Is there any reason this would happen? I have refrained from using 0.39 because I have to set the delay to about 90 ms to use both input and output, whereas with 0.38 I am usually fine with 10 ms. So does this mean something's wrong, or is 0.39 just more expensive? I want the new features.
-Chuckk
Hi Chuckk
What platform are you on? I've had no troubles with linux, but on os x I've had a lot of audio clicks. The solution for me was to run pd in jack instead of portaudio - better latency, no clicks and on some heavier patches my cputime meter drops by 15%...
cheers dafydd
On 5/20/06, Chuckk Hubbard badmuthahubbard@gmail.com wrote:
Is there any reason this would happen? I have refrained from using 0.39 because I have to set the delay to about 90 ms to use both input and output, whereas with 0.38 I am usually fine with 10 ms. So does this mean something's wrong, or is 0.39 just more expensive? I want the new features.
-Chuckk
-- "Far and away the best prize that life has to offer is the chance to work hard at work worth doing." -Theodore Roosevelt
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Hmm. I'm on WinXP. I don't quite understand how to change this portaudio business... I did it before with Csound, but someone provided the necessary files. I have always used ASIO for lower latency, but it does indeed seem like not using it improves Pd 0.39-2 somewhat.
On 5/20/06, dafydd hughes dafydd@sideshowmedia.ca wrote:
Hi Chuckk
What platform are you on? I've had no troubles with linux, but on os x I've had a lot of audio clicks. The solution for me was to run pd in jack instead of portaudio - better latency, no clicks and on some heavier patches my cputime meter drops by 15%...
cheers dafydd
On 5/20/06, Chuckk Hubbard badmuthahubbard@gmail.com wrote:
Is there any reason this would happen? I have refrained from using 0.39 because I have to set the delay to about 90 ms to use both input and output, whereas with 0.38 I am usually fine with 10 ms. So does this mean something's wrong, or is 0.39 just more expensive? I want the new features.
-Chuckk
-- "Far and away the best prize that life has to offer is the chance to work hard at work worth doing." -Theodore Roosevelt
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
-- www.sideshowmedia.ca
On Sat May 20, 2006 at 12:53:34AM -0400, Chuckk Hubbard wrote:
Hmm. I'm on WinXP. I don't quite understand how to change this portaudio business...
you mean change from pa v19 to v18? unless the pa18 support has been ripped out already, you can use it by removing -DPA19 from the makefile..
I have always used ASIO for lower latency, but it does indeed seem like not using it improves Pd 0.39-2 somewhat.
that's odd. as MME/DS has an unavoidable latency due to system software-mixing. i'd be sure youre actually using ASIO before you claim this. PA has a way of gracefully falling back onto DS.. to be sure, start->run->services.msc and disable and stop "Windows Audio" and try again. and be sure to check the buffer settings. any hardware made in the last 5 years will work with 256 samples (and perhaps 128) with ASIO..
and be sure to check the buffer settings. any hardware made in the last 5 years will work with 256 samples (and perhaps 128) with ASIO..
if you cant get 256 sample latency with ASIO, i'd file a bug. and maybe in the bug suggest the native implementation of ASIO from devel_pd as an existing solution. (since debugging the PA<>ASIO implemenetation would take about as much time as merging it)
the total latency should be a bit more, (256 samples for ASIO + 64 for pd's internal blocksize) / 44100 and maybe a ms or so for the DA. so around 8 ms. which shuld be acceptable unless youre a scientist.. in which case you can use the RT kernel, set the ALSA/jack buffer to 32 samples, and run pd-devel with the cb-scheduler..
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
You were right. I'm glad I asked about this. In 0.38, under ASIO, I only get one option for output and for input. In 0.39, it offers me the whole list. After I went down the list and actually selected ASIO for both, I can get down to about 7 ms with both input and output active and still run my sequencer. Awesome. I'm on 0.39 from now on.
Incidentally, at least on my system, ASIO only runs with 48 K or 96 K, there is no 44.1.
