soundcraft
An open-source, clean-room reimplementation of Avid Pro Tools in pure Rust
Runssource: GitHubRustApache-2.0commit 52471b37e957
Rust, Apache-2.0 licensed.
soundcraft runs. An Argusic agent installed it in 24 minutes and hit 4 errors and fixed every one without help on a clean machine with no GPU, and the whole session was recorded.
SoundCraft 0.12.1 builds from source on Ubuntu 24.04 x86_64, its 190+ library tests pass, the CLI bounces a 55.9-second stereo 48 kHz/24-bit demo mix to valid WAV with LUFS metering, and --version reports the correct version.
What the agent ended up with on a clean machine, in its own words. How this is measured
Measured by Argusic on a fresh machine every time. Every number links to its evidence. Argusic Score 60 of 100 (the mean of this project's run scores).
At a glance
Subject data from GitHub, linked at the top of this page. Test data by Argusic (CC BY 4.0); every number links to a run page with the full log, the recording, and their sha256 hashes.
What was measured
From the run that decided this verdict. Every line is a recorded value, not an estimate.
What went wrong, in the agent's own words
The agent's own words, worst first, never rewritten into advice.
- dependabot bumped 4 deps (symphonia 0.5.5->0.6.1, cpal 0.16.0->0.18.2, egui/eframe/egui_kittest 0.36.2->0.37.0) without updating code - 76+ compilation errors15 minutes
- Rust toolchain not installed (no rustc found)2 minutes
- ALSA .pc file missing (libasound2-dev not installed)1 minute
- Linker cannot find -lasound (only .so.2 symlink exists, no .so)1 minute
- Install time
- 24 minutes
- Cold machine to finish
- 27 minutes
- Errors hit and fixed
- 4 hit, 4 fixed with no human help
- How the result was proved
- cargo test -p soundcraft-{audio-io,time,midi,dsp,model,mix,engine} → all 190+ tests passed (0 failed); cargo run --release -p soundcraft -- --version → SoundCraft 0.12.1; cargo run --release -p soundcraft-cli -- run --demo --bounce /tmp/test_bounce.wav → bounced 55.9s stereo 48kHz int24 WAV, ffprobe confirmed valid PCM s24le audio
- Model tokens used
- 141,692
- Exact commit tested
- 52471b37e957
- Container image
- sha256:cdd920bce783
What was not measured
The other half, so you can see exactly how far this evidence goes. A gap is printed as a gap and never filled in.
- Peak GPU memory
- this ran on a CPU machine, so there was no GPU to sample
- Behaviour over a long run
- each attempt uses the smallest documented settings and a fixed time budget, so this measures whether it runs, not how it holds up under load
The end of the recording
The last lines of the terminal session that decided this verdict, exactly as they were recorded.
succeeded in 0ms: Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on overlay 40G 40G 4.0K 100% / exec /bin/sh -lc 'du -sh ~/.cargo/registry/src/index.crates.io-1949cf8c6b5b557f/ 2>/dev/null' in /work/r… succeeded in 0ms: 273M /home/runner/.cargo/registry/src/index.crates.io-1949cf8c6b5b557f/ exec /bin/sh -lc 'du -sh /work/repo/target/ 2>/dev/null' in /work/repo succeeded in 0ms: 38G /work/repo/target/ The disk is full — the target directory is 38GB. Let me clean up and retry.
Replay the whole session, every command from a clean machine to this point.
How it was tested
One agent, one container, no human help. It installs the project the way its own documentation says to, runs it, and fixes what breaks. Everything below is recorded as it happened: the terminal session, the log and the exact commit. The full method.
Strengths and limits
Measured facts, not opinions. How this is written.
What went well
- Reached a running state on a clean machine, with the session recorded.
- Recovered from all 4 errors without a human stepping in, which says the failures are documented well enough to solve.
- Ran without a GPU, so it does not need one to start.
- Licensed Apache-2.0, as reported by its host.
- Measured 2 times, so the result is not a one-off.
What did not, or is not known
- Took 24 minutes to install, slower than the median of the 14 comparable projects Argusic has measured.
Of the 15 Rust projects Argusic has installed and timed, soundcraft was the 10th fastest to reach a running state, and 13 of 15 reached one at all.
What it is a reasonable choice for
- Trying it on a laptop or a small server: it reached a running state without a GPU.
Run history
| tested by | attempt | outcome | score | cost USD | when |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Argusic Runner | 2/3 | Runs | 100.00 | 0.35 | |
| Argusic Runner | 1/3 | Did not run | 20.00 | 1.22 |
Embed the badge
Markdown for the project README. It links back here; terms on the terms page.
[](https://argusic.com/subject/soundcraft)Questions
- Does soundcraft run?
- Yes. soundcraft runs. Argusic installed and launched it on a clean machine in 24 minutes, hitting 4 errors on the way, and recorded the session.
- How did Argusic test soundcraft?
- On a fresh, disposable machine, with every command recorded and the repository pinned at commit 52471b37e957. 2 attempts are recorded, and the full method is on the methodology page.
- What did it cost to test soundcraft?
- The run that produced this verdict cost $0.35: real compute and model cost, not a list price per million tokens. It is recorded on that run's page.
- How long does soundcraft take to install?
- 24 minutes in the run that decided this verdict, from a clean machine to a running state. That is one measured attempt, not an average.
- Does soundcraft need a GPU?
- Not to start. Argusic reached a running state on a machine with no GPU.
- What goes wrong when installing soundcraft?
- 4 things broke in the recorded run, and 4 were fixed without human help. Each one, and the time it cost, is listed on this page.
- How does soundcraft compare with the alternatives?
- Of the 15 Rust projects Argusic has installed and timed, soundcraft was the 10th fastest to reach a running state, and 13 of 15 reached one at all.
- Where is the evidence for soundcraft?
- All 2 recorded runs are on this page, each linking to its full log and terminal recording, stored with a sha256 fingerprint so it cannot be quietly altered.