Arch Linux

thms

Member

Registered: 2010-02-01

Posts: 120

ALSA or Pulseaudio

Ok, I don't get it ;b What are the differences between ALSA and Pulseaudio and what is preferred by you and why? I need to setup a new Arch installation (hardrive died ) and need some advice.

brebs

Member

Registered: 2007-04-03

Posts: 3,742

Re: ALSA or Pulseaudio

Pulseaudio is an additional layer - a man in the middle. Its purpose is to confuse, and half-work, and be yet one more app that needs configuring.

An alternative viewpoint is in this thread.

jamesbannon

Member

From: Paisley, Scotland

Registered: 2008-10-24

Posts: 50

Re: ALSA or Pulseaudio

I don't get it either. I compromised and installed both

ewaller

Administrator

From: Pasadena, CA

Registered: 2009-07-13

Posts: 19,822

Re: ALSA or Pulseaudio

Take a look at the design section of the Wikipedia PulseAudio article
Then, take in the Arch Wiki PulseAudio Article

---

Nothing is too wonderful to be true, if it be consistent with the laws of nature -- Michael Faraday
Sometimes it is the people no one can imagine anything of who do the things no one can imagine. -- Alan Turing
---
How to Ask Questions the Smart Way

boast

Member

Registered: 2010-09-28

Posts: 219

Re: ALSA or Pulseaudio

better software mixing than dmix.

pulseaudio being ported to android is interesting http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=n … px=MTA0MzY

Last edited by boast (2012-03-18 18:00:11)

---

Asus M4A785TD-V ;; Phenom II X4 @ 3.9GHz ;; Ripjaws 12GB DDR3-1600 ;; 128GB Samsung 830 ;; MSI GTX460 v2 w/ blob ;; Arch Linux + KDE 4.x

brebs

Member

Registered: 2007-04-03

Posts: 3,742

Re: ALSA or Pulseaudio

better software mixing than dmix.

Like what? I see no evidence.

This makes little sense to me. *IF* it's better, then why not just do the same within ALSA?

I get the feeling that dmix is misunderstood. The default dmix mixing is geared for performance. Can change it in ~/.asoundrc with e.g.:

defaults.pcm.rate_converter "samplerate_best"

Not that I can notice a difference, except in an old phone tone dialling demo soundfile, which was created exactly to show the "weakness" with the default method.

/dev/zero

Member

From: Melbourne, Australia

Registered: 2011-10-20

Posts: 1,247

Re: ALSA or Pulseaudio

Ok, I don't get it ;b What are the differences between ALSA and Pulseaudio and what is preferred by you and why? I need to setup a new Arch installation (hardrive died ) and need some advice.

I tried getting by on a vanilla Alsa install, without pulseaudio. I got frustrated by the fact that only one application can use the soundcard at a time. Often, I'll have music on, but will also want to be able to hear what's happening in the video on a website. For this kind of thing, maybe it's possible to get by on dmix, but I'm already familiar with pulseaudio from my Ubuntu days . Maybe one day I'll try dmix, but until then, pulseaudio is in the category of "necessary evil" for me.

cfr

Member

From: Cymru

Registered: 2011-11-27

Posts: 7,143

Re: ALSA or Pulseaudio

I only got sound working at all after uninstalling pulseaudio. I'm not suggesting this is pulseaudio's fault but its complexity was beyond my ken.

Maybe good advice for a beginner would be to start with alsa and then install pulseaudio if you find that you want to do stuff alsa can't do but pulseaudio can?

Last edited by cfr (2012-03-18 19:22:24)

---

CLI Paste | How To Ask Questions

Arch Linux | x86_64 | GPT | EFI boot | refind | stub loader | systemd | LVM2 on LUKS
Lenovo x270 | Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-7200U CPU @ 2.50GHz | Intel Wireless 8265/8275 | US keyboard w/ Euro | 512G NVMe INTEL SSDPEKKF512G7L

Earnestly

Member

Registered: 2011-08-18

Posts: 805

Re: ALSA or Pulseaudio

Don't forget OSSv4. Not particularly recommending but it's worth considering.

As for PulseAudio, I've experienced nothing but headaches where ever it's installed and have totally avoided it on Arch. Life's good

I got frustrated by the fact that only one application can use the soundcard at a time.

*Kaustic watches The Bourne Supremacy, listens to Ludovico Einaudi via mpd and plays Counter Strike through Wine at the same time *
Say what?

(What am I missing here?)

Last edited by Earnestly (2012-03-18 20:36:31)

655321

Member

From: Costa Rica

Registered: 2009-12-08

Posts: 412

Website

Re: ALSA or Pulseaudio

I found this article on Pulse Audio very interesting and informative, and fits just right with the discussion here

https://www.linux.com/news/hardware/dri … t-doing-it

---

Linux user #498977
With microsoft you get windows and gates, with linux you get the whole house!
My Blog about ArchLinux and other stuff

ngoonee

Forum Fellow

From: Between Thailand and Singapore

Registered: 2009-03-17

Posts: 7,356

Re: ALSA or Pulseaudio

Its purpose is to confuse, and half-work, and be yet one more app that needs configuring..

2 wrong, 1 right. Implying that the 'purpose' of any app is to 'confuse/half-work', even one that you (or others) have personally had great problems with, is just disrespectful.

To the OP - generally ALSA with dmix will just work, the only 'lack' compared to pulseaudio for normal usage is slightly more complex BT setup and no per-app volumes. Pulseaudio gives you that, and is generally easier to use IF IT WORKS FOR YOU for desktop usage.

If you're not the standard desktop case, you wouldn't be asking anyway.

---

Allan-Volunteer on the (topic being discussed) mailn lists. You never get the people who matters attention on the forums.
jasonwryan-Installing Arch is a measure of your literacy. Maintaining Arch is a measure of your diligence. Contributing to Arch is a measure of your competence.
Griemak-Bleeding edge, not bleeding flat. Edge denotes falls will occur from time to time. Bring your own parachute.