| 1 |
On 22/05/10 21:26, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sat, May 22, 2010 at 1:02 PM, Nikos Chantziaras<realnc@×××××.de> wrote: |
| 3 |
> [snip] |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>> I don't do professional audio. I have a normal PC. And just like I |
| 6 |
>> sometimes use a synth in Windows (I'm just a hobbyist), I'd like to do the |
| 7 |
>> same in Linux. |
| 8 |
>> |
| 9 |
> You can; but you have to use special software, because yours is a |
| 10 |
> special case. The normal desktop/laptop user does not use a synth. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
>> ALSA/Pulse needing third-party stuff just to get basics right (acceptable |
| 14 |
>> latency; not *ultra* low latency, just acceptable one) is a sign that |
| 15 |
>> they're not designed right. |
| 16 |
>> |
| 17 |
> Your definition of "acceptable" is *ultra* low to me, and many others. |
| 18 |
> To me acceptable latency means that the audio system does not waste my |
| 19 |
> laptop/phone battery. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
>> And in the end, you know what? Even if OSS4 had a broken design, it's still |
| 23 |
>> better, because it works better. |
| 24 |
>> |
| 25 |
> This is your principal problem: you think your use-case is universal, |
| 26 |
> and it's not. To me Alsa+PulseAudio works better because it allows the |
| 27 |
> battery of my laptop to last for hours while I see a movie with my |
| 28 |
> bluetooth headset. With the latencies you want, that's not possible. I |
| 29 |
> believe my use-case is more general. |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
>> At least it gets the basics right. Other |
| 33 |
>> operating systems are much more advanced in that manner. It's ALSA that |
| 34 |
>> holds Linux audio back. |
| 35 |
>> |
| 36 |
> Jack uses ALSA. From the Jack FAQ page (http://jackaudio.org/faq): |
| 37 |
> |
| 38 |
> <quote> |
| 39 |
> Doesn't use JACK add latency? |
| 40 |
> |
| 41 |
> There is NO extra latency caused by using JACK for audio input and |
| 42 |
> output. When we say none, we mean absolutely zero. The only impact of |
| 43 |
> using JACK is a slight increase in the amount of work done by the CPU |
| 44 |
> to process a given chunk of audio, which means that in theory you |
| 45 |
> could not get 100% of the processing power that you might get it if |
| 46 |
> your application(s) used ALSA or CoreAudio directly. However, given |
| 47 |
> that the difference is less than 1%, and that your system will be |
| 48 |
> unstable before you get close to 80% of the theoretical processing |
| 49 |
> power, the effect is completely disregardable. |
| 50 |
> </quote> |
| 51 |
> |
| 52 |
> ALSA works great. And for regular users, with PulseAudio both are full |
| 53 |
> of awesome awesomeness. For your use-case, you should try Jack. |
| 54 |
> |
| 55 |
> Regards. |
| 56 |
> |
| 57 |
Can someone unsubscribe me please?!?!?!?!?!? |
Archives