrospect - that a google search for "digital music studio" did not produce demudi! This and the A/Demudi's website turning into porn, I figured the project died.)

Good on yer mate

You realize, of course, that a suggestion like "may I suggest <favorite distro> linux for your task" is a wee bit on the general side. Everyone likes to tout their faves - this dosn't make it a good suggestion. Including detail on how adopting the distribution helps the user with his specific issues will make your case much more effectively.

BTW: looking at this - I gained the impression that Sonar tended to use it's own audio format in production, though it can create files an a range of audio formats. I mentioned support for ogg/vorbis - which is OK in demudi. Also handles wav files. Couldn't see if Sonar handles flac - but would be surprised if it didn't. However - checking - I cannot get a clear picture on this. Can someone enlighten me?

Demudi has been replaced by 64Studio

we sure don't look like a great group now. we argue and flame about nothing.
i think the line "sererate box for learning" was missed by Simon Bridge in a big way.

a linux distribution is a linux distribution is a linux distribution.
if there is no support for the firewire device then there is no support for the firewire device.
so i don't see how i can be clearer on that point.

no i think this just makes you a jerk with no valid input to this thread whatsoever but rather intent on creating a flame and a distruption.

We have a major Linux distribution that contains the hard work of the earliest and most advanced poineers in Linux music studio environment. This is a cool thing unless you are a person like
Simon Bridge who has never not once ever built a linux music studio or run for instance major Linux music programms like jammin or the others even once to see what they do. Possibly you are a guy as we type this who doesn't have midi working on your machine at all and can't do midi input or even record multi tracks from your microphone. Which makes you a guy who should realize you have nothing usefull to contribute to this thread.

but what IS and what OUGHT TO BE are often two different things.

i think this is true only in the sense that studio64 is is a debian etch port for AMD 64 processors. it is DEMUDI only indirectly.

It's not DeMuDi at all. It replaced DeMuDi. Some of the primary DeMuDi developers are working on it.

i must not be doing a good job of making myself clear
i hope this doesn't come off as nit picking or argumentative.
demudi has not been replaced by anything because it did not end it merged back into debian.
demudi when it formed became a fork of debian. for various reasons
to work out configuration issues and liscense issues and to work out Organisational issues. they had big agnula effort at free software by the eu. Agnula was essentially Centro Tempo Reale (project leader) in Florence, KTH -Royal Institut of Technology- from Sweden, and XDV from Austria. we should all be gratefull to the EU for that one.
at the end of this project i believe in 2004 the need to fork was over and demudi synched its archives with debian again giving debian the entire infastructure for free music studio to debian after working out the kinks. This is why debian is so killer as an audio distribution.
Studio64 maintainer Free Ekanayaka from demudi is now a Debian Developer not a studio64 developer, so any improvements made to debian32 packages by studio64 are folded back directly into Debian and kept in sync. Studio64 is NOT a fork of Debian. So studio64 did not "replace" demudi. studio64 is also obviously not a fork of demudi. demudi, all its infastructure and developers still exists live and well as a aspect of debian. and there is a custom distribution of DEBIAN now for audio named studio64. as for studio64 the archives are synced and the sources.list are interchangeable with both debian32 and the unoficial debian64. studio64 seems to be working mainly on a unoficial 64 bit branch of debian which needs work and its good they are doing it. so any name you put on it it's all debian. this is not a seperate distribution as demudi was. and yes there is the new name studio64 and it is a Custom Debian Distribution for people why can't seem to install debian and setup the studio that is already there.