28 Jan
2010
28 Jan
'10
4:54 p.m.
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 03:01:38PM -0500, David McClanahan wrote:
you named the set of synths which are not RT safe.
(i dont really know about fluidsynth, but zyn and especially bristol
arent clean)
thats what i meant with bicycle.
we are talking about a buffer of 3ms here.
sound travels about 1 meter in that time.
--
torben Hohn
On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 8:47 PM, David Olofson
<david(a)olofson.net> wrote:
i still dont understand how building a highway, can speed up a bicycle
with a flat tire.
you should try a car on a normal road. will get you where you want.
Now, in real life, the "every time"
part will never be quite accurate.
After
all, you may see some "once in a billion" combination of hardware events
that
delays your IRQ a few microseconds too many, or your lose power, or the
hardware breaks down, or a software bug strikes... There are countless
things
that can go wrong in any non-trivial system.
Even in HRT systems, things go wrong. But in an HRT system, you lash the
squirrels
nuts down. In a soft realtime system, you bet that there won't be
a storm. Of course, there's a big difference between a
DAW that drops out a few
times a
day, and one that runs rock solid for weeks - but a truly glitch-free
system
would probably be ridiculously expensive, if it's even possible to build.
Triple redundancy hardware, code verified by NASA, various other things
I've
never even thought of; that sort of stuff...
Who wants a DAW. I'd be happy a while with a stable minimoog emulator. The
Bristol has that and CS80(descendant of Yamaha's GX-1). It'd be cool just to
have a stable, glitch a day, analog-like synth such as these. As it is now
with Ubuntu's Studio packages, Bristol locks up and then locks up the
operating system as does Zyn. FluidSynth works but will glitch quite a bit.
Well I understand it from that perspective, but for a performance
instrument I
would think no buffering would be the ideal.