Thanks for all the info! -Chuckk
On 5/20/06, _@whats-your.name <_@whats-your.name> wrote:
and be sure to check the buffer settings. any hardware made in the last 5 years will work with 256 samples (and perhaps 128) with ASIO..
if you cant get 256 sample latency with ASIO, i'd file a bug. and maybe in the bug suggest the native implementation of ASIO from devel_pd as an existing solution. (since debugging the PA<>ASIO implemenetation would take about as much time as merging it)
the total latency should be a bit more, (256 samples for ASIO + 64 for pd's internal blocksize) / 44100 and maybe a ms or so for the DA. so around 8 ms. which shuld be acceptable unless youre a scientist.. in which case you can use the RT kernel, set the ALSA/jack buffer to 32 samples, and run pd-devel with the cb-scheduler..
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Hey dafydd~
I'm getting that horrid dropout on OSX too, whenever I try to implement any type of synthesis. Sampling works ok, but I want to start getting dirty with the serious algorithms, and this drop out is unacceptible!
I have Jack Pilot, is there anything to configure in vanilla Pd 0.39-2 to get this fix working? I hope it works, it would really get me more motivated to be hardcore into Pd this summer.
~Kyle
On 5/19/06, dafydd hughes dafydd@sideshowmedia.ca wrote:
Hi Chuckk
What platform are you on? I've had no troubles with linux, but on os x I've had a lot of audio clicks. The solution for me was to run pd in jack instead of portaudio - better latency, no clicks and on some heavier patches my cputime meter drops by 15%...
cheers dafydd
On 5/20/06, Chuckk Hubbard badmuthahubbard@gmail.com wrote:
Is there any reason this would happen? I have refrained from using 0.39 because I have to set the delay to about 90 ms to use both input and output, whereas with 0.38 I am usually fine with 10 ms. So does this mean something's wrong, or is 0.39 just more expensive? I want the new features.
-Chuckk
-- "Far and away the best prize that life has to offer is the chance to work hard at work worth doing." -Theodore Roosevelt
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
-- www.sideshowmedia.ca
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Hey Kyle
I'm using Hans-Christoph's Pd-0.39.2 extended test 3, which is compiled with jack support - I don't think the binary on Miller's site is, although I'm pretty consistently wrong about many things.
here's the link to hc's installers page: http://at.or.at/hans/pd/installers.html
I don't think I've done any fancy configuration in jack itself - just set the buffer size nice and low and make sure jack is selected in the media menu. Seems to work beautifully, and gosh 0.39 is fantastic.
Good luck!
cheers dafydd
On 5/20/06, Kyle Klipowicz kyleklip@gmail.com wrote:
Hey dafydd~
I'm getting that horrid dropout on OSX too, whenever I try to implement any type of synthesis. Sampling works ok, but I want to start getting dirty with the serious algorithms, and this drop out is unacceptible!
I have Jack Pilot, is there anything to configure in vanilla Pd 0.39-2 to get this fix working? I hope it works, it would really get me more motivated to be hardcore into Pd this summer.
~Kyle
On 5/19/06, dafydd hughes dafydd@sideshowmedia.ca wrote:
Hi Chuckk
What platform are you on? I've had no troubles with linux, but on os x I've had a lot of audio clicks. The solution for me was to run pd in jack instead of portaudio - better latency, no clicks and on some heavier patches my cputime meter drops by 15%...
cheers dafydd
On 5/20/06, Chuckk Hubbard badmuthahubbard@gmail.com wrote:
Is there any reason this would happen? I have refrained from using 0.39 because I have to set the delay to about 90 ms to use both input and output, whereas with 0.38 I am usually fine with 10 ms. So does this mean something's wrong, or is 0.39 just more expensive? I want the new features.
-Chuckk
-- "Far and away the best prize that life has to offer is the chance to work hard at work worth doing." -Theodore Roosevelt
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
-- www.sideshowmedia.ca
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
--
http://theradioproject.com http://perhapsidid.blogspot.com
(((())))(()()((((((((()())))()(((((((())()()())()))) (())))))(()))))))))))))(((((((((((()()))))))))((()))) ))(((((((((((())))())))))))))))))))__________ _____())))))(((((((((((((()))))))))))_______ ((((((())))))))))))((((((((000)))oOOOOOO
-
_＠whats-your.name -
Chuckk Hubbard -
dafydd hughes -
Kyle Klipowicz