26 Jan
2013
26 Jan
'13
10:06 a.m.
Hi all,
Apologies if these questions have been asked before I can't find a
definitive answer.
I need an audio interface to work with my thinkpad X60 running Ubuntu
studio for live processing. At least 2 in 2 out.
My main program is SuperCollider and the main issue I for see is latency.
With the internal sound card the latency 11.6 ms, which of course is very
noticeable.
Would usb 2 be adequate for this or should I go firwire?
I've tried Motu ultra light, which I know is not supported, so was not
surprised when it did not work (but I have heard of some people getting it
to work).
I've also tried Focurite Saffire 6 USB with no success, I've read there are
issues but I'm not convinced USB 1 would be up for the job.
I've also read that in order to use a firewire interface you need a
real-time Kernel, where Ubuntu studio has a low latency Kernel?
I am fairy new to the world of Linux and moving from Mac.
Any audio interface recommendations and advice greatly appreciated.
Cheers,
Saul
26 Jan
26 Jan
10:17 a.m.
New subject: [LAU] Audio Interface for live Processing
What issues did you have with sapphire 6? That should be absolutely fine..
or a scarlett 2i2 or 2i4 .
J
On Jan 26, 2013 9:07 AM, "Saul Rayson" <saul(a)atonic.com> wrote:
Hi all,
Apologies if these questions have been asked before I can't find a
definitive answer.
I need an audio interface to work with my thinkpad X60 running Ubuntu
studio for live processing. At least 2 in 2 out.
My main program is SuperCollider and the main issue I for see is latency.
With the internal sound card the latency 11.6 ms, which of course is very
noticeable.
Would usb 2 be adequate for this or should I go firwire?
I've tried Motu ultra light, which I know is not supported, so was not
surprised when it did not work (but I have heard of some people getting it
to work).
I've also tried Focurite Saffire 6 USB with no success, I've read there
are issues but I'm not convinced USB 1 would be up for the job.
I've also read that in order to use a firewire interface you need a
real-time Kernel, where Ubuntu studio has a low latency Kernel?
I am fairy new to the world of Linux and moving from Mac.
Any audio interface recommendations and advice greatly appreciated.
Cheers,
Saul
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
10:54 a.m.
New subject: [LAU] Audio Interface for live Processing
On Sat, 2013-01-26 at 09:06 +0000, Saul Rayson wrote:
With the internal sound card the latency 11.6 ms,
which of course is
very noticeable.
I'm able to hear MIDI jitter within very small values, nearly nobody
from this list does believe me, but I'm unable to notice a serious issue
with a fixed latency of 10.7 ms. Btw. what are the settings to get 11.6
ms? Perhaps you run into issues regarding to bizarre settings?
11:12 a.m.
New subject: [LAU] Audio Interface for live Processing
On Sat, 2013-01-26 at 10:54 +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
On Sat, 2013-01-26 at 09:06 +0000, Saul Rayson wrote:
I guess I understand now:
512 samples / 44.1 kHz = 11.609977324 ms
11.609977324 * 2 = 23.219954649 ms ~ 23.2 ms
Yes, this is audible.
With the internal sound card the latency 11.6 ms,
which of course is
very noticeable.
I'm able to hear MIDI jitter within very small values, nearly nobody
from this list does believe me, but I'm unable to notice a serious issue
with a fixed latency of 10.7 ms. Btw. what are the settings to get 11.6
ms? Perhaps you run into issues regarding to bizarre settings?
3:29 p.m.
New subject: [LAU] Audio Interface for live Processing
Hi James,
I expected the focusrite Saffire 6 to work but it is not recognised by the
system or Jack. Then I read this
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1486482&page=3 from last year.
Maybe I'm doing something wrong but it would appear that there is no easy
solution.
Would usb 1 be fast enough for live processing?
What latency do you get with 2i4 (USB2) looks good.
Ralf, thanks for your calculations.
Cheers,
Saul
On 26 January 2013 10:12, Ralf Mardorf <ralf.mardorf(a)alice-dsl.net> wrote:
On Sat, 2013-01-26 at 10:54 +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
On Sat, 2013-01-26 at 09:06 +0000, Saul Rayson
wrote:
I guess I understand now:
512 samples / 44.1 kHz = 11.609977324 ms
11.609977324 * 2 = 23.219954649 ms ~ 23.2 ms
Yes, this is audible.
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
With the internal sound card the latency 11.6 ms,
which of course is
very noticeable.
