• Helix 🧬@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah it’s basically Pulseaudio, but better. The devs have done a great job on iterating upon the already pretty good pulseaudio!

        • Auzy@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I’d have to disagree with that. It wasn’t perfect and there were issues for many people at the beginning, but it united everything properly.

          Before then (in xmms days), don’t forget that audio in apps constantly didn’t work, and the sound servers often conflicted. It was far from a seamless experience.

          But, pipewire I agree doesn’t seem to have any downsides and finally fixes from what I felt was the last major issue (low latency)

          • wewbull@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Pipewire replaces the need for jack, which was low latency audio routing between audio components. Pipewire even has jack compatible interfaces so you can use jack based apps with it.

            Then there’s the bit most people skip over. Pipewire does the same thing for video!

          • gens@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Didn’t work on my last two sound cards, and always had latency problems for many people.

            JACK is for profesionals. If you need to take an input from an instrument, run it through a software filter, and output it immediately. Or if you need to output from one program to another to another. Etc. Usually that means small buffers and a lot of cpu usage. Not really for normal desktop users. Grab a specialized distro like ubuntu studio and try it, if you want.

    • LiveLM@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Nope. This will only be fixed when Discord gets their head out of their ass, unlikely to happen soon.

    • WaterWaiver@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Can you describe the issue? I don’t use Discord (and I presume the problem might depend on what browser you use).

      • peanutbutter_gas@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m assuming this is a “dedicated app” (i.e. apt install discord). I was capable of streaming the video, but sound was a different beast. Audio streaming on discord was a no go. I was finally able to do it with pipewire and using discord-screenaudio

          • peanutbutter_gas@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            Sorry for late reply. I just now noticed this.

            The difference would be that a browser would likely have multiple web pages fighting for resources whereas the dedicated client would not have to fight over so many resources.

            The OS has a dedicated task scheduler that alots cpu time to each process. Some processes get preferential treatment, but most processes started on user space ( i.e.double click UI icon) are just “normal” priority.

            When a task scheduler hits on a process, that process can start executing whatever it needs to do. The problem with running discord in a browser is that the application is splitting its attention across multiple pages ( and probably other stuff ) instead of a single page.

            Basically, it’s faster to focus on painting a single canvas than it is to painting 3 at the same time.

            I’m not going to discuss shared memory and separate processes or forking. You can goggle search if you want to know more about that.

            • WaterWaiver@aussie.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              I am not so sure that it will end up faster or better.

              **In theory: **A CPU scheduler should give programs as much CPU time as they want until you start nearing CPU resource saturation. Discord doesn’t need very large amounts of CPU (admittedly it’s a lot more than it should for a text chap app, but it’s still not diabolically bad). It will only start getting starved when you are highly utilising all cores. That can happen on my 2-core laptop, but I don’t have any games on my 6 core desktop that will eat everything. Nonetheless on my laptop I’d probably prefer my games take the resources (not Discord) and I’d happily suffer any reasonable drop in responsiveness of Discord as a result.

              I don’t think that a new process (a new dedicated browser-client) instead of a new thread (tab in existing browser) is intrinsically faster or better. CPU schedulers are varied and complex, I wouldn’t be surprised if any differences in performance measurements would end up down in the noise. If anything the extra memory usage might cause more IO contention and memory starvation, making everything slower rather than faster. But this is all conjecture, so don’t give it much credit.

              Basically, it’s faster to focus on painting a single canvas than it is to painting 3 at the same time.

              I don’t think that’s much of a problem in practice, at least for Firefox: one tab can crash and stop rendering completely (or lock up 100% of 1 CPU core) but the others will keep going in other threads. For the most part they shouldn’t be able to affect each other’s performance.

              In practice: What’s the actual metric that you think will be better or worse? I assume responsiveness to typing and clicks in the discord UI?

