Scheduled Maintenance: We are aware of an issue with Google, AOL, and Yahoo services as email providers which are blocking new registrations. We are trying to fix the issue and we have several internal and external support tickets in process to resolve the issue. Please see: viewtopic.php?t=158230

 

 

 

Do you prefer ALSA, PulseAudio or Open Sound System (OSS)?

Here you can discuss every aspect of Debian. Note: not for support requests!

Do you prefer, ALSA, PulseAudio or Open Sound System (OSS)?

ALSA
73
65%
PulseAudio
29
26%
Open sound System (OSS)
10
9%
 
Total votes: 112

Message
Author
Ibidem
Posts: 160
Joined: 2010-12-24 18:28

Re: Do you prefer ALSA, PulseAudio or Open Sound System (OSS

#61 Post by Ibidem »

OSS4 (with vmix0 enabled) has nearly everything you're likely to use from ALSA + PulseAudio.
It doesn't include a network sound server (like pa does), but that's a security advantage :P (pulse has at least one security vulverability in its history, and we shall see if there are more). It does have per-application volume control and a virtual mixer, which leaves only network sound as a reason for using pulse. Unlike pulse, it has a history of better audio quality.

The Squeeze packages won't work with new kernels, but upstream includes at least two build targets to make debs.
Thinkpad X100e/Debian Squeeze (All reposiories enabled)/Linux 3.4.11:
1GB RAM/1.6GHz Neo X2/ATI HD 3200/RTL8191SEVA2 wlan0, RTL8169 eth0

emarsk
Posts: 38
Joined: 2011-07-28 14:42

Re: Do you prefer ALSA, PulseAudio or Open Sound System (OSS

#62 Post by emarsk »

ALSA.
I tried OSS4 recently (latest debs from their site) and this is what I found:
  • it removed all the alsa drivers without even asking, so I had to reinstall the kernel (not a big deal but still annoying)
  • I didn't manage to make JACK work with OSS4 (this is a show-stopper for me)
  • at full volume, the OSS4 output was quieter than ALSA
  • the speaker weren't automatically muted when I inserted the headphones jack: I had to mute them from ossxmix
  • ossxmix crashed every time a new client was created or killed (such as launching/closing mplayer)
  • using another computer I recorded the audio output of ALSA and OSS4 playing the same files, and they sounded the same to my ears, but zooming in to precisely align the tracks I found that OSS4 sometimes misaligned the left and right channels by one sample
My conclusion is that OSS4 is clearly inferior to ALSA, at least on my hardware and for my needs.
it's != its

kedaha
Posts: 3521
Joined: 2008-05-24 12:26
Has thanked: 33 times
Been thanked: 77 times

Re: Do you prefer ALSA, PulseAudio or Open Sound System (OSS

#63 Post by kedaha »

It seems that, unlike ALSA, the alternative OSS4 may require, since it's not installed by default, some configuring, according to this wiki and doesn't work for everyone; this is a bit of a let-down specially if one has read about its advantages in comparison with ALSA.
If Hannu's (the OSS developer) observations here are correct, then one can only conclude that Debian/kFreebsd looks like best choice for Debian users whose hardware is fully compatible with OSS4 and who prefer it to ALSA/PulseAudio. To the question, Why would you prefer Debian GNU/kFreeBSD to Debian GNU/Linux? the wiki, among other reasons gives:
Standardized kernel interfaces:
OSS as the default sound system (i.e. the standard interface supported by almost every Unix-like system around).
So Debian/kFreeBSD looks like an interesting alternative to the Gnome 3/Alsa/ PulseAudio future, but this is discussed in another topic.
DebianStable

Code: Select all

$ vrms

No non-free or contrib packages installed on debian!  rms would be proud.

