Reaper For Linux on general Linux system

[michael diemer]

I'm currently using Ubuntu Studio (U.S.), but I'll need to upgrade that or switch to something else next April, when U.S. reaches EOL. I figured I would go with Xubuntu, and add the U.S. installer over that. Or maybe vanilla Ubuntu, which is attractive because it's good for 5 years. Same with Mint (although with Ubuntu, you also can add Extended Security Maintenance, which gives you another 3 years). The reason I would not just install the current U.S. is because they switched to KDE. I much prefer XFCE. (Why did they do this? XFCE was working fine, and you could always put KDE on it if desired. I just don't get making major changes for no good reason).

But lately I've been thinking, I don't really need Ubuntu Studio. All I do is midi. I never record anything. Heck, I don't even have a keyboard with its own sounds, just a small keyboard controller. In fact, I recently deleted a bunch of the stuff U.S. installs, especially the video and graphics stuff. On my system, it's just bloat. I still don't even use the remaining stuff. All I really need is a stable, long-term support distro. I'm not sure I even need a special kernel. The regular ones should be good enough for what I do. although I can always add that if I do need it.

So, first, does anyone here use a regular distro (i.e. not one specialized for music/multimedia), and if so, what did you need to do to make it work for you? What would be the bare minimum that would let me do what I do. Which again, is pretty basic. No recording. No video or graphical editing. No live playing. The only latency I worry about is playback of large orchestral midi projects. The only exotic thing I do is Wine. I need it for stuff like Kontakt and Garritan Personal Orchestra. This allows me to do everything I did on Windows, except use stuff that uses dongles. I'm done with that zhit.

[Glennbo]

I have four machines in my house running Xubuntu, and I used it on my DAW machine for three years where it performed flawlessly.

My first encounter with Xubuntu was when I was in a similar situation as you in that I was running MythBuntu on a whole house DVR system, and they were ending the distro. The MythBuntu guys suggested switching to Xubuntu and then installing MythTV on it, which I did back in 2016.

Since then, I moved all the machines in the house to Xubuntu other than my DAW, which is now running Manjaro. I switched that machine to Manjaro because I wanted the latest kernels and had (at the time) brand new state of the art hardware.

Also to note, I have done in place full version upgrades on Xubuntu multiple times and suffered no ill consequences. The 'buntu flavors now have a "do-release-upgrade" tool, and I last used it on my DAW before getting new hardware and moving that machine to Manjaro.

Edit: I looked back at the versions, and I've done two in-place upgrades on my Myth server. It started with Xubuntu 16.04, then was upgraded to 18.04, and now runs 20.04. I also did in-place upgrades on both my DAW and my wife's machines from 18.04 to 20.04, but the DAW is now Manjaro.

[michael diemer]

I have in the past done upgrades, once with Ubuntu, from 14 to 16. Possibly also with Mint. If Xubuntu offers that, it might be my best choice. Then every three years I'd just do an upgrade, not a reinstall. Mint XFCE would make sense too, especially as it's good for 5 years. Same with Linux Lite (now just called Lite). The latter is one of my favorite distros. Vanilla Ubuntu is Gnome of course, which turns me off.

Last year I did try Manjaro, and then Xubuntu, during my unsuccessful attempt to switch my music-making to Linux (I've been using it for everything else for close to 10 years). I didn't get very far that time, so I don't know how well it would have worked, once I was fully up and running.

I may start experimenting soon with another distro, and see how it goes. Then I'll have a good idea what to do come Spring.

[Glennbo]

Originally Posted by michael diemer

I have in the past done upgrades, once with Ubuntu, from 14 to 16. Possibly also with Mint. If Xubuntu offers that, it might be my best choice. Then every three years I'd just do an upgrade, not a reinstall. Mint XFCE would make sense too, especially as it's good for 5 years. Same with Linux Lite (now just called Lite). The latter is one of my favorite distros. Vanilla Ubuntu is Gnome of course, which turns me off.

Last year I did try Manjaro, and then Xubuntu, during my unsuccessful attempt to switch my music-making to Linux (I've been using it for everything else for close to 10 years). I didn't get very far that time, so I don't know how well it would have worked, once I was fully up and running.

I may start experimenting soon with another distro, and see how it goes. Then I'll have a good idea what to do come Spring.

The first in-place upgrades I did were manual from the terminal, but the last two I had set an option in the Software Updater for Xubuntu to let me know when a new release was available, and I did the upgrades like a normal update, but with a lot more stuff getting downloaded and installed.

I found this on the Xubuntu pages.