              I’ve never seen discord lag or stutter from causes other than IO limitations (startup speed, network traffic, heavy IO on my machine) or silly design (having to refresh the page after leaving it open all day, I suspect it’s intentionally auto-disabling but I’m not sure). That’s not something that running a separate discord client in a separate dedicated/embedded browser will fix.

  • WaterWaiver@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I’ve been using PipeWire this year on my Void Linux laptop & desktop. It’s been mostly OK but has a few problems. For years I have been using plain ALSA (with no custom configuration) because pulseaudio causes me regular issues across multiple machines (mostly silently failing).

    Pros:

    • I don’t have to use Chromium for my mic to work on online video conf (WTF Firefox)
    • “EasyEffects” lets me quickly fix crappy youtube audio (bad gain normalisation, way too much sibilance) with a minimum of effort.

    Cons:

    • Sometimes breaks all audio until I manually restart it (hey, just like pulseaudio. This problem never happens when using ALSA straight)
    • First time setup is complicated, involving environment variables, dbus user session buses and multiple daemons (running just pipewire isn’t enough). Why can’t it handle this all itself? Surely it should notice if these things are missing and just fix it itself? Compare this to straight ALSA where you (1) do nothing and then (2) everything works (except Firefox mic support)
    • I can’t have multiple audio outputs all unmuted at the same time. Eg my headphone output and my rear speaker output. If I override this (using alsamixer) then it gets forgotten next boot anyway, it seems to be out of scope of PipeWire’s understanding.
    • corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago
      • Sometimes breaks all audio until I manually restart it (hey, just like pulseaudio. This problem never happens when using ALSA straight)

      Well, how much lennart is in this thing? Not only can that predict how well it’s going to work, but also how soon it’ll be fixed, how responsive the ‘team’ will be to bug reports, how compatible it’ll be with other system components AND whether ‘compatibility’ will be achieved before the entire OS has been systematically imported into (and badly replicated by) the project.

      • Auzy@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I don’t think honestly he gets enough credit.

        If you check SystemD, its a HUGE step up, which is why everyone is using it now (whereas, the old scripts had race conditions, were a pain to write and other issues). Anyone who has written both can tell you how much better things are now…

        The fact this issue is happening on both Pipewire and Pulseaudio also suggests it’s more likely a bug in the drivers… It might not be obvious on ALSA directly, but that doesn’t mean an issue doesn’t exist there…

        And honestly, the situation before PulseAudio was awful. Audio not working was a common issue, and low latency audio was the least of anyone’s problems. Whereas, these days, because of Pulseaudio, even gaming is a thing now (back then, I even saw issues on tuxracer, and Unreal tournament back in the days).

        In regards to setup, most distributions will handle that anyway I’m guessing. So not sure why the configuration process should matter unless you’re in Arch or Slackware? As long as the distribution handles it, it shouldn’t matter. It’d really a non-issue honestly.

        I do a lot of middleware development and we’re regularly blamed by users for bugs/problems upstream too (which is why we’ve now added a huge amount of enduser diagnostics/metrics in our products which has made it more obvious the issues aren’t related to us). In practice, very few people have issues with Pulseaudio (I haven’t seen issues since launch). Sometimes as well, keep in mind it can be the sound interface (especially if its USB)

        • WaterWaiver@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          If you check SystemD, its a HUGE step up, which is why everyone is using it now

          I think that’s a “winners write history” situation. There were other options at the time that might have been better choices. Everyone uses it now because of Redhat and Debian being upstream to most users, desktop and corporate. I was not surprised by Redhat adopting it (it’s their own product) but Debian was quite the shock.

          Yes systemd is definitely a step up from traditional initscripts (oh god). In terms of simplicity, reliability and ease of configuration however it’s a step below other options (like runit). I don’t have distro management experience but, given the problems I’ve encountered with different init systems over the years, I suspect there would be less of a maintenance burden with the other options.

          • WaterWaiver@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’m very curious about the downvotes to this one. May I ask people’s thoughts? Perhaps I’m too vague? I can put a bigger story about my experiences with various init systems in production & research if people are interested.