screen fit

12 replies [Last post]
udr013
User offline. Last seen 6 years 34 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 2006-03-31
Posts:

I installed the new ardour2 , but i have a problem with the window size, It doesn't fit my screen, the layout is to big (everything is larger, icons, buttons). when i use f11 to optimize for track information it fits my screen (becouse of no buttons?).

how can i resize?
Thanks,
udr013

breakerfall
User offline. Last seen 4 years 45 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 2006-03-31
Posts:

I think the developers are aware of this issue. Unfortunately, I run @ 1024x768 resolution, so this bothers me too. I found that the best thing to do, is simply to hit F11 to make Ardour fill the screen (fits perfectly when I do this) and then just use all the keyboard and mouse controls as usual. =)

Esa
Esa's picture
User offline. Last seen 45 weeks 5 days ago. Offline
Joined: 2006-03-27
Posts:

I use Fluxbox and resolution 1158 x 864, and when Ardour starts, I use "maximize" in window options.

-----------------------
http://www.emvg.net/esa

udr013
User offline. Last seen 6 years 34 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 2006-03-31
Posts:

I tried different screen resolutions, this still doesn't solve my problem. I use kde with dualscreen 1024x768 so i can view both, the edit en mixer window

yakko78
User offline. Last seen 3 years 3 days ago. Offline
Joined: 2006-05-02
Posts:

It takes a while to modify the ui style but it can be done.

You can download this ardour_ui.rc. It is really flat and works good in xinerama or dual view, filling the entire display with a little cut on the botton of the mixer.

I use always this, but with more work u can obtain a better one. :-)

Here's the link:
http://www.mascanc.net/~vieri/down/ardour_ui.rc

--
Vieri Verze
http://www.mascanc.net/~vieri

Esa
Esa's picture
User offline. Last seen 45 weeks 5 days ago. Offline
Joined: 2006-03-27
Posts:

This style is great, thanks!
--------------------------------------------------------
Check out my songs at http://www.emvg.net/esa

dx9s
User offline. Last seen 10 weeks 3 days ago. Offline
Joined: 2006-05-19
Posts:

If you have single screen. I'd recommend 1280x1024 w/ system pager (part of window manager, i.e. KDE). I put the qjackctl on one page, editor view on second and mixer view on third.

If you have dual display, you can get by with 1280x1024 on one and 1024x768 on second. you will want to have the window manager "bar" (KDE's panel) on the larger screen (side or top/bottom). then mixer can go full screen on second. Make sure you've enabled Xinerama in the X server so the window manger can hand off screen borders to the applications.

I have gone crazy and gotten an AMD64-FX55 (fast) w/ nForce4-SLI and dual nVidia (with SLI disabled) and run four monitors. That is perhaps the best solution -- however I find myself thinking about getting a good quality PCI nVidia (low end FX) for two more screens.

You should be confortable at writing xorg.conf files!!! So-as-to be able to tweek the settings.

If you only have 1024x768 and single screen, you can minimize the KDE panel to get more space to Ardour!

If you are really serious, you might create your own profile that starts X w/o window manager and just starts X + Ardour

something like:

xinit /usr/bin/ardour -- /usr/X11R6/bin/X

or the rc files for xinit

(I've done this for other applications and a generic user accounts that starts up ONE app).

--Doug

breakerfall
User offline. Last seen 4 years 45 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 2006-03-31
Posts:

hehe... but all that is pointless - the problem lies with the code, not the user. Ardour2 just does not fit completely into a screen running 1024x768 resolution. They've improven the situation so it goes past the edge of the screen only a slight amount, so it's not a big deal at all. If you're really anal about it fitting correctly (and can't, or don't want, to change your resolution), then hitting the F11 key should keep you happy. Remembering it's a horizontal fit issue, not a vertical one.

Having the latest CPU and being able to write and edit x-scripts, won't make it fit! =]

Oh and KDE is probably the last desktop environment I would recommend for audio work, professional or ammateur.

dx9s
User offline. Last seen 10 weeks 3 days ago. Offline
Joined: 2006-05-19
Posts:

True, 1024x768 and it usually "almost fits" -- I was stating that 1280x1024 is better for several reasons as you have mentioned. I still need to DL (via SVN) and upgrade to the bleeding edge Ardour2 source -- lazy in part and have too many other things higher in priority.

As for latest CPU or scripts -- ?? That doesn't effect the 1024x768 as you mentioned. I was talking about my 4-screen setup. Basically I am trying to "Sell" the idea of at LEAST dual screen (dual head) which is a drastic improvement! Ardour with dual head is so much nicer! I liked it so much I now use four monitors.

