27 May
2005
27 May
'05
11:59 a.m.
greetings!
i'm wondering what you all would recommend as the least resource-consuming
(in terms of cpu/memory usage) method for multitrack recording. i need to
record 18 channels (each to its own file) of 44.1kHz float audio in a live
setting, while simultaneously running some looping and FX, so i'd like to
keep the recording chain as lean as possible.
curiously, my tests have shown significantly lower average system load
using ardour than using ecasound. i was surprised by this, having assumed
that ecasound would be the solution. so now i'm wondering if other options
might be even better than ardour. maybe a recorder built in pd? i do need
metering, preferably with resettable peak indicators.
thanks, in advance, for any advice or suggestions!
-p
27 May
27 May
12:39 p.m.
On 27 May 2005 at 10:03, "Peter Lutek" <plutek(a)infinity.net> wrote:
i'm wondering what you all would recommend as the
least resource-consuming
(in terms of cpu/memory usage) method for multitrack recording. i need to
record 18 channels (each to its own file) of 44.1kHz float audio in a live
setting, while simultaneously running some looping and FX, so i'd like to
keep the recording chain as lean as possible.
curiously, my tests have shown significantly lower average system load
using ardour than using ecasound. i was surprised by this, having assumed
that ecasound would be the solution. so now i'm wondering if other options
might be even better than ardour. maybe a recorder built in pd? i do need
metering, preferably with resettable peak indicators.
I'd go with ardour. There are some LADSPA plugin meters that
will do what you want. I too find ardour to have surprisingly
light load on my 2GHz Celeron with 1GB of RAM. What soundcard(s)
are you using for your 18 channels? I'm using an 8ch M-audio
Delta 1010. I expect you might need/have RME gear with all of
those channels. Join the ardour list if you want to learn more
about that.
G'luck....
--
Kevin
12:59 p.m.
On Fri, 27 May 2005 07:38:37 -0700, Kevin Cosgrove <kevinc(a)doink.com>
wrote:
On 27 May 2005 at 10:03, "Peter Lutek" <plutek(a)infinity.net> wrote:
thanks, kevin.... yup, i'm on the ardour list, but am ok with the ardour
side of things. incidentally, you don't need a plugin for the
metering..... the ardour mixer shows peaks in each strip, and is now
globally resettable (ctrl-click in any channel peak box resets all
channels). yes, i'm using an rme multiface (8 analog, 8 adat, 2spdif).
-p
i'm wondering what you all would recommend as
the least
resource-consuming
(in terms of cpu/memory usage) method for multitrack recording. i need
to
record 18 channels (each to its own file) of 44.1kHz float audio in a
live
setting, while simultaneously running some looping and FX, so i'd like
to
keep the recording chain as lean as possible.
curiously, my tests have shown significantly lower average system load
using ardour than using ecasound. i was surprised by this, having
assumed
that ecasound would be the solution. so now i'm wondering if other
options
might be even better than ardour. maybe a recorder built in pd? i do
need
metering, preferably with resettable peak indicators.
I'd go with ardour. There are some LADSPA plugin meters that
will do what you want. I too find ardour to have surprisingly
light load on my 2GHz Celeron with 1GB of RAM. What soundcard(s)
are you using for your 18 channels? I'm using an 8ch M-audio
Delta 1010. I expect you might need/have RME gear with all of
those channels. Join the ardour list if you want to learn more
about that.
2:36 p.m.
On 27 May 2005 at 11:03, "Peter Lutek" <plutek(a)infinity.net> wrote:
thanks, kevin.... yup, i'm on the ardour list, but
am ok with
the ardour side of things. incidentally, you don't need a
plugin for the metering..... the ardour mixer shows peaks in
each strip, and is now globally resettable (ctrl-click in any
channel peak box resets all channels).
I use its meters. But, I haven't found, nor bothered to look,
for peak-hold on them, let alone reset. I'm using beta29, if
that matters.
yes, i'm using an rme multiface (8 analog, 8 adat,
2spdif).
Very nice. I've never been able to figure out for certain
whether one needs to buy an additional PCI card to use the
multiface with a computer. It looks like that to me from data on
the web. I opted for the delta 1010 because it comes with a PCI
card for about half the price of the multiface plus an rme PCI
card. Of course the multiface has ADAT sync, which would have
been wonderful for me since I have an ADAT too. So, did you have
to buy an additional card?
