Is PulseAudio good enough?

For interesting topics. But remember this is a Linux Forum. Do not post offensive topics that are meant to cause trouble with other members or are derogatory towards people of different genders, race, color, minors (this includes nudity and sex), politics or religion. Let's try to keep peace among the community and for visitors.

No spam on this or any other forums please! If you post advertisements on these forums, your account may be deleted.

Do not copy and paste entire or even up to half of someone else's words or articles into posts. Post only a few sentences or a paragraph and make sure to include a link back to original words or article. Otherwise it's copyright infringement.

You can talk about other distros here, but no MX bashing. You can email the developers of MX if you just want to say you dislike or hate MX.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
dreamer
Posts: 738
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2017 11:34 am

Is PulseAudio good enough?

#1 Post by dreamer »

Do you use VoIP (SIP, Skype etc.) or do audio/video editing? Is PulseAudio good enough or is it only good enough for watching Youtube and play some mp3s?

I don't think PulseAudio is good enough for VoIP. Sometimes it works reasonably, but sometimes it's too laggy. My general opinion is that PulseAudio is the worst (performing) sound system on any platform I have tried. I just installed antiX and was relieved to have audio without PulseAudio.

I do know that PulseAudio brings many useful features and that ALSA isn't completely finished with all the functionality and GUIs required for a nice end-user experience. For developers it's also easier to target PulseAudio.

A few years ago I wanted Phoronix to test audio performance between Linux, Mac and Windows like they do with graphics. I guess audio is not their domain. I wanted PulseAudio to get exposed so it could be rewritten with performance in mind.

I know I'm not the only one who thinks PulseAudio is a dog. But what do you think? Do Linux users deserve better or do we get what we pay for? ;)

User avatar
manyroads
Posts: 2623
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2018 6:33 pm

Re: Is PulseAudio good enough?

#2 Post by manyroads »

I have no particular problem with creating my podcasts, playing my grandsons' videos or skype-ing with a friend I'm mentoring in Poland . So I guess it's okay by me.
Pax vobiscum,
Mark Rabideau - ManyRoads Genealogy -or- eirenicon llc. (geeky stuff)
i3wm, bspwm, hlwm, dwm, spectrwm ~ Linux #449130
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." -- H. L. Mencken

User avatar
timkb4cq
Developer
Posts: 3203
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2006 4:05 pm

Re: Is PulseAudio good enough?

#3 Post by timkb4cq »

Since PulseAudio just routes audio around using the underlying Alsa system it's not responsible for lower quality audio. However its default settings are not the highest quality most sound cards can manage - it's set for basic CD quality (16bit signed integer @ 44.1kHz). PA uses those defaults so older 16bit sound cards will work OOTB, but you can adjust them.
https://medium.com/@gamunu/enable-high- ... 16f3fe7e1f

PulseAudio does cause some latency, but in the PulseAudio mixer in the two device tabs there is an Advanced area that lets you adjust latency. Experiment with them.

Doesn't Skype require PulseAudio these days? I know Firefox does.
HP Pavillion TP01, AMD Ryzen 3 5300G (quad core), Crucial 500GB SSD, Toshiba 6TB 7200rpm
Dell Inspiron 15, AMD Ryzen 7 2700u (quad core). Sabrent 500GB nvme, Seagate 1TB

rs55
Posts: 273
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2019 4:24 pm

Re: Is PulseAudio good enough?

#4 Post by rs55 »

timkb4cq wrote: Thu Jun 13, 2019 9:53 pm Since PulseAudio just routes audio around using the underlying Alsa system it's not responsible for lower quality audio. However its default settings are not the highest quality most sound cards can manage - it's set for basic CD quality (16bit signed integer @ 44.1kHz). PA uses those defaults so older 16bit sound cards will work OOTB, but you can adjust them.
https://medium.com/@gamunu/enable-high- ... 16f3fe7e1f

PulseAudio does cause some latency, but in the PulseAudio mixer in the two device tabs there is an Advanced area that lets you adjust latency. Experiment with them.

Doesn't Skype require PulseAudio these days? I know Firefox does.
Firefox ESR works without pulse. I was also able to get the regular Firefox working by installing a program called "apulse" that effectively fools apps into thinking they are interacting with pulse - but simply passes it along to alsa.

User avatar
sunrat
Posts: 636
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2016 9:54 pm

Re: Is PulseAudio good enough?

#5 Post by sunrat »

That's a pretty good article but the config they suggest will still downsample any higher resolution audio such as 88.2KHz or 96KHz.
Pulseaudio 11 has introduced avoid-resampling = yes (PA11 is not in MX yet. Have to wait for MX19).

Also I don't find float32le worth the extra processing, so set, apart from other settings in the above article:

Code: Select all

default-sample-format = s24le
default-sample-rate = 96000  #(if you have hi-res files and your sound card is capable)
There's a decent discussion here - viewtopic.php?f=108&t=48608

As I mentioned in that thread, you will hear much more improvement by getting better playback equipment, especially speakers, than from any software config tweaks.

User avatar
dreamer
Posts: 738
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2017 11:34 am

Re: Is PulseAudio good enough?

#6 Post by dreamer »

I have set up MX Linux to use ALSA without removing PulseAudio packages. A small change in /etc/pulse/client.conf (can be made per user instead):

Code: Select all

autospawn=no
In Xfce > Settings Manager > Session and Startup > Application Autostart I unchecked PulseAudio items and created a new item called Volumicon with command "volumeicon" so that I would still have a sound volume icon in the notification area.

Reboot then use MX Select Sound to choose the default sound card.

My desktop looks identical with "volumeicon" pointing to QasMixer instead of PulseAudio Volume Control.

Firefox-ESR, Chrome and Pale Moon work without tweaks. In VLC Audio Output should be set to "Automatic" or "ALSA".

I have also installed "apulse" (thanks Stevo) to get Skype working without PulseAudio, but no luck there. I think the answer might be found in this forum thread, but unfortunately no one has answered. (Skype is 64-bit only, when this thread was created it was 32-bit only)

https://classicforum.manjaro.org/index. ... ic=25941.0
I'm looking for the correct syntax to add apulse/apulse32 in the "exec" line in /usr/bin/skype to start skype as in

Code: Select all

$ apulse skype
Maybe someone knows the answer?

This is what I get trying to launch from the terminal:

Code: Select all

$ apulse skype
/usr/bin/apulse: 5: exec: skype: not found
If I launch Skype from the menu it will launch but putting apulse in the command doesn't give me sound:

Code: Select all

apulse /usr/bin/skypeforlinux %U
Maybe I have to ditch Skype to go PulseAudio free... :exclamation:

PS I'm impressed/thankful how easy it is to turn Debian/antiX/MX into an ALSA-only system. If certain applications require PulseAudio that's beyond the control of distro developers.

Post Reply

Return to “General”