Hi Karl,
this is only partially true, I'm using Pd with standard (Rme) audio drivers, of course !
And Karl, what about a pd porting to OS X when it will be ready, aren't you working on Apple hardware ?
Cheers
Alessandro Fogar
---------- Initial message -----------
From : Karl MacMillan karlmac@peabody.jhu.edu To : "sfogar@libero.it" sfogar@libero.it Cc : pd-list@iem.kug.ac.at Date : Mon, 5 Mar 2001 11:44:11 -0500 (EST) Subject : Re: Latency in Audio
On Fri, 2 Mar 2001, sfogar@libero.it wrote:
Hi all,
in my experience Pd works much better on Win2k than on Win98.
This is not surprising since you are using ASIO - the scheduler is supposed to be significantly more stable under 2000, but the standard audio drivers have additional buffering (in the range of 30
milliseconds).
ASIO circumvents these additional buffers allowing you to take
advantage
of the better overall performance of 2000.
Karl
Using Asio and Rme Hammerfall I could obtain good latency (under 50
ms)
with Cubase.
Under Win2k the best should be to use a multiprocessor Pc.
And remember you have to carefully look at the interrupts (perhaps installing the standard PC Hal helps).
Consider that you'll not be able to achieve good results using the
SB
Live with standard drivers and Pd (I tried).
With The Hammerfall and Pd the latency is acceptable but not ideal.
Don't know about the Terratec.
We'd need the Asio interfacing but is it worth ?
Wouldn't it be better to use Linux or (possibly in the future) Apple Mac OS X ?
Cheers
Alessandro Fogar
---------- Initial message -----------
From : Karl MacMillan karlmac@peabody.jhu.edu To : claudio c.scozzafava@tin.it Cc : pd-list@iem.kug.ac.at Date : Thu, 1 Mar 2001 22:15:40 -0500 (EST) Subject : Re: Latency in Audio
Claudio,
You are not going to do very well trying to get better results
out of
Windows ME / 2000 until PD supports something like ASIO. Even
then, I
don't think that the results are going to be that good. In some
tests
that I did recently the best full-duplex performance I could get
out
of
Windows ME was 73ms and Windows 2000 was 120ms - this was using a
minimal
'ideal' application with the MME interface. This was on a 700mhz
PIII and
a 933mhz PIII respectively.
Many companies have been advertising much better results under
Windows and
I have to say it seems that either a) these results represent
something
other than real world performance or b) the app runs almost
entirely
as a
kernel driver (gigasampler being the best example of this). If
you
really
want good latency you should try Linux or Irix. For the same test
that I
mentioned above I got latencies below 3ms using Linux 2.4.1 and
Alsa -
this is using standard programming interfaces and the same
computer
as the
Windows 2000 test. If you have to use windows, I would suggest downgrading to windows 98 as it is slightly better.
Karl
Hi, I've some problems with the latency in PD's Audio in/out. I use PD under Windows ME and Win2000 and works very well
(in
Win2K midi timing is more stable), but I've some problems to use it
for
my works in real time. I must use it for very little patch
(filtering,
ring modulation ...), but the latency is about 300ms.
I run it on a Athlon Th. 800 Mhz, 256 Ram, HD IBM 30Gb,
audioCard SBLive.
How can I reduce the latency? I will buy a Terratec 24/96,
so I
hope to reduce the latency time.
Can someone give me some councils?
With my best regards Claudio Scozzafava
| Karl W. MacMillan | | Computer Music Department | | Peabody Institute of the Johns Hopkins University | | karlmac@peabody.jhu.edu | | www.peabody.jhu.edu/~karlmac |
| Karl W. MacMillan | | Computer Music Department | | Peabody Institute of the Johns Hopkins University | | karlmac@peabody.jhu.edu | | www.peabody.jhu.edu/~karlmac |
On Tue, 6 Mar 2001, sfogar@libero.it wrote:
Hi Karl,
this is only partially true, I'm using Pd with standard (Rme) audio drivers, of course !
Hmmm - I was thinking that RME would simply put the MME layer over the same low-level drivers they use for ASIO. I guess the way to really determine this is to try to open the card twice with two applications - if both apps can use the hardware at the same time then they are using the standard Windows driver model, if not then they are circumventing the parts of that cause large latencies (kmixer).
And Karl, what about a pd porting to OS X when it will be ready, aren't you working on Apple hardware ?