I'm able to hear MIDI jitter within very small values, nearly nobody
from this list does believe me, but I'm unable to notice a serious issue
with a fixed latency of 10.7 ms. Btw. what are the settings to get 11.6
ms? Perhaps you run into issues regarding to bizarre settings? 
4:08 p.m.
New subject: [LAU] Audio Interface for live Processing
On Sat, January 26, 2013 1:06 am, Saul Rayson wrote:
I need an audio interface to work with my thinkpad X60
running Ubuntu
studio for live processing. At least 2 in 2 out.
My main program is SuperCollider and the main issue I for see is latency.
With the internal sound card the latency 11.6 ms, which of course is very
noticeable.
Jack won't start lower? or too many xruns lower? If you are having xruns,
try unloading the kernel module for the wireless network. I was able to
get my netbook to half that in this way. Actually I had troubles much
higher without. Also check that your CPU governor is set to performance
and not ondemand.
Would usb 2 be adequate for this or should I go
firwire?
USB2 should be fine. The presonus boxes seem to work well with linux.
Quite honestly, with a portable computer like a laptop, take it to the
music store and try a few. Walk in with a list that are known to work with
Linux and try them. Thats what I do. If it doesn't work out of the box, I
try another.
For live work, Guitar effects, soft synths, etc. USB 1.1 at 16bit/48k may
work just fine. The ART USB Dual Pre - USB 1.1 for as low as $60 will take
instrument or mic and has better circuitry than your internal card for
sure. These just work, plug and go. For a bit more money they have a tube
pre (single or dual) for a warmer sound with a bit more control and a
limiter. These will still be good for recording too... but for serious
studio work USB2 or firewire will give 24bit digital for more head room.
SO look at your needs. Think about what you will want to try in the next
year or two... however long you think you will use your thinkpad :)
I've also read that in order to use a firewire
interface you need a
real-time Kernel, where Ubuntu studio has a low latency Kernel?
A number of people on the UbuntuStudio dev team use firewire with the low
latency kernel. That should not be an issue. The real issue is do you have
a FireWire interface or would you have to buy one? If you have one, then
you have the choice of FW or USB2 at similar price. If not then FW will
cost the extra for an interface and you have two things to make sure you
get one that works well with the software.
--
Len Ovens
www.OvenWerks.net
27 Jan
27 Jan
5:05 p.m.
New subject: [LAU] Audio Interface for live Processing
Thanks Len some great information here.
Jack won't start lower?
Yes, Jack just won't start on lower buffer sizes with internal sound. Not
really a problem. just for testing.
For live work, Guitar effects, soft synths, etc. USB
1.1 at 16bit/48k may
work just fine
My experience with USB audio is limited, but USB 1 on mac, for live
processing, I have found to have unusable latency.
I will probably update this computer at some point and convert all my
personal recordings to a Linux based system. My main reason for the
thinkpad was for gigs and live processing, so I am thinking a USB 2 audio
interface is what I'll go for.
I was not aware that Firewire interfaces would be software specific, I
assumed that if it connected with jack then any jack compliant software
would work?
Thanks again,
Saul
On 26 January 2013 15:08, Len Ovens <len(a)ovenwerks.net> wrote:
On Sat, January 26, 2013 1:06 am, Saul Rayson wrote:
I need an audio interface to work with my
thinkpad X60 running Ubuntu
studio for live processing. At least 2 in 2 out.
My main program is SuperCollider and the main issue I for see is latency.
With the internal sound card the latency 11.6 ms, which of course is very
noticeable.
Jack won't start lower? or too many xruns lower? If you are having xruns,
try unloading the kernel module for the wireless network. I was able to
get my netbook to half that in this way. Actually I had troubles much
higher without. Also check that your CPU governor is set to performance
and not ondemand.
Would usb 2 be adequate for this or should I go
firwire?
USB2 should be fine. The presonus boxes seem to work well with linux.
Quite honestly, with a portable computer like a laptop, take it to the
music store and try a few. Walk in with a list that are known to work with
Linux and try them. Thats what I do. If it doesn't work out of the box, I
try another.
For live work, Guitar effects, soft synths, etc. USB 1.1 at 16bit/48k may
work just fine. The ART USB Dual Pre - USB 1.1 for as low as $60 will take
instrument or mic and has better circuitry than your internal card for
sure. These just work, plug and go. For a bit more money they have a tube
pre (single or dual) for a warmer sound with a bit more control and a
limiter. These will still be good for recording too... but for serious
studio work USB2 or firewire will give 24bit digital for more head room.
