Linux 'most' stable versions ?

RELATED
PRODUCTS

Post

Do we know that a Linux version is considered stable enough when it is made available on the u-he website ?

Why do I ask ? Because I'm not interested in the interim versions that are put out as testing versions on Reddit. Some have problems, etc.. What I want are stable enough versions to make it to the u-he web site, like all current Linux products available on the website are, which I'm using now for more than 2.5 years.

So, is the gate the appearance of such versions on the u-he web site ?

Cheers.

Post

I do not agree that the website versions are the most stable; I've had the opposite experience.

I've had issues with some of the builds from reddit, but I've also found very stable builds that I use in every project multiple times over. It's only Bazille and ACE that I have issues with now. For reference, here's the versions that I'm using, most significantly better than those on the website.

Code: Select all

ACE-7015.tar.gz
Bazille-7015.tar.gz
ColourCopy-7658.tar.xz
Diva-7468.tar.gz
Filterscape-7015.tar.gz
Hive-7015.tar.gz
MFM2-7015.tar.gz
Presswerk-7669.tar.xz
Repro-1-7468.tar.gz
Satin-7658.tar.xz
Uhbik-7015.tar.gz
Zebra2-7468.tar.gz
Creator of Bitwiggers, the place to share Bitwig Presets.
Advocate for Bitwish, the place to vote on Feature Requests and discuss Bitwig.

Post

Versions on Reddit? I am in general quite confused about the Linux version. The Zebra version for instance that is linked from the U-he page is 2.7 only. Is this a mistake on the website? Where can I get the current version? On Reddit? Are we talking about this Reddit: reddit.com?

Post

https://www.reddit.com/r/UheOnLinux/ which is where the closed and stickied Linux builds topic now points users to.
Creator of Bitwiggers, the place to share Bitwig Presets.
Advocate for Bitwish, the place to vote on Feature Requests and discuss Bitwig.

Post

sth wrote: Fri Nov 02, 2018 8:49 pm I do not agree that the website versions are the most stable; I've had the opposite experience.

I've had issues with some of the builds from reddit, but I've also found very stable builds that I use in every project multiple times over. It's only Bazille and ACE that I have issues with now. For reference, here's the versions that I'm using, most significantly better than those on the website.

Code: Select all

ACE-7015.tar.gz
Bazille-7015.tar.gz
ColourCopy-7658.tar.xz
Diva-7468.tar.gz
Filterscape-7015.tar.gz
Hive-7015.tar.gz
MFM2-7015.tar.gz
Presswerk-7669.tar.xz
Repro-1-7468.tar.gz
Satin-7658.tar.xz
Uhbik-7015.tar.gz
Zebra2-7468.tar.gz
I *believe* that the 7015 versions were GUI tests and that plugins were expected to have issues. 4408 is the "release" branch.

Post

That explains my issues with Bazille and ACE.

I don't really care what the "release" version is; not only do these builds have more features, essentially all of them are *more stable* than the "release" versions were for me. I'm looking for newer features and stability, and these non-release versions fit that for me.

Back to OP's question, I don't know what makes a build get promoted to the website; they haven't changed in a very long time. It may not simply be a matter of stability, because as I said some of these "interim versions that are put out as testing versions" are *more stable* than the ones on the website.

It's silly to me to only care about what's promoted on the website, given that there's better builds available that just aren't posted on there.
Creator of Bitwiggers, the place to share Bitwig Presets.
Advocate for Bitwish, the place to vote on Feature Requests and discuss Bitwig.

Post

sth wrote: Fri Nov 02, 2018 11:03 pm
That explains my issues with Bazille and ACE.

I don't really care what the "release" version is; not only do these builds have more features, essentially all of them are *more stable* than the "release" versions were for me. I'm looking for newer features and stability, and these non-release versions fit that for me.

Back to OP's question, I don't know what makes a build get promoted to the website; they haven't changed in a very long time. It may not simply be a matter of stability, because as I said some of these "interim versions that are put out as testing versions" are *more stable* than the ones on the website.

