hello,
is it possible to get low latency with Pd and asio drivers on windows? i have a usb audio card (hercules dj console, don't lough), that works very well with audiomulch (4ms latency), but with Pd i have dropouts with the default 70ms delay.
as the usb card works perfectly with audiomulch, why doesn't it work with pd? both use portaudio? are there any command line parameter i have to apply?
(btw, how do i get a list of alle the command line parameters with pd 0.38-test10?)
I had problems too, trying to start pd 0.38test10 with an emagic emi 2/6. (Won't run at all). Seems that the portaudio code of pd is less than optimal. Not sure if the way to solve this is writing native ASIO code, as it is done currently by Tim and Tom (;)), or to fix the portaudio stuff.
Guenter
On Mon, 22 Nov 2004, smoerk wrote:
hello,
is it possible to get low latency with Pd and asio drivers on windows? i have a usb audio card (hercules dj console, don't lough), that works very well with audiomulch (4ms latency), but with Pd i have dropouts with the default 70ms delay.
as the usb card works perfectly with audiomulch, why doesn't it work with pd? both use portaudio? are there any command line parameter i have to apply?
(btw, how do i get a list of alle the command line parameters with pd 0.38-test10?)
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://iem.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list
� wrote:
I had problems too, trying to start pd 0.38test10 with an emagic emi 2/6. (Won't run at all). Seems that the portaudio code of pd is less than optimal. Not sure if the way to solve this is writing native ASIO code, as it is done currently by Tim and Tom (;)), or to fix the portaudio stuff.
Guenter
but it works perfectly with audiomulch. it seems it's not a problem of portaudio (afaik ross bencina wrote portaudio and audiomulch), but the combination of portaudio and pd.
but it works perfectly with audiomulch. it seems it's not a problem of portaudio (afaik ross bencina wrote portaudio and audiomulch), but the combination of portaudio and pd.
We decided to support the development of native drivers for ASIO and Coreaudio since these interfaces seem to be more stable than the Portaudio API and in the end all audio drivers would be native and the Portaudio (source code) overhead be gone. I found it extremely nerve-consuming to search for bugs both in PD and Portaudio and to always find some here and there.
best greetings, Thomas
On Mon, 22 Nov 2004, smoerk wrote:
Seems that the portaudio code of pd is less than optimal. Not sure if the way to solve this is writing native ASIO code, as it is done currently by Tim and Tom (;)), or to fix the portaudio stuff.
Guenter
but it works perfectly with audiomulch. it seems it's not a problem of portaudio (afaik ross bencina wrote portaudio and audiomulch), but the combination of portaudio and pd.
Thats what I meant with "the portaudio code of pd". Its the way pd uses portaudio that is wrong. First, I think it uses the maximum number of buffers. Then, the pablio (portaudio blocking I/O) thing is a bad hack, as portaudio is meant to be used in a callback model.
Guenter
PS: I have been talking with Ross about this and he sort of agrees, he is sitting in my office.
PS: I have been talking with Ross about this and he sort of agrees, he is sitting in my office.
Oh well, please tell him that the Coreaudio implementation does not try to set the sample rate, it just accepts the one presented by the audio card. (Which results in 96 kHz in my case, with resampling by Coreaudio from 44,1 kHz @ 8 channels results in about 35% cpu)
best greetings, Thomas
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004, Thomas Grill wrote:
PS: I have been talking with Ross about this and he sort of agrees, he is sitting in my office.
Oh well, please tell him that the Coreaudio implementation does not try to set the sample rate, it just accepts the one presented by the audio card. (Which results in 96 kHz in my case, with resampling by Coreaudio from 44,1 kHz @ 8 channels results in about 35% cpu)
Ok, I will, but I doubt that he will take the responsibility, he is working on Windows, and most probably was relying on the bug reports that get sent when something is not working. Maybe in a similar way as someone is waiting to get feedback on the ASIO support for pd currently ?