Thanks....
--
Kevin
28 May
28 May
3:17 a.m.
On Fri, 27 May 2005 09:36:04 -0700, Kevin Cosgrove <kevinc(a)doink.com>
wrote:
yes, but that was one of the BIG selling points for the multiface for me
-- get both the pci adapter and the cardbus adapter and you can easily
flip the multiface between your desktop and your laptop. yes, it's a sweet
little box!
-p
On 27 May 2005 at 11:03, "Peter Lutek" <plutek(a)infinity.net> wrote:
take a look in the mixer window, with channel strips at full width. the
numeric display immediately above the fader is the fader level, while the
one immediately above the channel meter is the peak level. click in the
peak level display to reset that particular channel (works while the
transport is running), or ctrl-click to reset all channels.
thanks, kevin.... yup, i'm on the ardour
list, but am ok with
the ardour side of things. incidentally, you don't need a
plugin for the metering..... the ardour mixer shows peaks in
each strip, and is now globally resettable (ctrl-click in any
channel peak box resets all channels).
I use its meters. But, I haven't found, nor bothered to look,
for peak-hold on them, let alone reset. I'm using beta29, if
that matters. yes, i'm using an rme multiface (8 analog, 8
adat, 2spdif).
Very nice. I've never been able to figure out for certain
whether one needs to buy an additional PCI card to use the
multiface with a computer. It looks like that to me from data on
the web. I opted for the delta 1010 because it comes with a PCI
card for about half the price of the multiface plus an rme PCI
card. Of course the multiface has ADAT sync, which would have
been wonderful for me since I have an ADAT too. So, did you have
to buy an additional card? 
6:42 a.m.
Last Friday 27 May 2005 15:03, Peter Lutek was like:
i'm wondering what you all would recommend as the
least resource-consuming
(in terms of cpu/memory usage) method for multitrack recording. i need to
record 18 channels (each to its own file) of 44.1kHz float audio in a live
setting, while simultaneously running some looping and FX, so i'd like to
keep the recording chain as lean as possible.
curiously, my tests have shown significantly lower average system load
using ardour than using ecasound. i was surprised by this, having assumed
that ecasound would be the solution. so now i'm wondering if other options
might be even better than ardour. maybe a recorder built in pd? i do need
metering, preferably with resettable peak indicators.
Ardour is remarkably light on use of resources. It's either that or Ecasound I
think. Ecasound is good for script-driven stuff. Ardour has graphic meters. I
think any other approach is likely to be much more work for fewer gains.
cheers,
tim hall
http://glastonburymusic.org.uk
29 May
29 May
7:46 p.m.
On Fri, 27 May 2005, Peter Lutek wrote:
i'm wondering what you all would recommend as the
least resource-consuming
(in terms of cpu/memory usage) method for multitrack recording. i need to
record 18 channels (each to its own file) of 44.1kHz float audio in a live
setting, while simultaneously running some looping and FX, so i'd like to
keep the recording chain as lean as possible.
[...]
curiously, my tests have shown significantly lower
average system load using
ardour than using ecasound. i was surprised by this, having assumed that
I wouldn't be suprised if ardour performed better in your case. Especially
handling lots of separate files (for example 1ch-per-file) can be a
challenge to ecasound's engine...
But the difference shouldn't be significant, so I'd still be interested in
the exact ecasound configuration you've used in your tests (in private
mail perhaps?) -- maybe it's a known performance bottleneck.
Anyways, the basic operations a multitrack hd-recording app needs to do
are the same for a console app as well as for a full-blown DAW: audio i/o
-> ardour and ecasound both use jackd; separate disk i/o thread with lots
of buffering; processing and float<->fixed conversions; etc -- some of
these are by their nature quite heavy operations cpu+mem wise, so if some
app provided significantly lower cpu+mem usage than for example ardour or
ecasound, I'd suspect it is skipping some important steps. ;)
--
http://www.eca.cx
Audio software for Linux!
6916
days inactive
6918
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
6 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Kai Vehmanen -
Kevin Cosgrove -
Peter Lutek -
tim hall