User avatar
Mr James
Posts: 1258
Joined: 2010-09-10 13:02

Re: Do you prefer ALSA, PulseAudio or Open Sound System (OSS

#64 Post by Mr James »

PulseAudio seems to be really CPU dependant - at least when it comes to certain programs. The dolphin-emu GameCube/Wii emulator was using 100% of my E8400 under pulse while the gameplay was slow with stuttering. Dumping pulse and using ALSA reduced the CPU usage to 80% with very smooth and fast gameplay. The games played were Resident Evil Remake and Resident Evil Zero.
Yeah, I'm sticking with ALSA.
asus S551L laptop :: debian stable :: dwm

kedaha
Posts: 3521
Joined: 2008-05-24 12:26
Has thanked: 33 times
Been thanked: 77 times

Re: Is it not time to fully reinstate OSS4 in Debian?

#65 Post by kedaha »

Having used OSS4 on my main desktop Squeeze/Gnome system for quite some time I am more than pleased with the sound quality - and see no reason why it should not be put on an equal footing with ALSA.
However, users who are interested in trying OSS4 may read that "it is technically weak in some respects" in the Debian Wiki:
ALSA, the Advanced Linux Sound Architecture, is both a project and a body of software. The project was started because the OSS architecture is technically weak in some respects, and the free variant of OSS lacks some drivers available only in the commercial variant. For several years the ALSA software was developed separately from Linux. The drivers were added to the Linux codebase during the 2.5 development series and became the standard sound driver system in Linux 2.6.
Source:http://wiki.debian.org/ALSA#ALSA_and_OSS
And
Open Sound System is a set of device drivers for accessing sound cards and other sound devices under various UNIX operating systems. OSS has been derived from the Linux Sound Driver. Under Linux it is considered legacy, replaced by ALSA. Under GNU/kFreeBSD it is the native sound system.

Source: http://wiki.debian.org/OSS
Should a potential user browse Synaptic, they will read in the package description for oss4-base,
Open Sound System (OSS) is an attempt in unifying the digital audio architecture for UNIX.
From the above one might easily come to the conclusion that one would end up with some kind of substandard "attempt" or "set of technically weak, legacy device drivers replaced by ALSA" but even the linux-sound-base package which allows users to reconfigure the system to use OSS4, after

Code: Select all

# dpkg-reconfigure linux-sound-base
warns:
Choosing the ALSA sound system is strongly recommended.
I beg to differ: Can this strong recommendation of the Alsa Sound System and consideration of the Open Sound System quoted above be considered objective and impartial? is it fair? Ubuntu seems to have taken this to heart and gone the whole hog and removed OSS4 completely in favour of ALSA and PulseAudio but not Debian where users have this freedom of choice: A user can choose whatever kernel, desktop environment or drivers etc he/she prefers but why is the ALSA sound system strongly recommended?
Just as someone prefers Xfce to Gnome or prefers LXDE to either, I prefer OSS4 to Alsa but it's just my personal preference and I continue to be very interested in all audio systems running in Debian.
It seems to me much more in accordance with Debian's philosopy to place OSS4 on an equal footing with other sound systems, specially when it has been released under the General Public licence 2: opensource_oss/licensing.html. However, there is progress in this direction since it is the default sound system for Debian kfreebsd : Debian_GNU/kFreeBSD_why even though its detractors may consider it to be a "toy operating system" as discussed in another thread: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=66967.
DebianStable

Code: Select all

$ vrms

No non-free or contrib packages installed on debian!  rms would be proud.

User avatar
iceman
Posts: 354
Joined: 2010-08-19 23:14
Location: USA

Re: Do you prefer ALSA, PulseAudio or Open Sound System (OSS

#66 Post by iceman »

I hated Pulseaudio when it came out. It was rushed and many things where broken. Pulseaudio seems to be much better now and I haven't had any issues with it. So i voted Pulseaudio, however alsa and oss are tied at a very close second.
A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing.
---------
Thinking is over rated. Let the Government do it for you.

uua80
Posts: 124
Joined: 2010-12-17 19:38

Re: Do you prefer ALSA, PulseAudio or Open Sound System (OSS

#67 Post by uua80 »

I have used ALSA for a long time and never had a problem with it. I had no sound on squeeze initially but that was fixed with a single command, not sure exactly what the command was.