Guenter
a bad hack, as portaudio is meant to be used in a callback model.
i hope, i will be successful in rewriting the scheduler to support callback-based dsp computation
maybe this also improves the latency with portaudio ...
cheers ... tim
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004, Tim Blechmann wrote:
a bad hack, as portaudio is meant to be used in a callback model.
i hope, i will be successful in rewriting the scheduler to support callback-based dsp computation
maybe this also improves the latency with portaudio ...
FYI, someone has already done this. The code is in jack_0_35_0_cb branch. Don't know if this is useful at that point. It will surely improve latency for portaudio because portaudio is also callback based. Still someone needs to rewrite the portaudio part for this to work.
Guenter
cheers ... tim
-- mailto:TimBlechmann@gmx.de ICQ: 96771783 http://www.mokabar.tk
After one look at this planet any visitor from outer space would say "I want to see the manager." William S. Burroughs
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://iem.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list
FYI, someone has already done this. The code is in jack_0_35_0_cb branch. Don't know if this is useful at that point. It will surely improve latency for portaudio because portaudio is also callback based. Still someone needs to rewrite the portaudio part for this to work.
thanks ... that's interesting ... i'll check that ...
tim
Well, the pd code, unless I've written it wrong somehow, sets the total portaudio buffer size roughly to the requested latency in samples. Also, having Pd poll a fifo that's filled in by the callback routine should only add another 64 samples of latency, plus whatever the OS wakeup latency is. Certainly this shouldn't be more than 20 msec or so on a reasonably modern system. So I don't know how the latency is getting up to 70!
Anyway, I'm planning to upgrade to Portaudio 0.19 on all platforms for PD version 39... I'm playing it conservatively for 0.38 because I've almost got it all working and don't want to break things now.
cheers Miller
On Mon, Nov 22, 2004 at 11:53:42PM +0100, gnter geiger wrote:
On Mon, 22 Nov 2004, smoerk wrote:
Seems that the portaudio code of pd is less than optimal. Not sure if the way to solve this is writing native ASIO code, as it is done currently by Tim and Tom (;)), or to fix the portaudio stuff.
Guenter
but it works perfectly with audiomulch. it seems it's not a problem of portaudio (afaik ross bencina wrote portaudio and audiomulch), but the combination of portaudio and pd.
Thats what I meant with "the portaudio code of pd". Its the way pd uses portaudio that is wrong. First, I think it uses the maximum number of buffers. Then, the pablio (portaudio blocking I/O) thing is a bad hack, as portaudio is meant to be used in a callback model.
Guenter
PS: I have been talking with Ross about this and he sort of agrees, he is sitting in my office.
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://iem.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list
but it works perfectly with audiomulch. it seems it's not a problem of portaudio (afaik ross bencina wrote portaudio and audiomulch), but the combination of portaudio and pd.
he possibly uses another way to compute dsp ...
tim ... who is still looking for beta testers for the native asio code
hello,
what about midi? last time i tied on windows, a midi loop was 100ms. (pd 37.4) is there any plan to have a lower midi latency?
by the way, I've an OT question : what usb/midi interface work fine on linux?
thanks Cyrille
� a écrit :
I had problems too, trying to start pd 0.38test10 with an emagic emi 2/6. (Won't run at all). Seems that the portaudio code of pd is less than optimal. Not sure if the way to solve this is writing native ASIO code, as it is done currently by Tim and Tom (;)), or to fix the portaudio stuff.
Guenter
On Mon, 22 Nov 2004, smoerk wrote:
hello,
is it possible to get low latency with Pd and asio drivers on windows? i have a usb audio card (hercules dj console, don't lough), that works very well with audiomulch (4ms latency), but with Pd i have dropouts with the default 70ms delay.
as the usb card works perfectly with audiomulch, why doesn't it work with pd? both use portaudio? are there any command line parameter i have to apply?