SO look at your needs. Think about what you will want to try in the next
year or two... however long you think you will use your thinkpad :)
I've also read that in order to use a
firewire interface you need a
real-time Kernel, where Ubuntu studio has a low latency Kernel?
A number of people on the UbuntuStudio dev team use firewire with the low
latency kernel. That should not be an issue. The real issue is do you have
a FireWire interface or would you have to buy one? If you have one, then
you have the choice of FW or USB2 at similar price. If not then FW will
cost the extra for an interface and you have two things to make sure you
get one that works well with the software.
--
Len Ovens
www.OvenWerks.net
5:56 p.m.
New subject: [LAU] Audio Interface for live Processing
On Sun, January 27, 2013 8:05 am, Saul Rayson wrote:
I was not aware that Firewire interfaces would be
software specific, I
assumed that if it connected with jack then any jack compliant software
would work?
If you can see it in Jack it is fine. I was just aware that the chipset in
the computer side of the FW interface matters. Once jack has the i/o the
software doesn't care.
--
Len Ovens
www.OvenWerks.net
6:06 p.m.
New subject: [LAU] Audio Interface for live Processing
On Sun, 27 Jan 2013 08:56:08 -0800
"Len Ovens" <len(a)ovenwerks.net> wrote:
On Sun, January 27, 2013 8:05 am, Saul Rayson wrote:
Very true, FW interfaces based on a Ricoh controller tend to be
more problematic than those based on a Texas Instrument controller.
I recently got an Alesis Multimix16 which has a Firewire interface. It
is stable as a rock on my studio desktop which has a TI controller, but
to get it to work on my laptop with a Ricoh controller, I had to make every
performance tweak known to man, turn off all the networking and USB ports
and physically turn off the Wifi switch before I could record all 18
channels without xruns.
--
======================================================================
Joe Hartley - UNIX/network Consultant - jh(a)brainiac.com
Without deviation from the norm, "progress" is not possible. - FZappa
I was not aware that Firewire interfaces would be
software specific, I
assumed that if it connected with jack then any jack compliant software
would work?
If you can see it in Jack it is fine. I was just aware that the chipset in
the computer side of the FW interface matters. Once jack has the i/o the
software doesn't care.
9:20 p.m.
New subject: [LAU] Audio Interface for live Processing
On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 4:05 PM, Saul Rayson <saul(a)atonic.com> wrote:
Latency in 1.1 vs usb 2 shouldn't be significantly different as I
understand it. usb 2 just allows higher bandwidth - so more channels
or 24bit vs 16bit. Just depends on whether the interface is properly
supported in linux.
Thanks Len some great information here.
Did you try 48k / 3 periods/buffer?
Also, is 10ms really so bad? I guess it depends what you are using it
for, but 10ms from pressing a keyboard to getting a note out is not so
bad at all - within the realms of analogue organ response times, I
think.. If you need to feed audio in and have near-zero latency, that
is a different matter..
For my live setup (virtual synth-rack) I am planning to rely on the
internal sound - at least in initial (rehearsal) tests.. Not too
worried as long as latency is <25ms and xrun-free.
Jack won't start lower?
Yes, Jack just won't start on lower buffer sizes with internal sound. Not
really a problem. just for testing. For live work,
Guitar effects, soft synths, etc. USB 1.1 at 16bit/48k may
work just fine
My experience with USB audio is limited, but USB 1 on mac, for live
processing, I have found to have unusable latency.
I will probably update this computer at some point and
convert all my
personal recordings to a Linux based system. My main reason for the thinkpad
was for gigs and live processing, so I am thinking a USB 2 audio interface
is what I'll go for.
Yes - I just got a scarlett 2i4 and heartily recommend it - although
haven't stress-tested it much yet. Quality seems very good!
Be careful though - not all usb2 devices are supported in linux..
Re: firewire - there was some discussion here a year or so back that
it might be being slowly discontinued - fewer laptops having as
standard etc, and most consumer interfaces moving to usb2.
James
11:33 p.m.
New subject: [LAU] Audio Interface for live Processing
On Sun, January 27, 2013 12:20 pm, James Stone wrote:
Latency in 1.1 vs usb 2 shouldn't be significantly different as I
understand it. usb 2 just allows higher bandwidth - so more channels
or 24bit vs 16bit. Just depends on whether the interface is properly
supported in linux.