It's silly to me to only care about what's promoted on the website, given that there's better builds available that just aren't posted on there.
First of all, the versions posted on the u-he website are the ones that I use since the beginning and that's since about 2.5 years. I bought all of them and they all run very fine. Linux Mint 18 KDE (based on Ubuntu). So no problem there. And moreover, not problem with the original Repro 1 and 5 (I do not consider a somewhat slowness in tweaking a knob as a problem as long as music can be created, I do not create soundsets, I use soundsets and modify here and there).

Secondly the 'interim' (hopefully that's an applicable term) versions posted by Alex on reddit can show, as many comments providing development feedback are showing, some problems here and there.

These two points are taken into the context of wanting to create music only and not fiddling with software. I do not want to install a version to find out that my favorites are gone. This is crucial. I do regular backups but neverthless, reinstalling (part of) a backup is not what I consider creating music.

Hence the basic question about gating. Is the u-he web site a gate that allows what was accepted as stable versions ?

You see, 2.5 years ago when I discovered u-he (and Bitwig) there were no such turmoil. The versions were there, I tried them, they were an incredible surprise, like huge creative doors were being opened in making music using Linux (which is the only OS I use). Bought them all. There was no testing versions, in-development versions. For all practical means or for the wallet, these were products.

I realize now that the cycle of voluntary testing and voltuntary developement of the Linux versions must have been done before I discovered the plugins and what I saw were 'products'.

In that vein my question is reflecting this event: is the u-he website a gate to stable Linux versions ?

If so, then I can gladly wait until new versions are posted and then proceed to get these with an assured mind that they went through a good number of development iterations. I am certainly not hunting for new versions. All I have at the moment is fine to create music. The setup actually can stay the same, DAWs and plugins, forever and it would be just fine (Bitwig could get some optimization though :) ) as there's so much to learn with all of those plugins, with mixing and mastering and withg creating music. Also, I do not want to install versions each week or so, with the possibility of one hiding a 'surprise'. In such a quest, having a 'gate' that 'officially' terms a version as being 'stable' would be great so again, that was the full background to my question.

This all said, looming in the distance is the thought, since I started to use many Windows plugins earlier this year (wine-staging, linvst) to run all u-he products as Windows plugins although I would really like to stay with Linux as the bridging overhead is absent.

Cheers, and sorry for being such long-winded !

Post

Well, we'd have to wait for a U-he team member to chime in for the answer to that. I assume that if it's going to be posted to the website, that it's recommended and stable. That doesn't necessarily mean that the interim versions are not as stable, or that certain members might recommend them over the others.

Perhaps they're waiting until all plugins are in an ideal state and then update it all at once, instead of worrying about per-plugin versions and which is the best and is it on the website.

Given some one-off bugs in certain builds, it's hard for me to imagine that almost twice-as-many builds later than those on the website, the current builds are *worse* than those haha.
Creator of Bitwiggers, the place to share Bitwig Presets.
Advocate for Bitwish, the place to vote on Feature Requests and discuss Bitwig.

Post

In my opinion, the whole reddit switch is a flop,
because reddit is a second rate gossip rag, not well
suited for serious communication. Abique hoped
reddit would make support discussions easier,
but I doubt that is working both ways. KVR isn't
perfect, but I think a U-he linux subforum is needed,
where there can be multiple threads and a few stickies.
(have separate Mac/Win areas ever been considered?)
Pretty sure more linux-driven sales of U-he products
will result from a fuller presence here, than what will
ever be possible over at reddit. (to be clear, abique didn't make
reddit, he makes excellent linux ports of complex
world-class plugins, for which I am continually grateful.)
I stand quite in awe of the whole U-he enterprise,
refreshed by each great new sound and combinations
that are discovered :hyper:

Post

I think abique made the right move, so as not to be bothered as much. I can understand that; I'm a busy guy too. The whole arrangement just makes it difficult for me to get excited or spend more.

Urs likes Mac. This is where he started and prefers to be. Windows support is obligatory, of course. Yet, Linux support isn't necessary in 2018, nor a trivial thing. I think U-he sees the Linux thing as a novelty--perhaps a bright future prospect too--but only so serious. Therefore, the 'beta proviso'. Most appropriately, I should regard U-he products in the same way; a novelty, only so serious, not to place too much faith in, etc.--this is only fair. I'm grateful, but sober.