(btw, how do i get a list of alle the command line parameters with pd 0.38-test10?)
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://iem.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://iem.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list
cyrille henry wrote:
hello,
by the way, I've an OT question : what usb/midi interface work fine on linux?
the behringer-mixer won't work with the usb (but you probably know that ;-))
apart from that, i can only recommend having a look at the homepage of the usbmidi drivers: http://homepage3.nifty.com/StudioBreeze/software/usbmidi.html
we are successfully using roland UM-1 (or 2?), but i cannot give you any numbers concerning latency (but it feels better than 100ms roundtrip)
mfg.as.dr IOhannes
thanks Cyrille
IOhannes m zmoelnig a écrit :
the behringer-mixer won't work with the usb (but you probably know that ;-))
it does not work on windows... (it does on 2 of the 3 windows comptuter I tried in fact)
apart from that, i can only recommend having a look at the homepage of the usbmidi drivers: http://homepage3.nifty.com/StudioBreeze/software/usbmidi.html
the fastlane i use should be working, but pd recognize only 1 in and 1 out (got 2), and input does not work. i don't know if it's a pd problem or a pb regarding the instalation of the driver (the drivers was includ in the linux distro i use).
we are successfully using roland UM-1 (or 2?),
ok, i'll try to find a friend using such interface to make a try.
but i cannot give you any numbers concerning latency (but it feels better than 100ms roundtrip)
I hope so : 100ms is too much...
thanks cyrille
mfg.as.dr IOhannes
thanks Cyrille
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://iem.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list
Hallo Hannes, list!
IOhannes m zmoelnig schrieb:
the behringer-mixer won't work with the usb (but you probably know that ;-))
Are you speaking about the beringer MIDI controller with the motorfaders (Behringer BCF2000) ? I thought they work in linux. (I ask because I wanted to buy this device ...)
I also searched google and i schould work on linux ... ?
Thanks, LG Georg
hello,
Georg Holzmann a écrit :
Hallo Hannes, list!
IOhannes m zmoelnig schrieb:
the behringer-mixer won't work with the usb (but you probably know that ;-))
Are you speaking about the beringer MIDI controller with the motorfaders (Behringer BCF2000) ? I thought they work in linux.
yes, i think Iohannes was speaking of this one, because my brother own one. we were using it on windows during the performance on the graz convention. i did not try using it on linux. anyway, even on windows, we do not use the usb port. we just use midi in and out with an external midi/usb interface : internal usb/midi does not work very good. maybee new version should fix this problem...
(I ask because I wanted to buy this device ...)
all i can say is that is a good choice. the fader are not the best fader ever seen, but they are quite good. better than on my motor mix (for 1/4 of the price). intergration on pd is very easy. we add no problem so far using it.
cheers cyrille
I also searched google and i schould work on linux ... ?
Thanks, LG Georg
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://iem.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list
cyrille henry wrote:
hello,
Are you speaking about the beringer MIDI controller with the motorfaders (Behringer BCF2000) ? I thought they work in linux.
yes, i think Iohannes was speaking of this one, because my brother own one. we were using it on windows during the performance on the graz convention. i did not try using it on linux. anyway, even on windows, we do not use the usb port. we just use midi in and out with an external midi/usb interface :
yes, i was referring to this very device. and yes, we are using it with an external usb2midi device too (on linux), because the usb-out of the bcf does not work on linux
but it is working fine in this mode (apart from the weirdness, that the (infinite !) knobs refuse to work when after they have reached 127. you have to reset them manually (via midi).
mfg.,a.sdr IOhannes
Hallo, IOhannes m zmoelnig hat gesagt: // IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
the behringer-mixer won't work with the usb (but you probably know that ;-))
apart from that, i can only recommend having a look at the homepage of the usbmidi drivers: http://homepage3.nifty.com/StudioBreeze/software/usbmidi.html
Ooh, that's an old page quite out of date. ALSA's snd-usb-audio driver is the way to go today. ;) The advantage is the ALSA sequencer system, which has no really good equivalent in OSS.