I have used a USB 1.1 IF on my netbook running at 800Mhz (half speed) and
was still able to run the IF at -p 64 -n 2 (2.67 ms Latency) without
xruns. I did have to back the latency off if I ran too many softsynths or
too many effects, but even double that is not bad. -p 64 with USB 2
devices seems to be the lowest too. I run into memory problems before CPU
use problems in general with only 1G memory :)
--
Len Ovens
www.OvenWerks.net
On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 4:05 PM, Saul Rayson
<saul(a)atonic.com> wrote:
For live work, Guitar effects, soft synths, etc. USB
1.1 at 16bit/48k
may
work just fine
My experience with USB audio is limited, but USB 1 on mac, for live
processing, I have found to have unusable latency.
28 Jan
28 Jan
12:26 a.m.
New subject: [LAU] Audio Interface for live Processing
On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 10:32 PM, Len Ovens <len(a)ovenwerks.net> wrote:
On Sun, January 27, 2013 12:20 pm, James Stone wrote:
Latency in 1.1 vs usb 2 shouldn't be significantly different as I
understand it. usb 2 just allows higher bandwidth - so more channels
or 24bit vs 16bit. Just depends on whether the interface is properly
supported in linux.
I have used a USB 1.1 IF on my netbook running at 800Mhz (half speed) and
was still able to run the IF at -p 64 -n 2 (2.67 ms Latency) without
xruns. I did have to back the latency off if I ran too many softsynths or
too many effects, but even double that is not bad. -p 64 with USB 2
devices seems to be the lowest too. I run into memory problems before CPU
use problems in general with only 1G memory :)
.. actually on the Scarlett 2i4, I can start jack with -p 16 -n 2..
but it's not really usable on my ageing PC (Athlon 2500XP 1G RAM)..
lots of xruns.. It will run xrun free at 48k with -p32. push it up to
-p64, and it is pretty solidly stable at 96000 sample rate. Note 2.67
is round trip latency - from sound in to sound out. For midi control
of softsynths, it is half that.
With very short sample sizes, linuxsampler complains that the audio
fragment size is too small though! I think linuxsampler (at least the
version shipped with ubuntu) requires a period of 128 to run
correctly..
James
On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 4:05 PM, Saul Rayson
<saul(a)atonic.com> wrote:
For live work, Guitar effects, soft synths, etc. USB
1.1 at 16bit/48k
may
work just fine
My experience with USB audio is limited, but USB 1 on mac, for live
processing, I have found to have unusable latency.
11:25 p.m.
New subject: [LAU] Audio Interface for live Processing
Hi James/Len,
Did you try 48k / 3 periods/buffer?
Just got it down to 4ms on the internal card!
often I'm processing a live and recorded input, which is mixed back with
the live performance, so latency is of some importance, but the numbers you
are both getting are very workable.
Thanks again for all the info.
/S
On 27 January 2013 23:26, James Stone <jamesmstone(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 10:32 PM, Len Ovens
<len(a)ovenwerks.net> wrote:
On Sun, January 27, 2013 12:20 pm, James Stone wrote:
I have used a USB 1.1 IF on my netbook running at 800Mhz (half speed) and
was still able to run the IF at -p 64 -n 2 (2.67 ms Latency) without
xruns. I did have to back the latency off if I ran too many softsynths or
too many effects, but even double that is not bad. -p 64 with USB 2
devices seems to be the lowest too. I run into memory problems before CPU
use problems in general with only 1G memory :)
.. actually on the Scarlett 2i4, I can start jack with -p 16 -n 2..
but it's not really usable on my ageing PC (Athlon 2500XP 1G RAM)..
lots of xruns.. It will run xrun free at 48k with -p32. push it up to
-p64, and it is pretty solidly stable at 96000 sample rate. Note 2.67
is round trip latency - from sound in to sound out. For midi control
of softsynths, it is half that.
With very short sample sizes, linuxsampler complains that the audio
fragment size is too small though! I think linuxsampler (at least the
version shipped with ubuntu) requires a period of 128 to run
correctly..
James
On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 4:05 PM, Saul Rayson
<saul(a)atonic.com> wrote:
>For
live work, Guitar effects, soft synths, etc. USB 1.1 at 16bit/48k
> may
>work just fine
My experience with USB audio is limited, but USB 1 on mac, for live
processing, I have found to have unusable latency.
Latency in 1.1 vs usb 2 shouldn't be significantly different as I
understand it. usb 2 just allows higher bandwidth - so more channels
or 24bit vs 16bit. Just depends on whether the interface is properly
supported in linux.
4735
days inactive
4737
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
12 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
James Stone -
Joe Hartley -
Len Ovens -
Ralf Mardorf -
Saul Rayson