As for KDE, -- 1 part personal choice, 1 part compromise. True that GNOME+GTK is a better mix (Ardour is GTK/GTK2). But then you'll have other QT apps (qjackctl, etc.). Not much of an arguement, but with two "standards" GTK versus QT you needs to have a minimal of both libs.

It is (in part) a compromise. Some distro's don't come with GNOME -- for example Slackware 10.2 (offical) drops GNOME however two groups are maintaining GNOME support (packages) for slackware... I install them for a more "complete" system (libs + standard GNOME tools, plus I prefer GDM over KDM)...

I don't see any serious negative (other than KDE is getting slightly bloated).

If you are serious, then you'd create an account JUST for Ardour that starts up X and runs minimal stuff (aka xinitrc with jack daemon and ardour -- no window manager). I have done this for other programs -- the biggest thing is it free's up memory (which w/ 2GB of RAM, doesn't really matter much).

I understand that hardware cost money, and the best improvement for an existing system is getting at least 512MB + a dual headed video card (nVidia is good) + a second display. Last I'd recommend at least ONE display being 1280x1024 and the other can stay 1024x768. I used this on the first Ardour workstation I setup.

For single display @1024x768, yes I agree there are issues that should be reviewed (and fixed) -- a source code thing.

It is personal preference.

--Doug

breakerfall
User offline. Last seen 4 years 45 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 2006-03-31
Posts:

Who said anything about Gnome?

Gnome and KDE are both as bad as each other. You can install the QT and GTK libs without having to use KDE or Gnome. You know this, right? You make it sound like the only available choices are KDE and Gnome - and that's certainly not the case.

There are plenty of other good desktop environments out there. Xfce is pretty neat and if you want even more lean, clean, badassery - there's minimalistic desktops like the *box's.

=)

dx9s
User offline. Last seen 10 weeks 3 days ago. Offline
Joined: 2006-05-19
Posts:

*Laughing* I did say KDE is "slighly bloated" -- Gnome is somewhat lighter. and Sure there are many other window managers (libs != window manager). Heck you could install something like twm (or even twm95) .. but yuck!

I agree, for a more "turn key" install of Ardour, lean and trim is best for a non-technical user! But when was the last time you setup a machine for ONE purpose only!? -- My only true "single" application machine (unfortunately) is a WinXP w/ LinearX stuff installed.

(sorry for the delayed reply, back from a week of training).

--Doug

breakerfall
User offline. Last seen 4 years 45 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 2006-03-31
Posts:

Lean and trim is the best for users of any ability, not just non-technical users. When running audio applications, plugins and various other pieces of software, you want to have a lightweight desktop, especially to save your RAM and Memory resources for the audio applications.

You don't need a bloatware desktop environment to use any software. There's a whole bunch of *box environments and if that's too minimal, there's more chunky, but still lightweight DE's like XFCE. The only time I would install KDE, is if for some stupid reason, a developer decides they want to use KDE specific libraries in their software. So I'd install the minimal requirements and then never run it as a desktop.

As long as you have the relevant libraries, you're good to go. Anyway, this is a daft argument. My original point, is that you were talking almost like everyone uses KDE and that KDE is a good compromise. I was simply stating that it doesn't even come close. You need neither Gnome or KDE to successfully run ardour and some of the accompanying applications. So to summarise, I'm just saying that I'm not likely to recommend that anybody (regardless of technical level) use KDE if they're genuinly interested in audio work.

dx9s
User offline. Last seen 10 weeks 3 days ago. Offline
Joined: 2006-05-19
Posts:

You are very correct. For a serious "turn-key", there are better "light-weight" window managers.

I've even setup a configuration w/ NO window manager. Text mode log into system (init 3), inside .profile (or .bash_profile, if you prefer) put this (or something close)

# start UT2004
/usr/X11R6/bin/xinit `/usr/bin/which ut2004` -- `/usr/bin/which X`
# and log off
exit

As this application works fine full screen. Ardour *might* but would be a pain. That plus if you want to run and interact with other applications (like Jack-Rack)... any window manager is needed.

But you are correct.

I however am not as serious yet have had several stable (usable) Ardour machines on AMD machines. I probably would setup a profile with .xinitrc and xfce or twm.

I guess the flip side to your statement is also true. Make sure Ardour works with simple window managers! If it needs KDE or Gnome, that *would* be a problem.

Good idea!

--Doug