It might be, that some Midisport devices use firmware, which isn't really worth the trouble, IMO. Personally I'm very happy with the Evolution UC-33, which is just plug and play, but comes with sliders, which isn't what everone needs. Edirol also seems to be very fine.
Ciao
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org__
apart from that, i can only recommend having a look at the homepage of the usbmidi drivers: http://homepage3.nifty.com/StudioBreeze/software/usbmidi.html
since this is not really related to the subject any more, would you mind to change it to "linux midi devices" or similar?
would help to keep track of the mails ...
thanks ... tim
Hi, It would be great if you could simply try out the native ASIO implementation of devel_0_38 and give some feedback. I'm having fun with my RME HDSP, running at measured latencies below 10 ms. With Portaudio i never achieved latencies below 25 ms. It works mostly, although with some things still to fix. Tim and i are positive that the latency can still be reduced.
best greetings, Thomas
I had problems too, trying to start pd 0.38test10 with an emagic emi 2/6. (Won't run at all). Seems that the portaudio code of pd is less than optimal. Not sure if the way to solve this is writing native ASIO code, as it is done currently by Tim and Tom (;)), or to fix the portaudio stuff.
Guenter
On Mon, 22 Nov 2004, smoerk wrote:
hello,
is it possible to get low latency with Pd and asio drivers on windows? i have a usb audio card (hercules dj console, don't lough), that works very well with audiomulch (4ms latency), but with Pd i have dropouts with the default 70ms delay.
as the usb card works perfectly with audiomulch, why doesn't it work with pd? both use portaudio? are there any command line parameter i have to apply?
(btw, how do i get a list of alle the command line parameters with pd 0.38-test10?)
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
http://iem.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
On Mon, Nov 22, 2004 at 11:01:08PM +0100, g?nter geiger wrote:
I had problems too, trying to start pd 0.38test10 with an emagic emi 2/6. (Won't run at all).
i get that with the experimental native ASIO support. (wont launch at all, crashes in ASIO_GetDriverInfo*() or something..)
Seems that the portaudio code of pd is less than optimal. Not sure if the way to solve this is writing native ASIO code, as it is done currently by Tim and Tom (;)), or to fix the portaudio stuff.
portaudio v19 support was added in 038 (thanks Miller, or whoever..), build portaudio: ./configure --with-winapi=asio and add -DPA19 to pd makefile and you should get it.. works great here with 128 buffer...
On Mon, 22 Nov 2004, carmen wrote:
portaudio v19 support was added in 038 (thanks Miller, or whoever..), build portaudio: ./configure --with-winapi=asio and add -DPA19 to pd makefile and you should get it.. works great here with 128 buffer...
Ah, interesting. Will try that ASAP. Thanks a lot. Will try the native support too, now that its there, and report my findings.
Guenter
I had problems too, trying to start pd 0.38test10 with an emagic emi 2/6.(Won't run at all). Seems that the portaudio code of pd is less than optimal. Not sure if the way to solve this is writing native ASIO code, as it is done currently by Tim and Tom (;)), or to fix the portaudio stuff.
i'm not familiar with the hercules dj console ... but i suppose, it's common for usb devices to work with a block size of multiples of 441 (at least with my old quattro that didn't run with portaudio, too)
for these devices, i still have some problems to reduce the input latency with the native asio implementation ... you could at least try it and give me some feedback ...
in addition to that, i'm currently working on the main scheduler ... it would reduce the latency even more, if we compute the dsp at the time of the asio callback ... (hopefully i can add it to the cvs in a couple of days)
cheers ... tim
-
carmen -
cyrille henry -
Frank Barknecht -
Georg Holzmann -
g�nter geiger -
IOhannes m zmoelnig -
Miller Puckette -
smoerk -
Thomas Grill -
Tim Blechmann