PulseAudio was too buggy for my tastes when it first came out, I haven't bothered with it since.

I don't believe I've tried OSS.
Debian is Linux.

milomak
Posts: 2158
Joined: 2009-06-09 22:20
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Do you prefer ALSA, PulseAudio or Open Sound System (OSS

#68 Post by milomak »

kedaha - was oss4 out on 1 Jun 2011? that's when the wiki was last updated. it being a wiki, do you not have the ability to update it?

that being said, i was going to install oss4 on my sid distro, however

Code: Select all

Retrieving bug reports... Done
Parsing Found/Fixed information... Done
grave bugs of oss4-dkms (-> 4.2-build2005-1) <unfixed>
 #645537 - oss4-dkms: dkms build fail
serious bugs of oss4-gtk (-> 4.2-build2005-1) <tagged as pending a fix>
 #647271 - oss4-gtk: uninstallable on kfreebsd
Summary:
 oss4-gtk(1 bug), oss4-dkms(1 bug)
do you know if the dkms failure can be manually fixed?
Desktop: A320M-A PRO MAX, AMD Ryzen 5 3600, GALAX GeForce RTX™ 2060 Super EX (1-Click OC) - Sid, Win10, Arch Linux, Gentoo, Solus
Laptop: hp 250 G8 i3 11th Gen - Sid
Kodi: AMD Athlon 5150 APU w/Radeon HD 8400 - Sid

vbrummond
Posts: 4432
Joined: 2010-03-02 01:42

Re: Do you prefer ALSA, PulseAudio or Open Sound System (OSS

#69 Post by vbrummond »

I tried dolphin lately and it is probably more a bug with their pulse plugin than anything. The sound on there is very poor on some games and works great in others.
Always on Debian Testing

User avatar
2Karl
Posts: 39
Joined: 2012-01-02 02:41
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Do you prefer ALSA, PulseAudio or Open Sound System (OSS

#70 Post by 2Karl »

Definitely Pulse (although it's sort of comparing apples and oranges, as Pulse is a layer which sits on top of Alsa). The ability to adjust individual volumes of applications is a must, and if set up correct, alsa apps won't hog all the resources, meaning you can get sound from multiple alsa apps at once.
"It's a pity she won't live. But then who does?"

Ibidem
Posts: 160
Joined: 2010-12-24 18:28

Re: Do you prefer ALSA, PulseAudio or Open Sound System (OSS

#71 Post by Ibidem »

2Karl wrote:Definitely Pulse (although it's sort of comparing apples and oranges, as Pulse is a layer which sits on top of Alsa). The ability to adjust individual volumes of applications is a must, and if set up correct, alsa apps won't hog all the resources, meaning you can get sound from multiple alsa apps at once.
OSS4 can do that too.
Thinkpad X100e/Debian Squeeze (All reposiories enabled)/Linux 3.4.11:
1GB RAM/1.6GHz Neo X2/ATI HD 3200/RTL8191SEVA2 wlan0, RTL8169 eth0

User avatar
2Karl
Posts: 39
Joined: 2012-01-02 02:41
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Do you prefer ALSA, PulseAudio or Open Sound System (OSS

#72 Post by 2Karl »

Ibidem wrote: OSS4 can do that too.
I have to admit, I've not experimented with OSS since way back before ALSA was standard, though I've heard it's a lot better these days.
"It's a pity she won't live. But then who does?"

kedaha
Posts: 3521
Joined: 2008-05-24 12:26
Has thanked: 33 times
Been thanked: 77 times

