Request Zrythm

[aespop]

Zrythm is a DAW (Digital Audio Workstation). In Linux space there are few professional audio applications. Zrythm is a new application with a fresh perspective about audio and MIDI workflow. In MX repos there is Ardour that which is really cool but it has a limited midi features, however if you will add Zrythm in MX repos, you are converting this distro in a serious candidate for audio production in GNU/Linux. Zrythm is free softwawre (Affero GPL 3) and has a continuous development. Please, all audio hobbyist will be really grateful.

- The information about the license of Zrythm is here.
- The last source files are here.

[timkb4cq]

Zrythm uses the Gtk4 UI libraries. Since MX is built on debian stable (currently bullseye) it does not have Gtk4 libraries available. That means building a native MX-21 Zrythm package would be a major effort.
Given that Zrythm offers a flatpak which should work on MX-21, backporting Gtk4 (and a number of other dependencies) to build Zrythm doesn't feel like a good use of our resources right now.
Sorry about that.

[AVLinux]

Hi,

If I may offer an opinion.. Zrythm is a great Open-Source DAW but like Ardour it is not free, for binaries from the developer you are expected to either use the demo version (with limitations) purchase the project's own binaries or subscribe to a version and receive any updated binaries as new versions are released. The developer provides most common Package formats, for example his paid Debian Packages include the required GTK4 libs and run well on Debian Bullseye/MX21/AVL-MXE21 systems and as mentioned there are Flatpaks and also AppImages. Like Ardour you can also choose to compile it for yourself if you want it for free..

I think it's wonderful that MX Linux has a lot of new Multimedia Packages included and the Packagers do a tremendous job but I have made my concerns clear to the Packaging team when it comes to Audio Projects that are not free and where the originating developers are using a monetized Open-Source model to either provide their own supported binaries and tech support it is not a great place for the MX Packaging team to get involved providing binaries that do an end-run around what the upstream source developers intentions are.

That said in the case of Ardour the MX Content Creator Respin 'AVL-MXE' (which I maintain) provides and comes with a ready-to-use fully functional and supported binary bundle of Ardour with the developers full permission and consent, perhaps when Zrythm matures into a final 1.0 Release a similar arrangement can be worked out. I am personally a Zrythm subscriber and the developer is both very attentive to bug reports and provides his binaries and subscriptions at a VERY reasonable cost.

[aespop]

Zrythm uses the Gtk4 UI libraries. Since MX is built on debian stable (currently bullseye) it does not have Gtk4 libraries available. That means building a native MX-21 Zrythm package would be a major effort.
Given that Zrythm offers a flatpak which should work on MX-21, backporting Gtk4 (and a number of other dependencies) to build Zrythm doesn't feel like a good use of our resources right now.
Sorry about that.

What a pity. But I understand, thanks for your interest. I will wait.

@AVLinux I understand your speech but I consider it incorrect. The free software is about freedom. The developers can sell the binaries but they can't impede to the people to use, compile, modify or share the software. For english users (in particular beginners) don't forget what free is freedom, no money exchange, and please don't confuse to the people, Ardour is free because it has a free license (GPL 2); and the same situation for Zrythm. Maybe a trademark can restrict to share free software, but we can change the marks and resolved problem.

I suggest and recommend to novel linux users and all my friends that please donate and collaborate with free software, but I never confuse them, Bitwig or Reaper are not free, Ardour is free, absolutely free.

[AVLinux]

@AVLinux I understand your speech but I consider it incorrect. The free software is about freedom. The developers can sell the binaries but they can't impede to the people to use, compile, modify or share the software. For english users (in particular beginners) don't forget what free is freedom, no money exchange, and please don't confuse to the people, Ardour is free because it has a free license (GPL 2); and the same situation for Zrythm. Maybe a trademark can restrict to share free software, but we can change the marks and resolved problem.

I suggest and recommend to novel linux users and all my friends that please donate and collaborate with free software, but I never confuse them, Bitwig or Reaper are not free, Ardour is free, absolutely free.

You're confusing freedom of access to the source code with monetized binaries..

I was quite clear if you compile it for yourself it is free, or if you choose their binaries with limitations they are free (as in without monetary cost). If you look closely at the Ardour website and speak to it's developers you will see it is exactly as I say but don't listen to me, read it for yourself: https://ardour.org/faq.html#download It appears to be similar on the Zrythm site although not as clearly stated but these are the choices on the Downloads page: https://www.zrythm.org/en/download.html It is indeed YOUR freedom to compile their source code, that is a very different scenario than MX (or any other Distro) to compile and distribute binary packages to thousands of Users. In the case of Ardour there indeed are Distribution packages (as there currently are in both Debian and MX) but if you seek tech support from the Ardour developers they only support tech issues with their paid binaries. If you self-compile or obtain it from somewhere else you are on your own as far as support..

Although both projects don't actively stop Distributions from Packaging I think it is important for the MX Packagers be made aware that their potential actions could pose a conflict of interest with intentions of the upstream originating developers of the Applications and I think it's important for them to have all the information to make an informed choice about what goes in the Repos..

[pianokeyjoe]

aww! Ah well no zrythm for me either.. I do not know how to compile and if MX19 and MX21 do not have GTK4 libs then yeah, will not work. I think this app even the PAID versions may not work on DEBIAN but rather will only work in UBUNTU latest, which DOES have GTK4 with the new GNOME 42? SO UBUNTU STUDIO?Since I can not buy it I can only speculate. I could try the demo and report back though. I am on MX19.4 AHS

[AVLinux]

aww! Ah well no zrythm for me either.. I do not know how to compile and if MX19 and MX21 do not have GTK4 libs then yeah, will not work. I think this app even the PAID versions may not work on DEBIAN but rather will only work in UBUNTU latest, which DOES have GTK4 with the new GNOME 42? SO UBUNTU STUDIO?Since I can not buy it I can only speculate. I could try the demo and report back though. I am on MX19.4 AHS

The paid and demo Deb versions work fine on Bullseye/MX21/AVL-MXE (as I said above) he provides a working GTK4 environment in the packaging without having to install it. Secondly there are AppImages and Flatpaks

[pianokeyjoe]

@AVLinux thankyou my friend, I have downloaded the Linux binary of the demo. I figure if that works, then it makes sense to pay for the full version and add it to my custom AVL-MXE snapshots.