Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] introduction & ideas
From: Paul Davis (pbd_AT_Op.Net)
Date: Tue Mar 05 2002 - 17:10:41 EET
>> >As the timestamps are in, I prefer to think of a "series of MIDI
>> >events" as - guess what - a stream! Even if it's a variable data
>> > rate stream of structured data, it's still a stream with a steady
>> > heartbeat, in the form of the clock used for the timestamping.
>>
>> sure, but this doesn't change my point that the clocks run at
>> different rates.
>
>Ok, I was of course thinking of timestamping MIDI events with the
>"audio clock". No problem when running a sequencer as a part of the
>audio network, but it does get messy to timestamp the MIDI events.
>
>
>> its precisely because audio/video are continuous streams that we
>> can add a consistent delay to the system, and people are
>> (reasonably) happy.
>
>Yeah... The stream frame rate is the clock.
the window/macos worlds have been pretty unhappy with this
arrangement, which i am convinced is part of the reason for the
emergence of these newer interfaces which accept pre-queued
data. timing MIDI with the audio clock just doesn't work well
enough. even at the best typical resolution (1.3msec, or 64 frames at
48kHz), the MIDI sloppiness is something i've seen lots of complaints
about on vst-plugins, for example. granted, some interfaces can go
lower than this, but its not clear its a good idea for the overall
system. and besides, what we want, ideally, is a clock running at the
MIDI rate.
--p
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Tue Mar 05 2002 - 21:58:40 EET