Re: Do you prefer ALSA, PulseAudio or Open Sound System (OSS

#73 Post by kedaha »

milomak wrote:kedaha - was oss4 out on 1 Jun 2011? that's when the wiki was last updated. it being a wiki, do you not have the ability to update it?
Thanks milomak for your reply.
Yes, I think the wiki does need updating with regard to oss4 and I'll look at that some time.
milomak wrote:that being said, i was going to install oss4 on my sid distro, however

Code: Select all

Retrieving bug reports... Done
Parsing Found/Fixed information... Done
grave bugs of oss4-dkms (-> 4.2-build2005-1) <unfixed>
 #645537 - oss4-dkms: dkms build fail
serious bugs of oss4-gtk (-> 4.2-build2005-1) <tagged as pending a fix>
 #647271 - oss4-gtk: uninstallable on kfreebsd
Summary:
 oss4-gtk(1 bug), oss4-dkms(1 bug)
do you know if the dkms failure can be manually fixed?
I ran into the same problem. I found that the only way to use oss4 was to compile it from source using Stable as posted in viewtopic.php?f=16&t=52919&start=15#p395847 and install the resulting deb. This works in Wheezy and Sid too. If I find a manual fix for dkms I'll post again.
At present I'm playing around with a new pci-express Xtreme Audio soundcard which is a little problematic.

Code: Select all

$ lspci | grep Audio
01:00.1 Audio device: nVidia Corporation High Definition Audio Controller (rev a1)
02:00.0 PCI bridge: Creative Labs [SB X-Fi Xtreme Audio] CA0110-IBG PCI to PCIe Bridge
03:00.0 Audio device: Creative Labs [SB X-Fi Xtreme Audio] CA0110-IBG
DebianStable

Code: Select all

$ vrms

No non-free or contrib packages installed on debian!  rms would be proud.

User avatar
phenest
Posts: 1702
Joined: 2010-03-09 09:38
Location: The Matrix

Re: Do you prefer ALSA, PulseAudio or Open Sound System (OSS

#74 Post by phenest »

Ibidem wrote:
2Karl wrote:Definitely Pulse (although it's sort of comparing apples and oranges, as Pulse is a layer which sits on top of Alsa). The ability to adjust individual volumes of applications is a must, and if set up correct, alsa apps won't hog all the resources, meaning you can get sound from multiple alsa apps at once.
OSS4 can do that too.
ALSA can mix multiple apps too. As for individual volumes, I don't see how that is "a must". Rhythmbox already has it's own, as do most/all music/video players.
ASRock H77 Pro4-M i7 3770K - 32GB RAM - Pioneer BDR-209D

Magnusmaster
Posts: 168
Joined: 2010-06-12 22:50

Re: Do you prefer ALSA, PulseAudio or Open Sound System (OSS

#75 Post by Magnusmaster »

I use ALSA and so far I haven't got any issues.

User avatar
thenhedies23
Posts: 4
Joined: 2012-04-06 13:41
Location: southeast usa

Re: Do you prefer ALSA, PulseAudio or Open Sound System (OSS

#76 Post by thenhedies23 »

At first the default ALSA worked for me but when I brought my THX-grade surround sound set up into my room and tried it i got the "browser-only audio" problem a few others have reported. I don't remember how OSS worked out, but I know pulseaudio is working great with my set-up and I've only configured the mic input.
Image

User avatar
/tmp
Posts: 426
Joined: 2011-12-31 08:39
Location: GNU Userlands
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: Do you prefer ALSA, PulseAudio or Open Sound System (OSS

#77 Post by /tmp »

I went with ALSA as I have never had major problems with it on various machines. Granted, something is always going to act up but PulseAudio just seemed to give me more headaches.
Bookworm | Intel I7-3667U | Apple Macbook Air 5,2 (Mid 2012) (Laptop) | 8 GB RAM | 3rd Gen Intel Core Graphics

VelvetLicks
Posts: 5
Joined: 2013-01-21 20:09

Re: Do you prefer ALSA, PulseAudio or Open Sound System (OSS

#78 Post by VelvetLicks »

I do prefer ALSA because I'm mainly a Jackd user!
I use Debian as basis for my home studio pro. (Do not use Tango Studio wich is Ubuntu based, either Studio64).
Since I use Debian, I use Gnome, just because it's here and works well for what I'm doing with.

