[LAD] Fw: Re: Some questions about the Jack callback

Len Ovens len at ovenwerks.net
Sun Sep 21 16:28:01 UTC 2014

On Sun, 21 Sep 2014, Len Ovens wrote:

> <dream helmet on>
> I think the MOD is in many ways the wave of the future. I see off-loading 
> more of the sound processing to the audio interface as the general computer 
> interfaces become more throughput oriented and less lowlatency capable. 
> Having an audio interface that is kind of a secialty computer, but with OS 
> access for the user just makes sense. Many AIs already have quite a lot of 
> processing inside, but are not open. The cost is not that high for this added 
> processing (end cost of $50?) and I would think having the ability to add 
> processing power with cards the size of the mini/micro PCIe wireless cards 
> should not be difficult. If Jack is run with very low latency, then using a 
> netjack like interface between cores could easily allow the use of 16 or more 
> cores/threads and still have an acceptable latency. What if a second (open) 
> video card was used for audio processing?

To add to this, I am wondering, because of the higher latency of some of 
the newer USB AIs, if it would make sense to have a jack backend that 
allows jack to run at a lower latency than the AI. So the AI would run 
64/2, but jack would run at 32/2 or less so that there was time to offload 
processing on more cores/threads.

Len Ovens

More information about the Linux-audio-dev mailing list