[PD] firewire is dead?

[Max]

I just got a RME Fireface UCX and will test it on linux soon. it has a USB class compliant mode, so it should run. The documentation says that the latency in the class compliant mode is not as good as with the proprietary driver. It would be interesting to have numbers here how much better exactly the rme driver is over the class compliant.
I guess i'd simply connect output to input and measure the delay? Someone must have done this before, Is there a standard method? A patch?

I must say that I am a bit disappointed about the drivers for os x. I installed the firewire and USB drivers and updated the firmware, with the result that the settings app now crashes and the firmware update also quits unsuccessfully now. in the regular mode now all the led on the device are on and the sound is chpped up. USB class compliant mode however still works. i mailed the support. Disappointing for a device i just spend >1000 eur on. also the rme fireface driver is the only process which isn't 64bit that is loaded by the os.

Am 18.10.2012 um 14:24 schrieb Peter Venus <news at petervenus.de>:

> a quick look on ffado.org brought up, that RMEs fireface 400 and 800
> have now the "full support" status.
> i haven´t tested this yet, but if this works, this would be a perfect solution i think.
> anyone checked this yet?
> cheers, peter
> 
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 17. Oktober 2012 um 23:33 Uhr
> Von: "Ed Kelly" <morph_2016 at yahoo.co.uk>
> An: "Rob Bothof" <rbothof at xs4all.nl>, "pd-list at iem.at" <pd-list at iem.at>
> Betreff: Re: [PD] firewire is dead?
> Jack + fa101?
> I have never, ever got this to give me anything other than glitchy, unusable audio!
> 
> > 
> >actually it was still called smartcard..
> >either how i use it still with edirol fa101
> >never failed me, rocksolid performance with jack
> >
> >On 10/16/2012 6:11 PM, yvan volochine wrote:
> >> On 10/16/2012 02:45 PM, patrick wrote:
> >>> good, i was a little bit worried about using a pci-e firewire adapter
> >>> for audio in linux / jack.
> >>> 
> >>> about latency, yesterday i used jdelay to measure the round-trip of my
> >>> latency, at 44100 with 128, 3 = 17 ms (jack reports 8 ms). at 96000 i
> >>> get 7 ms, BUT my cpu seems to be working hard and i get glitches. so the
> >>> question is:
> >>> 
> >>> with a faster cpu, can i lower the latency?
> >> 
> >> yes =)
> >> 
> >> i.e. I have to use huge buffer sizes (so more latency) because of my old Intel Core Duo 1.6Ghz (great thinkpad x60 with expresscard slot for my FW card though)...
> >> 
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Pd-list at iem.at mailing list
> >UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
> >
> >
> > 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Pd-list at iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Pd-list at iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list