I'm planing to replace some of my old computers (for obvious reasons), so I gave a try to Debian Wheezy & Gnome3, easy install from an USB Key, just a little surprise when rebooting... It was impossible without the key... Need to copy and upgrade grub manually to my HD...

Sound work straight out of the box, but Jack needs ALSA... And I need Jack in order to work with Ardour, MuseScore, QSynth, my external sound card, external midis etc.
I do not care about how menus look like, how DockX behaves, it's, from my end user point of view, just a question of taste and feel, and practicing. I remember when OSX came out with its Acqua looking having heard so many people saying OS9 was much more this, much more that...

I just wonder why it is almost impossible to remove PA from Gnome3? Why Gnome3 developers decide to not consider the possibility to let end user to choose which sound manager he needs to customize its system.
It's a system configuration question, Debian comes with PostgreSQL. But it's quite easy to just remove PostgreSQL and install MySQL or anything in place. Same about Apache2, you may remove it and install LightHttpd in just a few clicks with Aptitude or couple simple commands within your shell. More example?
It should absolutly to be the same with ALSA, OSS and Pulse Audio. There're no programming issues there. Just a question of Gnome Team's choice!

69% of this forum users vote for ALSA... Why to not consider such a vote as a programming guidelines!

At least make Gnome3 to be able to let us customize our system without such ridiculous "hard coded dependencies"!
I'm going to install Squeeze with XFCE on my new hardware, waiting waiting for the Gnome3 team opens its mind!
Cheers
VelvetLicks

User avatar
Pednick
Posts: 34
Joined: 2012-08-27 01:04

Re: Do you prefer ALSA, PulseAudio or Open Sound System (OSS

#79 Post by Pednick »

Alsa, PulseAudio is garbage and will always be garbage. 8)
"An it harm none, do what thou wilt"

User avatar
shiva
Posts: 24
Joined: 2011-06-29 01:07

Re: Do you prefer ALSA, PulseAudio or Open Sound System (OSS

#80 Post by shiva »

milomak wrote:i experienced pa in its earliest incarnation given i run sid. it wasn't up to the task then.

i would concede that today it is probably much better. but i ask myself the question - why change configurations when my current solution works perfectly?

so even if pa is now fully functional, why would i change from alsa? except for the shorter pa.
I was alsa fan but now already a year I got pulse running perfectly and now I'm for pulse. there is no stilling of sound card like alsa know to do.
I have setup with alsa + pulseaudio where alsa use pulse plugin and use pulseaudio server for playback and recording purposes. Every app work great in this setup and simultaneous sound with exceptional mixing capabilities (for onboard card) in pavucontrol. I also use Jack a lot and it work great with pulse and alsa.
Only reason why I anytime switch in /etc/asound.conf to alsa is when I would really to work some latency important project in linux. Which I'm not doing on this machine this machine have only integrated sound card.
Here is link to my /etc/asound.conf http://pastebin.com/WtjpFXim - it was made by following the steps from page Pulseaudio PerfectSetup - http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Softwar ... rfectSetup

Also there are few more things to do after installing first of all is fixing few minor things in way PulseAudio is set up. You can find right steps here - http://pc-freak.net/blog/how-to-fix-pul ... gnu-linux/

Thats all for now I'm happy with PulseAudio even if I in least few years have always kept uninstalling it - install if application need it. Uninstall if I find the way for app to work with alsa.
Debian Sid, custom 3.9 kernel, xfce 4.10, Mate
Arch Linux running 3.10-rc4 kernel Xfce 4.10, openbox
Gentoo Linux running 3.10-rc4 custom Xfce 4.10

Post Reply