15 Feb
2013
15 Feb
'13
9:04 p.m.
On Fri, 15 Feb 2013 18:30:15 +0100, Bob van der Poel <bob(a)mellowood.ca>
wrote:
You should prefer 48 KHz, that it does take more data shouldn't matter.
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 9:03 PM, Ralf Mardorf
<ralf.mardorf(a)alice-dsl.net> wrote:
Yes, equal settings for frames/periode and periods/buffer will result in a
lower latency at a higher sample rate.
On Thu, 2013-02-14 at 20:32 -0700, Bob van der
Poel wrote:
Is this saying that a higher freq will result in lower latency? Guess
that makes sense since higher freq contains more data. Now, if I have an app like audacity set to 48K
does it (or jack?) send
a message to the box to enable 48 (or 44.1)? If that is the case, I
assume that using 44.1 or 48 should have the identical latency issues?
48K should send a bit more data back to the computer?
All audio devices I know automatically are set to the sample rate set by
alsa, 'jackd -d alsa --help'.
No, the latency will differ for different sample rates:
512 samples / 44.1 kHz = 11.609977324 ms
11.609977324 * 2 = 23.219954649 ms ≈ 23.2 ms
512 samples / 48.0 kHz = 10.666666667 ms
10.666666667 * 2 = 21.333333334 ms ≈ 21.3 ms Higher sample
rate = more data at equal bit depth.
Guess there really is no reason not to use 48K then.