there's a firewire 410 interface been put out by m-audio, similiar to the quattro but with 4 input 10 output.. looks lovely and the performance sounds great.... is it supported by ALSA yet?.... bw m~ Austin wroted: -- |\ _,,,---,,_ ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ HTTP 503: Too Busy |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' '---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL .::. www.iriXx.org .::. www.copyleftmedia.org.uk .::. gnupg key ID: AEB7A31E

Brian Redfern wrote: It would be worth checking at the page for firewire support to see if anyone has written a native firewire example. Takashi based the usb-audio driver on the one for OSS which Alan Cox wrote. I've successfully recorded 4 channels without dropouts between two machines over nfs but not with jack. I can use jack without dropouts just not at lowlat. I have to use 2048 if I want to use a few apps at once. I usually use them on two channels. Recently I was seeing problems with jack apps and lost the inputs for 3 and 4 so I have updated to the new cvs. My last one was March 21. It worked very well with jack until one of the last incarnations stuffed up a whole lot of my apps. now jacklaunch doesn't work with terminatorX again. I had it running a jackd session with ams, two alsaplayers and my friend on bass for a night and I routinuely use it for sampling live at concerts. So far I have done some recordings with it but only in duplex because I am still working on mixer techniques. I generally get audio lag while using the alt out on the mixer into the device at 2048 so I haven't been able to use it for serious four tracking. I have done some interesting (to me) things with it so far and it's fairly portable and rugged. If you want something specific to recording the maudio delta series or rme hammerfall series (maybe not hdsp9652) are very well tested. -- Patrick Shirkey - Boost Hardware Ltd. Http://www.boosthardware.com Http://www.djcj.org - The Linux Audio Users guide ======================================== Being on stage with the band in front of crowds shouting, "Get off! No! We want normal music!", I think that was more like acting than anything I've ever done. Goldie, 8 Nov, 2002 The Scotsman

On Tue, May 27, 2003 at 02:12:47PM -0400, Austin wrote: Not if you're only running one app. high performance audio *with routing of audio data between apps*. -- Paul Winkler http://www.slinkp.com

Frank Barknecht wrote: Another thing about the quattro is that even the windows drivers will not allow you to record and playback on all 4 channels at one time. You can use 4 in, 2 out 48khz 24 bit 2 in, 4 out 2 in, 2 out 94 khz 24 bit I think I am running up against this with my latest attempts. It may be that the quattro cannot do all 8 channels because of a hardware switch maybe for power consumption or something. They do run awfully hot and I can imagine that it would be possible to melt something if their is too much power running through them. -- Patrick Shirkey - Boost Hardware Ltd. Http://www.boosthardware.com Http://www.djcj.org - The Linux Audio Users guide ======================================== Being on stage with the band in front of crowds shouting, "Get off! No! We want normal music!", I think that was more like acting than anything I've ever done. Goldie, 8 Nov, 2002 The Scotsman

What setup do you use for 2X2 full duplex? I just want two channels of 16 bit in and out at the same time, but haven't figured out which combination of buttons on the quattro do it, perhaps I need to input on one and two and then listen on three and four?

For clarity, you have come up with the number of bits... if you devide your answer by 8, you will have the number of bytes, which is a little over a meg/sec. Many people will have programs that pad 24 bit ints to 32 bits, or four bytes, which bumps the the answer up closer to 1.5meg/sec. Still, it is true that the USB bandwidth is responsible for crippling the available channels on cards that attempt to do 24/96.

Mark Knecht wrote: that should be divided by three to get bytes as there are 8 bits in every byte the quattro uses 24 with 3 periods (not packed in four like other cards). 24 * 3 bytes * 48000 = 3072000 bytes => 3072 Kb => 3.072 Mb/S That comes as no surprise to me that the usb protocol cannot handle effectively it's full bandwidth. But it should be easily able to handle this: 44100 * 2 bytes * 8 channels (4 in, 4 out) = 705600 bytes => 705.6 Kb/S -- Patrick Shirkey - Boost Hardware Ltd. Http://www.boosthardware.com Http://www.djcj.org - The Linux Audio Users guide ======================================== Being on stage with the band in front of crowds shouting, "Get off! No! We want normal music!", I think that was more like acting than anything I've ever done. Goldie, 8 Nov, 2002 The Scotsman

Nah, I understand what you and Tobiah are saying, but I'm a hardware guy, and USB is a hardware spec. I know it's not true for you Patrick, but are all of your readers aware that USB is a 'Serial' bus? (hehe...Universal Serial Bus == USB) A 'Serial Bus' (of any type - USB, 1394, Ethernet, Fiber Channel) transfers bits 'serially', meaning one bit at a time. Why would someone not specify bandwidth on a 'Serial Bus' in terms of bits/Second? If we were talking SCSI then I'd say Bytes/Second, but we're not... ;-)

On Wed, 2003-05-28 at 00:45, Frank Barknecht wrote: Probably true, with no other USB devices on the bus. USB 2.0 would be much better.

Completely true to the best of my knowledge. '1394 Sound Support' normally equates to MLAN. I've got the MLAN specs (legally from Yamaha) and would love to find a way to develop some Linux drivers, but alas we need people to do that. There are MLAN NDA issues, but our lawyer thought that shouldn't stand in the way of being able to do an Open Source driver if there was interest. As for USB 2.0, I would have thought that wouldn't be much of an issue, being sort of incremental over the existing USB environment, but I could be wrong about that, and I haven't actually seen any USB 2.0 audio devices yet. Are there any? (I haven't looked.)

Humm...the UA-1000 - USB 2.0 - 10 in x 10 out. Looks pretty cool. A friend has a smaller Edirol that he records with on business trips. (Drummer at home becomes guitar player on the road.) ;-) He likes it. Thanks for the hint! - Mark

Cool. Glad that much works! If it wasn't clear, I multiplied by 4 because Patrick's table said the device does two in and two out at 96KHz. That makes four channels of data moving across the USB bus. That's all I was saying. Don't know why I'm spending so much time talking about a device I've never seen or heard. ;-) That said, I'll not butt in here anymore unless someone wants to know something specific about the technology. Cheers, Mark

On Tue, 2003-05-27 at 22:03, Patrick Shirkey wrote: [MWK] I wasn't making any claims. I was just punching buttons on a calculator based on your info. This table says 8 channels at 16/44 = 5.6Mb/Sec 6 channels at 24/48 = 6.9Mb/Sec 2 channels at 24/96 = 4.6Mb/Sec reasonably consistant I suppose... Sure, why not? ;-)