By the way, does anyone at U-he actually use Linux for their *real* audio workstation? I'd love to know.

Post

U-he on Linux is a HUGE point for me. I vote with my dollar and it's very convenient that basically all of my favorite synths are from U-he and on Linux; sometimes it's a compromise but in this case it's the best-case-scenario (the best, on Linux, with DPI support).

I don't own many synths or effects, but I own every single U-he plugin. Whenever possible I recommend them and preach about what they can do.

If Linux "support" will disappear, I'm not sure what I'd do. I definitely wouldn't sell the licenses and give them the transfer money, and I definitely would not keep supporting them with more money. I would probably and bitterly continue using the old versions anyway lol.
Creator of Bitwiggers, the place to share Bitwig Presets.
Advocate for Bitwish, the place to vote on Feature Requests and discuss Bitwig.

Post

Yeah ...
I'm of the same attitude pretty much, sth. I too have nearly everything they've made (hundreds of dollars in). I think it's only ACE I don't have.

Truth is, I'll make music no matter what and I don't really need half the things I've bought. Linux, on the other hand, I couldn't dispense with that. Albeit Linux is just a set of principals, which software makers have been leaning towards for years now. I have confidence it'll continue.

In the meantime, I'm real excited about stuff like the Librem 5, which is a true Linux based phone that's upcoming. Maybe my U-he stuff will run on that eventually. I love portable noise makers!

Post

Beyond principals, I like the repository/software update management,
file management, disk management, environment management,
gui management, video system management, and security systems.
The hardware/software connectivity that jackd provides,
offers enough creative bonuses, to diminish the importance
of new 'standards' that developers invest in, trying to stay
a few steps ahead of the competition. OSC, MPE, NKS? :dog:
I hope they all succeed, if only for squeezing out some
greeat new music here and there, which is in short supply.

Even within the limitations imposed by fewer hardware choices,
there is far more freedom in linux installs, to personalize the workplace
and cyber man-cave(s) than mac or win
corporate office control freaks and data miners will ever allow.

I can choose to login to the best among dozens of system guis,
should I find that a certain one excels at a job needing attention.
With win/mac, you get pretty much always the same can of soup,
the same at breafast, lunch, dinner, or party time. Sure, it gets
the job done, but it seems like such a boring grind in comparison.

For the beancounters and prognosticators,
the closed U-he linux topic is 6 digits in the read column.
The Reaper linux forum has a steady growth of new posters,
with some very savvy coders and music producers among them.
New linux people using U-he products are finding that much of the
supporting cast they rely on in win/mac setups, can easily
be wrapped for use in native linux daws by LinVst,
and that others will work in a wineHQ environment.
The few devs with 'killer app plugins' that don't yet work,
can't even code a decent install/registration like U-he have,
and rely on ilok, pace, or their own sad attempts at such dross.

Not to mention that the computer market itself, with heavy
emphasis on portable devices with powerful engines,
is not a fiscal $rock of gibraltor$.
Certainly a market yet to be dominated, where a linux
audio engine, embedded or otherwise, could be
a great advantage. I'd love to see a U-he populated...

https://www.moddevices.com/products/mod-duo-x

Post

Straying more on-topic, the nature of linux, with the steady
and easy availibility of new kernels, sundry levels of core system
componants, and a wide pallete of apps coded by people
of sundry motives and skills, that it's incumbant on me,
to keep a stable system, a testing system, and a wild-west
system to cover all the bases, so dealing with different
builds of U-he products is already 'business as usual'.
I'm motivated to use the best, and happy to do whatever
it takes. If linux vanished today, I'd use the same audio
software on the lesser of the remaining evils :party: :dog: :party:
Cheers

Post

glokraw, btw, I have a MOD DUO (not the DUO-X) and I'm really impressed with it! Do you have one too? I'd also like to see a U-he entry here.

Post Reply

Return to “u-he Linux support”