Upgrading to the next available release

Go to → Settings Manager → Software Updater and wait for the list of available updates to be downloaded

If a new version of Xubuntu is available, a box at the top of the window will appear saying that a new distribution release is available

To upgrade to the next available release, save all of your open documents and click the Upgrade button in → Settings Manager → Software Updater

[audiojunkie]

Originally Posted by michael diemer

I'm currently using Ubuntu Studio (U.S.), but I'll need to upgrade that or switch to something else next April, when U.S. reaches EOL. I figured I would go with Xubuntu, and add the U.S. installer over that. Or maybe vanilla Ubuntu, which is attractive because it's good for 5 years. Same with Mint (although with Ubuntu, you also can add Extended Security Maintenance, which gives you another 3 years). The reason I would not just install the current U.S. is because they switched to KDE. I much prefer XFCE. (Why did they do this? XFCE was working fine, and you could always put KDE on it if desired. I just don't get making major changes for no good reason).

But lately I've been thinking, I don't really need Ubuntu Studio. All I do is midi. I never record anything. Heck, I don't even have a keyboard with its own sounds, just a small keyboard controller. In fact, I recently deleted a bunch of the stuff U.S. installs, especially the video and graphics stuff. On my system, it's just bloat. I still don't even use the remaining stuff. All I really need is a stable, long-term support distro. I'm not sure I even need a special kernel. The regular ones should be good enough for what I do. although I can always add that if I do need it.

So, first, does anyone here use a regular distro (i.e. not one specialized for music/multimedia), and if so, what did you need to do to make it work for you? What would be the bare minimum that would let me do what I do. Which again, is pretty basic. No recording. No video or graphical editing. No live playing. The only latency I worry about is playback of large orchestral midi projects. The only exotic thing I do is Wine. I need it for stuff like Kontakt and Garritan Personal Orchestra. This allows me to do everything I did on Windows, except use stuff that uses dongles. I'm done with that zhit.

I've used most of them: Debian, Ubuntu, Mint, Arch, EndeavourOS, and now Fedora. I think the best thing for you to do, is to use the flavor of Ubuntu you want, and just add the things you need. Ubuntu Studio (including the Ubuntu Installer) is a nice easy way to get things set up quickly, but you'll get a more customized experience that is still easy to use and set up, if you simply use what you're comfortable with and expand your knowledge as you get comfortable. With Ubuntu, you can use any of the applications you use currently, and leave out the ones you don't. Pretty much everything is an install away....including Ubuntu Studio Controls. You don't HAVE TO install the Ubuntu Studio package list, you can install just what you want. In addition, you can use the KXStudio repo if you want, as well as any commercial native linux apps (they're all compiled with Ubuntu). Ubuntu also has an LTS version so you can be supported for much longer than regular versions. In my opinion, when someone is moving away from the pre-installed Audio Linux distros like AV Linux, Ubuntu Studio, etc., Ubuntu is the easiest and smoothest transition into the intermediate set ups. My vote for you is to move from Ubuntu Studio to Ubuntu with the Desktop Environment you prefer.

[michael diemer]

Originally Posted by audiojunkie

My vote for you is to move from Ubuntu Studio to Ubuntu with the Desktop Environment you prefer.

Thanks, but do you mean Ubuntu and then install XFCE, or Xubuntu? I'm pretty sure only Ubuntu has the 5 year LTS. Xubuntu only has 3, like Ubuntu Studio. I think all the 'buntu flavors are 3 year support.

Also, what about Mint? I have used it before, and I heard it works well for audio.

[audiojunkie]

Originally Posted by michael diemer

Thanks, but do you mean Ubuntu and then install XFCE, or Xubuntu? I'm pretty sure only Ubuntu has the 5 year LTS. Xubuntu only has 3, like Ubuntu Studio. I think all the 'buntu flavors are 3 year support.

Also, what about Mint? I have used it before, and I heard it works well for audio.

Hmmm.... Good point. I wasn't referring to installing a second Desktop Environment over Gnome, I was referring to you installing Xubuntu--but I didn't factor in the differences in support. However, in my opinion, using Xubuntu and then doing the graphical upgrade like Glennbo suggested would be your best bet. As long as the full version upgrade goes well, there wouldn't be too much difference between the support times between the OSes. The Mint option with XFCE is another good option.

[michael diemer]

I agree, at this point Xubuntu or Mint XFCE looks best. But this is a ways off, and I'm going to continue to think about it. And like I said, perhaps do some experimenting. I may even gradually build up a new drive, so the transition will be seamless.

It is a weakness of Linux that many distros have no upgrade option. It's not a big deal until you factor in Wine. Once you have things working, you don't want to screw it up! And any major change, whether an upgrade or new install, can strike fear into the hearts of the most intrepid Linux users.

