30 Jan
2009
30 Jan
'09
3:49 p.m.
On Fri, 30 Jan 2009 03:05:11 +0100
torbenh(a)gmx.de wrote:
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 01:08:02PM -0800, Ken Restivo
wrote:
depends, depends..
load?
applications?
If you see xruns might also depend on your jack line as there seems to
be a bug that causes some xruns not to appear when -t is omitted.
...
Best,
Philipp
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 06:16:33PM +0100, Peder
Hedlund wrote:
i have a 2.00 GHz Core 2 Duo, with jack set to -r 44100 -p 64 -n 3....
no xruns. running 2.6.28 vanilla.
so what ? Quoting Svend-Erik Kj?r Madsen
<sv-e(a)sv-e.dk>dk>:
My requirements are very specific: I play live with other
musicians, via MIDI, and it's funk music, and I play bass through
my Linux laptop. Therefore, I have to be locked in with the
drummers. When I hit the 1, it has to be right on top of the kick
drum. I also use a lot of softsynths, and I'm playing live, so
Xruns are unacceptable. Consistently LOW latency with no Xruns and
CPU-intensive softsynths are very important to me.
That said, my current setup is a 2.33Ghz Core 2 Duo with a RT
kernel and JACK set to -r 44100 -P 128 -n 3, using a USB soundcard
and USB MIDI keyboard. I haven't calculated out what latency that
is in milliseconds, but whatever it is, so far it works fine for
me. It feels like I'm playing an actual instrument, not a sluggish
computer. On tir, 2009-01-27 at 15:03 +0100, Cassiel
wrote:
>
> 5.3ms latencies: If you can't sense it... you don't need it
I just ran a few test with a keyboard playing both the
keyboard's soundmodule and through midi and Qsynth, and I must
admit that latency was down to 1.3 ms before the audible time
differece disapeard.
Ok, I have to admit to lying; I only managed to go down to 5.8
ms (128/44100/2).
But, then again, I'm running a generic vendor kernel (2.6.25.11)
on a seven years old CPU. I'd imagine a modern CPU being able to
go lower, so my question remains:
Has anyone with a modern PC tried to go low-latency with a
non-patched kernel?