19 Apr
2007
19 Apr
'07
10:30 a.m.
On Thu, 2007-04-19 at 15:18 +0300, David Baron wrote:
On Thursday 19 April 2007, Charles Linart wrote:
The problem with jamin is the need to jack it from program to program in order
to use it. A plugin to aurdour would be more efficient. My system cannot run
such a setup either.
the CPU utilization of JAMin would be scarcely any different as a plugin
than as a standalone process. the overhead of running two JACK clients
is also relatively small (probably on the order of 40usec per interrupt
from the audio interrupt).
when mastering, you can generally reduce CPU load by using larger
latency settings. unlike mixing, where you may need/want the instant
feedback you get with low latency, mastering is a more subtle process
that doesn't necessarily benefit (and may even suffer from) constant
tweaking over short time intervals.
--p
I
don't know if jamin can be interconnected with audacity, but with
ardour I would propose the following:
1. Import all your songs into one ardour-session.
2. Connect jamin as an insert-effect on the master-track.
3. Work your way through mastering... (takes the longest time)
I'm not sure if I have a ram problem or if wires crossed somewhere,
but with both Ardour and JAMin working, the sound gets all chopped up
and horrible. CPU load jumps from about 3 percent to about 40 percent
with JAMin running as opposed to without. Everything seems kosher in
the patch bay and with the input/output connections in both Ardour and
JAMin
Patchbay: JAMin outputs to Ardour, Ardour forwards to JAMin
Ardour: Ardour track outs 1 and 2 go to JAMin in L and R
JAMin: outputs back to Ardour's master track
per this tutorial http://jamin.sourceforge.net/en/tutorial.html
All I can think is that I need more ram but there's already a gig and
a half in my box. Is that enough, or am I doing something wrong with
the connections?