[audiojunkie]

Originally Posted by michael diemer

I agree, at this point Xubuntu or Mint XFCE looks best. But this is a ways off, and I'm going to continue to think about it. And like I said, perhaps do some experimenting. I may even gradually build up a new drive, so the transition will be seamless.

It is a weakness of Linux that many distros have no upgrade option. It's not a big deal until you factor in Wine. Once you have things working, you don't want to screw it up! And any major change, whether an upgrade or new install, can strike fear into the hearts of the most intrepid Linux users.

Here are two things to consider:

Look into bottles. It is a graphical front end manager for wine. I believe the bottles can also be backed up so that you won’t need to redo them.

The other thing to consider, is a linux post installation script. Essentially, it is a bash script composed of typical install commands to push your favorite apps to your computer after you reinstall. You make it and use it in case you need to reinstall.

These two things will reduce your fears of the inevitable reinstallations in your life, by making reinstallations much less a pain.

[fabio77]

I have Ubuntu 20.04 installed. I tried UbutuStudio 22.04 but had some issues. So I got went back to Clean 20.04.

What I have done to make all things working I tried to explain in this post https://forum.cockos.com/showpost.ph...3&postcount=37

The only thing since then is a wine downgrade to 7.11 that seems to fix some network problems in version 7.12, that caused some vst-plugins to stop installation.

And a (post)installation-script, as mentioned by audiojunkie is a good idea. I made myself a text-file over the years, with all the commands (grub, customize, programm installations and so on). If you don't have one you can start one. Maybe you think what commands you already know you have to run after installation and write them down and safe it. For example a "sudo apt install and_all_the_programs_you_need".

[Largos]

I much prefer XFCE. (Why did they do this? XFCE was working fine, and you could always put KDE on it if desired. I just don't get making major changes for no good reason).

KDE is objectively better. The only reason for using XFCE (and the reason I use it on an install) is if you are familiar with it. It has a small development team and really nothing ever really changes so it's now very outdated and it's not even a case of the lack of features result in improved performance.

[michael diemer]

Originally Posted by Largos

KDE is objectively better. The only reason for using XFCE (and the reason I use it on an install) is if you are familiar with it. It has a small development team and really nothing ever really changes so it's now very outdated and it's not even a case of the lack of features result in improved performance.

Objectively better? I'm not sure how one would determine that. They're both good products, it's more matter of preference.

Outdated? I say it's stable, and the devs know better than to screw around with it too much.

[michael diemer]

Originally Posted by fabio77

I have Ubuntu 20.04 installed. I tried UbutuStudio 22.04 but had some issues. So I got went back to Clean 20.04.

What I have done to make all things working I tried to explain in this post https://forum.cockos.com/showpost.ph...3&postcount=37

The only thing since then is a wine downgrade to 7.11 that seems to fix some network problems in version 7.12, that caused some vst-plugins to stop installation.

And a (post)installation-script, as mentioned by audiojunkie is a good idea. I made myself a text-file over the years, with all the commands (grub, customize, programm installations and so on). If you don't have one you can start one. Maybe you think what commands you already know you have to run after installation and write them down and safe it. For example a "sudo apt install and_all_the_programs_you_need".

Thank you Fabio, I am going to copy your above post into a document. I'll probably experiment on my old AMD dual-core, which is enough to get something like Garritan and Aria going on wine.

[Largos]

Originally Posted by michael diemer

Whether or not KDE is objectively better is a matter of opinion.

Actually, it isn't. People do performance comparisons which are available to see around the internet.

Outdated? I say it's stable, and the devs know better than to screw around with it too much.

or you could actually engage with facts https://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonev...crown-in-2020/

and to answer your original question about why they would do it, ubuntu studio says about the reasons for switch at the bottom of their post here https://ubuntustudio.org/2020/04/ubu...-lts-released/

[michael diemer]

No need to get into a pissing contest here, so I'll just say that what is better is what works better for me. That's the only fact that matters to me.

Also, I think KDE is ugly. That's an opinion, though...

[Glennbo]

Originally Posted by michael diemer

Objectively better? I'm not sure how one would determine that. They're both good products, it's more matter of preference.

Outdated? I say it's stable, and the devs know better than to screw around with it too much.

XFCE does what I need. Launch programs and stay out of the way.

I setup hotkeys to launch and to close all my most used applications. Super-r launches REAPER, Super-a launches Guitarix virtual amp, and so on. My favorite, Super-g runs "pkexec thunar" for God mode file browsing with a popup password prompt.

[foxAsteria]

POP! OS my 2nd fave after Manjaro. Very straightforward and snappy even on old systems.