I do run apple hardware and had the MacOS X public beta for a while - it looks really nice. As long as tcl/tk is available I think the port should be pretty easy (and if nothing else there are X servers available that run transparently with the native gui so it would be possible to use the unix tcl/tk). I did a partial FreeBSD port a while ago and that was basically just a matter of changing some includes (the thing I didn't finish was the audio I/O and then I needed the disk space again and had to get rid of FreeBSD). The MaxOS X port should be similar. One thing that would make all of this easier would be to replace the soundcard i/o portion with something like PortAudio (www.portaudio.com). That looks to be gaining some popularity and is really nice to use (I have used it on Windows and Mac).
Karl
Cheers
Alessandro Fogar
---------- Initial message -----------
From : Karl MacMillan karlmac@peabody.jhu.edu To : "sfogar@libero.it" sfogar@libero.it Cc : pd-list@iem.kug.ac.at Date : Mon, 5 Mar 2001 11:44:11 -0500 (EST) Subject : Re: Latency in Audio
On Fri, 2 Mar 2001, sfogar@libero.it wrote:
Hi all,
in my experience Pd works much better on Win2k than on Win98.
This is not surprising since you are using ASIO - the scheduler is supposed to be significantly more stable under 2000, but the standard audio drivers have additional buffering (in the range of 30
milliseconds).
ASIO circumvents these additional buffers allowing you to take
advantage
of the better overall performance of 2000.
Karl
Using Asio and Rme Hammerfall I could obtain good latency (under 50
ms)
with Cubase.
Under Win2k the best should be to use a multiprocessor Pc.
And remember you have to carefully look at the interrupts (perhaps installing the standard PC Hal helps).
Consider that you'll not be able to achieve good results using the
SB
Live with standard drivers and Pd (I tried).
With The Hammerfall and Pd the latency is acceptable but not ideal.
Don't know about the Terratec.
We'd need the Asio interfacing but is it worth ?
Wouldn't it be better to use Linux or (possibly in the future) Apple Mac OS X ?
Cheers
Alessandro Fogar
---------- Initial message -----------
From : Karl MacMillan karlmac@peabody.jhu.edu To : claudio c.scozzafava@tin.it Cc : pd-list@iem.kug.ac.at Date : Thu, 1 Mar 2001 22:15:40 -0500 (EST) Subject : Re: Latency in Audio
Claudio,
You are not going to do very well trying to get better results
out of
Windows ME / 2000 until PD supports something like ASIO. Even
then, I
don't think that the results are going to be that good. In some
tests
that I did recently the best full-duplex performance I could get
out
of
Windows ME was 73ms and Windows 2000 was 120ms - this was using a
minimal
'ideal' application with the MME interface. This was on a 700mhz
PIII and
a 933mhz PIII respectively.
Many companies have been advertising much better results under
Windows and
I have to say it seems that either a) these results represent
something
other than real world performance or b) the app runs almost
entirely
as a
kernel driver (gigasampler being the best example of this). If
you
really
want good latency you should try Linux or Irix. For the same test
that I
mentioned above I got latencies below 3ms using Linux 2.4.1 and
Alsa -
this is using standard programming interfaces and the same
computer
as the
Windows 2000 test. If you have to use windows, I would suggest downgrading to windows 98 as it is slightly better.
Karl
Hi, I've some problems with the latency in PD's Audio in/out. I use PD under Windows ME and Win2000 and works very well
(in
Win2K midi timing is more stable), but I've some problems to use it
for
my works in real time. I must use it for very little patch
(filtering,
ring modulation ...), but the latency is about 300ms.
I run it on a Athlon Th. 800 Mhz, 256 Ram, HD IBM 30Gb,
audioCard SBLive.
How can I reduce the latency? I will buy a Terratec 24/96,
so I
hope to reduce the latency time.
Can someone give me some councils?
With my best regards Claudio Scozzafava
| Karl W. MacMillan | | Computer Music Department | | Peabody Institute of the Johns Hopkins University | | karlmac@peabody.jhu.edu | | www.peabody.jhu.edu/~karlmac |
| Karl W. MacMillan | | Computer Music Department | | Peabody Institute of the Johns Hopkins University | | karlmac@peabody.jhu.edu | | www.peabody.jhu.edu/~karlmac |
| Karl W. MacMillan | | Computer Music Department | | Peabody Institute of the Johns Hopkins University | | karlmac@peabody.jhu.edu | | www.peabody.jhu.edu/~karlmac |