15 Dec
2005
15 Dec
'05
11:49 a.m.
Paul Davis wrote:
That explains why this was cheaper at the time (over a year ago)
I thought I would get this as:
1 It was supported
2 I could add more cards as the system grew
3 The website seemed to infer Linux Support
I didnt really worry about monitoring and latency as I was using the DDX
and this controlled the monitors as in most analogue studios.
Apart from Word clock the HDSP card didnt seem that diffrerent.
It's a shame RME have allowed the marketing depatment to run the company!
Cheers
Bob
Bearmusic
hearmymusic.co.uk <http:www.hearmymusic.co.uk>
>Currently,
I am trying to decide between an RME
>Hammerfall and an M-Audio Delta 1010 audio card. Just
>as the 3D provides video performance, the RME
>Hammerfall does the same for audio, off loading the
>audio processing away from the main cpu. The alsa
>project also says both cards are supported.
this is an unfortunate reading of BS marketing text.
the hammerfall series (digiXXXX and HDSP) do nothing of the sort, they
never did, they don't on any other OS, etc etc etc.
all that RME is referring to here are 2 things:
a) direct monitoring without CPU involvement
- well yeah, except that even consumer analog
cards do that
b) the card is a DMA busmaster, and so the CPU doesn't
need to be involved in transferring data to the
card, it just stuffs it into host-side RAM
- well yeah, except that almost every other
PCI card on the planet *except* RME's
earlier designs do this too. this is
really just an apology for the incredibly
stupid design of the digi96 series, which
require active participation by the host
CPU to move data to the card.
--p