Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
From: Steve Harris (S.W.Harris_AT_ecs.soton.ac.uk)
Date: Tue Jun 08 2004 - 19:41:27 EEST
On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 08:40:54 +0200, Marek Peteraj wrote:
> > > > The point I didnt make is that JAMin /cannot/ be implemented efficiently
> > > > as a set of plugins. The (majority, non-ladspa) DSP code is very
> > > > intermingled, to make it run in realtime.
> > >
> > > How much DSP code is non-ladspa in JAMin? (approx. in %-age?)
> >
> > 90%
> >
> > The non-ladspa DSP code is 3800 lines (not inc. libraries), the LADSPA code
> > (including preamble, not libraries) is < 400.
>
> Which part of that DSP code would be impossible to implement separately
> as ladspa?
Not impossible, just not efficiently. The EQ, xover and metering is all
combined together as they share a lot of internal (non time domain) data.
LADSPA can only input and output time domain audio data and control data.
Neither is appropraite, so you would have to do a lot of (expensive and
high latnecy) conversions before the inputs and outputs of each plugin.
- Steve
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Tue Jun 08 2004 - 19:38:46 EEST