13 Apr
2013
13 Apr
'13
11:43 p.m.
Le 13-04-2013 10:26, Len Ovens a écrit :
On Sat, April 13, 2013 6:38 am, jonetsu(a)teksavvy.com
wrote:
Are you using the same jackd(bus) latency setting for
both cases? Are
you
letting ardour start jack or are you using something else? In any
case you
will need jack to run at 128frames/period or less. (probably 64)
Ardour
starts jack at 1024 by default if I remember correctly... so does
qjackctl
for that matter.
Yes, it was set at 1024. A setting of 64 works great. Thanks !
Direct no. The kernel will determine the lowest usable
latency you
can
use, but the way jack is started determines what latency jack is
(trying
to be) using. If you can't get jack to run at the needed latency
without
xruns then a change in kernel may help. Other settings in bios and HW
wise
may help too.
And so the trigger to install a low-latency kernel would be getting too
many xruns. It sounds like a simple rule to observe.
Finally, there is a matter of processing power. The
more effects you
use
the higher the latency needs to be to support them. I have an older
machine and so I try to track without internal eq/effects. I add
effects
for mixdown at a higher latency. I do have an external mixer (Mackie
1604)
and some external reverbs and stuff I can use for monitoring, but I
have
been tracking dry so far. Effects for tracking monitoring do not have
to
be super quality, just good enough to keep the talent in the right
frame
of mind. Some talent needs it and some don't.
Interesting this concept of adding effects at mixdown when high latency
is available. So much to know about creative audio recording. For now
I'm leaning much more on the talent side that needs a good feedback of
what it'll sound like ;-)
Cheers.