[4duhwinnn]

Whichever OS, creating a separate partition mounted as /home
will simplify life in the various scenarios leading to a fresh install,
where keeping your same user-name, and choosing not to reformat /home,
preserves a lot of your customizations and of course, local data.

Bodhi linux is long-existing and very lightweight ubuntu spinoff, with Moksha enlightenment derivative as default system gui. I use it often for basic recordings with standard kernels. Add packages with synaptic, to fatten it up, as desired..
Cheers

[4duhwinnn]

And AVLinux now has an Enlightenment based RC 2 candidate iso, a great pleasure to use. I installed it to a small ssd, and it's as speedy as it is productive
and fun

[michael diemer]

Originally Posted by 4duhwinnn

Whichever OS, creating a separate partition mounted as /home
will simplify life in the various scenarios leading to a fresh install,
where keeping your same user-name, and choosing not to reformat /home,
preserves a lot of your customizations and of course, local data.

Bodhi linux is long-existing and very lightweight ubuntu spinoff, with Moksha enlightenment derivative as default system gui. I use it often for basic recordings with standard kernels. Add packages with synaptic, to fatten it up, as desired..
Cheers

I use Bodhi as my base computer (not my music one). I love it. Put in on my wife's old laptop also. For one thing, it does not push updates. you have to check yourself, so you have option to do it when it makes sense. It is tempting.

I think it's best light distro on the planet for 10+ year old machines. Although there are of course lighter ones out there, for those really old Pentium dinosaurs. And for not too old machines, Linux Lite, Lubuntu, Zorin Lite all are good choices. But bodhi is truly unique. I know of no other light system that still has a full-featured, snappy and powerful GUI. To get any lighter you have to go to windows managers. All this and it's beautiful, too. They deserve a lot of credit.

[michael diemer]

Originally Posted by 4duhwinnn

And AVLinux now has an Enlightenment based RC 2 candidate iso, a great pleasure to use. I installed it to a small ssd, and it's as speedy as it is productive
and fun

I'm thinking to stay away from the dedicated systems, as I don't use 90% of the features. My computer is 8 years old, an i-7, and thus could benefit from a light distro, or at least a stripped-down one. Xubuntu is still my leading candidate. I could make it look exactly like Ubuntu Studio, right down to the pretty picture (the water scene). that would make the transition really painless..

[Largos]

Originally Posted by michael diemer

No need to get into a pissing contest here, so I'll just say that what is better is what works better for me. That's the only fact that matters to me.

Also, I think KDE is ugly. That's an opinion, though...

What's a pissing contest? You asked why the change, I told you.

[michael diemer]

Originally Posted by Largos

What's a pissing contest? You asked why the change, I told you.

Thank you for that link. Actually, I'm sure I already read it and forgot about it.

I gave KDE a try awhile back with Kubuntu. I gave up on it, I just didn't like it. No amount of bench-testing can make an iota of difference when someone just doesn't like something. I don't choose my operating system or desktop environment based on benchmarks. I either like it or I don't. Your mileage may vary.

Have a good one.

p.s. In case there is a language difference here: a pissing contest is a crude way of saying in English that two people - particularly guys, for obvious anatomical reasons - are trying to prove each other wrong. There's no right or wrong here, it comes down to personal preference, so no need to argue.

[audiojunkie]

Originally Posted by 4duhwinnn

Whichever OS, creating a separate partition mounted as /home
will simplify life in the various scenarios leading to a fresh install,
where keeping your same user-name, and choosing not to reformat /home,
preserves a lot of your customizations and of course, local data.

Bodhi linux is long-existing and very lightweight ubuntu spinoff, with Moksha enlightenment derivative as default system gui. I use it often for basic recordings with standard kernels. Add packages with synaptic, to fatten it up, as desired..
Cheers

I’ve seen this mentioned elsewhere several times on other forums as well. I think the separate partition for /home is good advice!

[michael diemer]

Originally Posted by audiojunkie

I’ve seen this mentioned elsewhere several times on other forums as well. I think the separate partition for /home is good advice!

I've always wanted to do that, but never have. Maybe this time...

[marwatt]

xfce on Arcolinux (Arch) here... KISS

[alextone]

Originally Posted by 4duhwinnn

And AVLinux now has an Enlightenment based RC 2 candidate iso, a great pleasure to use. I installed it to a small ssd, and it's as speedy as it is productive
and fun

I'm using AVL-EFL here. Fast, and an enjoyable experience.

[ebby]

Last summer I did a survey of all the Linux distros, well the top dozen or so according to distrowatch, and I tried them all (distro and version below). There were others that I downloaded to try but install/setup problems meant I never even got to a working desktop.

