Has somebody a stable Ubuntu Studio NATTY 64-bit?

Ralf Mardorf ralf.mardorf at alice-dsl.net
Tue May 31 19:51:18 UTC 2011

On Tue, 2011-05-31 at 20:28 +0200, Hartmut Noack wrote:
> Am 31.05.2011 00:45, schrieb Ralf Mardorf:
> > On Mon, 2011-05-30 at 18:05 -0400, Mike Holstein wrote:
> >> ralph
> >
> > I heard a lot of Linux recordings I like, but never one that regarding
> > to the sound quality was comparable to any professional studio recording
> > or any analog home recoding.
> I never heared any recording made unto cassette, that had a sound 
> quality comparable with the first primitive recordings I made with 
> Audacity on a Terratec EWX -- some 10 years ago.
> Excuse the hard words but your notions are plain nonsense. I do not 
> speak about software at all here, sound quality has nothing to do with 
> software at all.
> You can actually make a audiophile recording of a Jazz-trio on Linux 
> simply using a capable interface (like the RME plus a decent IO-module), 
> good preamps, good microphones and good musicians playing good 
> instruments in front of them. With jack_record or Ardour or Mixbus or 
> Gramofile: at your option.
> Yes, top-notch analogue equipment still beats everything else but 
> certainly not a cassette-recorder.
> best regards

A maintained Yamaha MT44D, that does mean that you've got to clean and
demagnetize it. Recalibrating is tricky and expensive, but you can buy
cassettes, test them and if they are ok for your Yamaha MT44D, then you
buy a bigger charge of those cassettes. I did use exactly this tape
recorder when I worked for studio development at [snip], so I could
compare my home recordings to top-notch studio recordings. A cassette
recorder isn't nearly as good as top-notch analog equipment, but much
better than my two TerraTec cards. Of cause, the cassette recorder was
less good than a Firewire Motu device I could test at this time. I know
that most 4-track cassette recordings are disgusting, but most people
don't know how to maintain gear in the right way. It's possible to use
the demagnetizer and to make things more worse, than they were before
demagnetizing ;) etc.. The biggest difference between cheap and
expensive analog equipment is the durability. Some of those rich guys I
was working for collect old equipment, mics, pre-amps, tape recorders. I
heard Telefunken tape recorders (Senkel, nicht Kassette, dunno the term
in English, is it 1/4"?) that still were top-notch, thought those
recorders were older then I was. Neither a home recording cassette
recorder nor a microchip for any sound card will live that long.

A lot of people will disagree even with your opinion, they say that no
analog equipment is better than digital equipment and then use the tape
saturation plugin ;) that never ever is able to do tape saturation,
nearly as good as even a consumer cassette recorder. Tape saturation can
be that good, that you don't need a compressor for the stereo sum!
You can use disadvantages of some equipment as an advantage. It's easier
for top-notch, but also, very limited possible for cheap analog
equipment. It's a pity that this knowledge falls into oblivion.

Listen to old Beatles recordings, older than Abbey Road ;), they did use
gear comparable to the quality of a 4-track cassette recorder! I'm not a
talker, Beatles LPs are available, but avoid loudness war remastered

More information about the Ubuntu-Studio-users mailing list