[LAU] Use of 96 kHz sample rate to lower latency

[Bill Gribble]

> On Jan 2, 2014, at 7:26, Harry van Haaren <harryhaaren at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 64 x 2 @ 48kHz = 2.67msec
> 64 x 2 @ 96kHz = 1.33msec
> => Doubling the samplerate halves the latency

Sure, that math is correct, but this is not a really interesting observation if (as I interpret the OP to be) you are trying to wring the lowest-latency performance out of a real system...

If, in the case you describe, you are at "best possible latency" at 48 kHz, simply increasing the sample rate is almost guaranteed to put you in XRUN hell. You are asking the system to respond in half the time you had previously determined was its best possible effort. 

Thanks, 
Bill Gribble