MX Linux 19.4
Manjaro Linux 21.1.0
EndeavourOS 2021.04.17
Linux Mint 4-lmde
Pop!_OS 21.04
Ubuntu 21.04
Debian 11
elementary OS 5.1.7
Garuda Linux 210720
Fedora 34
openSUSE 15.3
Zorin OS 15.3
PCLinuxOS 2021.08
Slackware
Puppy Linux 9.5
CentOS 8.4.2105

In the end I settled on Manjaro KDE (Plasma, rather than the XFCE you'd want to use), ahead of Garuda and Zorin using all sorts of criteria, not just music making. Similar to you, but I'm mostly MIDI with just the odd track or two for acoustic instruments and vocals. I found Beth Harmon's Manjaro guide (elsewhere on this forum) very useful if you choose to re-visit Manjaro. Hope that helps.

[michael diemer]

Sounds like an interesting experiment, and a time-consuming one! thanks for sharing the results. I've tried most of the ones on that list, although only Manjaro for music. I haven't tried the other Arch ones, or Pop or Slackware.

I'm still leaning Mint at this point, mostly because of the 5 year support, but also the fact that it's non-rolling. I just trust LTS versions I guess.

I will be trying it out when the new version comes out, which will be soon. I liked mint when I used it, and only switched because the bistro-hopping bug got me. But Xubuntu is still a possibility, too. Although they have snaps, which mint does not.

Fortunately, I have time to decide. My version of Ubuntu Studio is good until April.

[marwatt]

Originally Posted by michael diemer

...I haven't tried the other Arch ones, or Pop or Slackware...

Hi Diemer
I started using linux with Ubuntu (I came from more than twenty years of Windows experience) ... after 2 years I switched to Arcolinux (Arch based) and I never go back.

What I liked about Arcolinux (I use the S version... there are many configuration) is that I only installed what I needed ... (unlike other distros that basically install a lot of things that I don't use) and above all there are the latest versions of applications in the repository.
And a rolling distro is always up to date ...

Why not try, in parallel with Mint, also an Arch based distro?
just a suggestion

regards

[michael diemer]

Originally Posted by marwatt

Hi Diemer
I started using linux with Ubuntu (I came from more than twenty years of Windows experience) ... after 2 years I switched to Arcolinux (Arch based) and I never go back.

What I liked about Arcolinux (I use the S version... there are many configuration) is that I only installed what I needed ... (unlike other distros that basically install a lot of things that I don't use) and above all there are the latest versions of applications in the repository.
And a rolling distro is always up to date ...

Why not try, in parallel with Mint, also an Arch based distro?
just a suggestion

regards

I did try Manjaro last year, and switched back to Xubuntu. Two reasons:

1. The commands are all different. Also, I could never remember when to use pamac, vs. pacman. Too confusing.

2. As for rolling distros, that's one of the reasons I gave up on Windows. I don't want my computer updating to the latest versions. I am heavily dependent on wine, and updates can break things.

[fabio77]

Originally Posted by michael diemer

I did try Manjaro last year, and switched back to Xubuntu. Two reasons:

1. The commands are all different. Also, I could never remember when to use pamac, vs. pacman. Too confusing.

2. As for rolling distros, that's one of the reasons I gave up on Windows. I don't want my computer updating to the latest versions. I am heavily dependent on wine, and updates can break things.

I tried manjaro yesterday on my laptop. But I couldn't even get the dropbox integration running. And there were other programms I missed in the repos.

But I saw again how great xfce is I installed the gnome version first, because I'm used to it on my Ubuntu PC. But on the Laptop, with original gnome, all was kind of blurred. Then I installed the xfce version (I know, I could have installed xfce ontop, but I wanted a clean version for experiments on arch). And the xfce was really nice and sharp.

I think I would install Xubuntu on my PC, but it's not LTS.

Maybe I try the Arco mentioned above. But I like the manjaro logos and wallpapers

[marwatt]

Originally Posted by michael diemer

I did try Manjaro last year, and switched back to Xubuntu. Two reasons:

1. The commands are all different. Also, I could never remember when to use pamac, vs. pacman. Too confusing.

..is the same thing... one visual... the other CLI...

Originally Posted by michael diemer

2. As for rolling distros, that's one of the reasons I gave up on Windows. I don't want my computer updating to the latest versions. I am heavily dependent on wine, and updates can break things.

Correct but I just block updates on wine... simple.

Anyway
I am convinced that one should choose the distro that they like the most ... perhaps not the best distro in the world but the one most congenial to their needs. My distro is Arcolinux :-)