13 Apr
2013
13 Apr
'13
3:38 p.m.
Hello,
With Fedora 15/CCRMA and Ardour 2.x shipped with it, I used to
monitor a track (including EQ and effects) by adding an external send to
an unused playback(s) of the 1010LT. The 1010LT itself was set for
digital mix. When I do this with Ardour3, there's a quite noticeable
delay in the monitoring which prevents it from being useful at all. The
'send1 out' are associated with playbacks 7 and 8 in the main routing
diagram. And so...
1) At Arodur3 install time there was some option about monitoring and
I've chosen 'something' which could have been the default. I will
install 3.1.10 soon, so I can redo this step if needed.
2) Is this now a direct consequence of not using any low-latency
kernel ?
Thanks for any comments/suggestions - much appreciated as always.
Cheers.
13 Apr
13 Apr
4:26 p.m.
On Sat, April 13, 2013 6:38 am, jonetsu(a)teksavvy.com wrote:
Hello,
With Fedora 15/CCRMA and Ardour 2.x shipped with it, I used to
monitor a track (including EQ and effects) by adding an external send to
an unused playback(s) of the 1010LT. The 1010LT itself was set for
digital mix. When I do this with Ardour3, there's a quite noticeable
delay in the monitoring which prevents it from being useful at all. The
'send1 out' are associated with playbacks 7 and 8 in the main routing
diagram. And so...
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.
1) At Arodur3 install time there was some option
about monitoring and
I've chosen 'something' which could have been the default. I will
install 3.1.10 soon, so I can redo this step if needed.
Monitoring can be turned on or off in ardour. Off is preferred because
that means you are taking care of monitoring in hardware :) On means
Ardour sets up monitoring channels, but in this case you are doing that
manually anyway.
2) Is this now a direct consequence of not using
any low-latency
kernel ?
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.
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.
Thanks for any comments/suggestions - much appreciated as always.
Cheers.
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
--
Len Ovens
www.OvenWerks.net
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.
11:53 p.m.
Le 13-04-2013 17:43, jonetsu(a)teksavvy.com a écrit :
And so the trigger to install a low-latency kernel
would be getting
too many xruns. It sounds like a simple rule to observe.
And indeed. In one recording of a simple acoustic guitar track there
was at least 29 xruns. They are so densely packed that their numbering
is not that clear. Never had that many under Foedora 15/CCRMA where
there was one once in a while. So I guess I'll try a jack setting of 128
or a bit more if if this does not do it, install the Linux Mint
low-latency kernel. The machine is quad core with 16G of RAM.
14 Apr
14 Apr
3:06 p.m.
Le 13-04-2013 17:53, jonetsu(a)teksavvy.com a écrit :
And indeed. In one recording of a simple acoustic
guitar track there
was at least 29 xruns. They are so densely packed that their
numbering
is not that clear. Never had that many under Foedora 15/CCRMA where
there was one once in a while. So I guess I'll try a jack setting of
128 or a bit more if if this does not do it, install the Linux Mint
low-latency kernel. The machine is quad core with 16G of RAM.
I've applied the scaling_governor modification Ralf wrote about
recently and now all xruns are gone at a jackd sampling rate of 64. I
found a page at Arch which explains what CPU scaling is about :
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/CPU_Frequency_Scaling
4243
days inactive
4244
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
4 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
jonetsu＠teksavvy.com -
Len Ovens