[PD-dev] Alternative to Portaudio under Windows
Miller Puckette
mpuckett at imusic1.ucsd.edu
Sun Sep 14 17:52:41 CEST 2008
Well, I've seen latencies down to 6 msec in linux using ringbuffers. They
theoretically only add 64 samples of latency. So I don't think that in itself
is the problem.
I think the problem in Windows is the "audio server" that non-ASIO audio I/O
apparently always goes through. Also, I think it's not feasible to use audio
callbacks in Windows since Pd can make system calls (e.g., allocate memory)
during the callback -- linux and Mac allow this but Windows doc says not
to do that. (This shold be a leftover warning from older times but I've been
heeding it anyway.)
cheers
Miller
On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 05:42:12PM +0200, Thomas Grill wrote:
> Hi,
> the incredible latency under Windows is actually not caused by
> portaudio.
> It's rather used by the fact that a ringbuffer is used to transfer
> audio data to the driver side. I don't know if the newer callback-
> based implementation (pd 0.41 or so, see the pd audio dialog) is also
> working under Windows - it should reduce the latency drastically.
> gr~~~
>
> Am 14.09.2008 um 11:54 schrieb PSPunch:
>
> >
> >Hi,
> >
> >
> >This was just a thought and not a theme I need immediate answers.
> >
> >I believe it is common understanding that Pd on Windows has much
> >latency
> >issues than on other platforms.
> >
> >Has there been any attempts like, say, add native ASIO support to Pd?
> >Is there any specific process towards the end of the chain which makes
> >it difficult to add new types of outputs?
> >
> >
> >--
> >David Shimamoto
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Pd-dev mailing list
> >Pd-dev at iem.at
> >http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pd-dev mailing list
> Pd-dev at iem.at
> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
More information about the Pd-dev
mailing list