Will have to try this out. I have yet to find a reason to not just continue to use the old version 2.x audacity from the pre-telemetry days. I just need simple post-production tools after rendering out of my DAW and the old audacity does the trick.
Tenacity – a multi-track audio editor/recorder
31–40 of 62 posts
Re: Tenacity – a multi-track audio editor/recorder
#32I'm having difficulty building it on Artix (an arch derivative). [ 63%] Linking CXX executable ../RelWithDebInfo/tenacity /usr/bin/ld: /tmp/lto-llvm-3894d5.o: (.data.rel.ro._ZTI21ListNavigationEnabledI8wxWindowE[_ZTI21ListNavigationEnabledI8wxWindowE]+0x10): undefined reference to `typeinfo for wxNavigationEnabled ' This is probably some sort of issue with the way part of wxwindows was built on my distribution. I'd l…
I have nothing to tenacity or artix, but my top search result gave me this link:
https://github.com/audacity/audacity/issues/4614#issuecommen...
Looks similar and kind of makes sense with tenacity using the audacity 3 UI ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Re: Tenacity – a multi-track audio editor/recorder
#33An audacity fork. Reason for forking described at https://tenacityaudio.org/docs/_content/Introduction_and_Mot... . Their own summary: > at the primary reasons were attempts at adding telemetry and a new desktop privacy policy [by the new audacity maintainers] Previously discussed at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34835200
So, 4 years since the initial forks and 2 years since the Audacium merge, how Tenacity (basically Tenacity&Saucedacity&Audacium) compares to Audacity?
After its inception, Tenacity unfortunately tackled an irrelevant, yet opinionated part of development first: The build system, together with any internal variables saying "audacity" getting replaced with "tenacity". As such, a lot of the work that's gone into it don't manifest to users, and merging any upstream changes takes needlessly long. As a result of this, Tenacity fell behind upstream a lot, being stuck somewhere around Audacity 3.1 while Audacity already was around 3.7. Last month, mercifully, Tenacity got rebased onto Audacity 3.7: https://codeberg.org/tenacityteam/tenacity/pulls/527 (a +261299 -395037 diff!)
As far as user-facing changes go, it's some new themes, a different compressor, keeping features visible which upstream has hidden by default, MKA support without FFmpeg, as well as support for some more niche systems (Haiku, BSD). All of this is in some stages of ongoing; Tenacity 1.4 alpha 1 got released a few weeks ago, and while that does include the rebase, it hasn't ported back all of the changes which were made before the rebase.
Noteworthy: Most of the development is being contributed by one person, Avery King.
As of right now, I'd recommend Audacity 3.7.x over Tenacity, as Audacity 3.x has been in maintenance mode pretty much since 3.6, while Tenacity is currently finding its footing again. Disabling update checking is easy enough anyway.
In the future though, it appears that Tenacity is going to keep alive legacy Audacity for legacy systems while Audacity 4 is on the way of adding more DAW features and dropping support for older systems. Definitely a worthwhile role to inherit.
(disclaimer: I was a designer for Audacity)
Re: Tenacity – a multi-track audio editor/recorder
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
Serious question: Why would it be preferable to have something like this in the browser? The thought of having to keep track of a browser tab that you might accidentally close and lose all your work doesn't sound great.
I would like to see something like this in the Web simply to allow for collaboration. I would love to see a DAW where randos upload just a track—maybe a drum track. Other's can "create a branch" where they jam along: add a bass track. And let the jamming, branching, songwriting commence.
Why does that require the web? Networked collaboration integration already exists in mainstream DAWs without all the downsides of forcing things into a web browser
Re: Tenacity – a multi-track audio editor/recorder
#35An audacity fork. Reason for forking described at https://tenacityaudio.org/docs/_content/Introduction_and_Mot... . Their own summary: > at the primary reasons were attempts at adding telemetry and a new desktop privacy policy [by the new audacity maintainers] Previously discussed at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34835200
Well, technically the reason for the fork was the implanted backdoor that was executing a binary coming from Muse groups server, hidden as telemetry and an update check. It's not a well built backdoor and the code is easy to spot, as there's not a lot of other http related code in audacity itself. edit: Check the au3/src/update/UpdateManager.cpp, they're still not hiding this better after all that happened, lol. [1]…
You are aware that VLC, LibreOffice and many other FOSS apps have an update checker?
Re: Tenacity – a multi-track audio editor/recorder
#36I'm having difficulty building it on Artix (an arch derivative). [ 63%] Linking CXX executable ../RelWithDebInfo/tenacity /usr/bin/ld: /tmp/lto-llvm-3894d5.o: (.data.rel.ro._ZTI21ListNavigationEnabledI8wxWindowE[_ZTI21ListNavigationEnabledI8wxWindowE]+0x10): undefined reference to `typeinfo for wxNavigationEnabled ' This is probably some sort of issue with the way part of wxwindows was built on my distribution. I'd l…
I have nothing to tenacity or artix, but my top search result gave me this link: https://github.com/audacity/audacity/issues/4614#issuecommen... Looks similar and kind of makes sense with tenacity using the audacity 3 UI ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Thank you!
Re: Tenacity – a multi-track audio editor/recorder
#37I like this more https://www.ocenaudio.com/features
I love OcenAudio, it's SoundForge for the new millennium =)
It is, however, not the same type of app. OcenAudio is a wave editor, so only one file at a time. Audacity is multitrack, and has a project structure much like a DAW without the MIDI stuff.
Re: Tenacity – a multi-track audio editor/recorder
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would like to see something like this in the Web simply to allow for collaboration. I would love to see a DAW where randos upload just a track—maybe a drum track. Other's can "create a branch" where they jam along: add a bass track. And let the jamming, branching, songwriting commence.
Why does that require the web? Networked collaboration integration already exists in mainstream DAWs without all the downsides of forcing things into a web browser
Everyone has a browser, not everyone has a DAW, and even fewer people have the same DAW.
Doing this in a browser is ridiculously inefficient.
But if you just want a limited-track scratchpad for virtual jamming, it's the most accessible option.
Re: Tenacity – a multi-track audio editor/recorder
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
So, 4 years since the initial forks and 2 years since the Audacium merge, how Tenacity (basically Tenacity&Saucedacity&Audacium) compares to Audacity?
After its inception, Tenacity unfortunately tackled an irrelevant, yet opinionated part of development first: The build system, together with any internal variables saying "audacity" getting replaced with "tenacity". As such, a lot of the work that's gone into it don't manifest to users, and merging any upstream changes takes needlessly long. As a result of this, Tenacity fell behind upstream a lot, being stuck somew…
The things that are happening to Audacity 4 have made me ponder doing the opposite: taking Ardour and stripping it down to make an audio file editor ...
Re: Tenacity – a multi-track audio editor/recorder
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why does that require the web? Networked collaboration integration already exists in mainstream DAWs without all the downsides of forcing things into a web browser
Everyone has a browser, not everyone has a DAW, and even fewer people have the same DAW. Doing this in a browser is ridiculously inefficient. But if you just want a limited-track scratchpad for virtual jamming, it's the most accessible option.
The bigger, broader problem is that "virtual jamming" just doesn't seem to have taken off the way some folks thought it would.
It's not a useless thing to be able to do, but there are few people who seem to want it at the center of their music-making activity. At least that is the way it seems to me. It initially appeared to be an immensely cool new capability, and in many ways it really is. It just isn't a thing that many people want to do.