Re: [linux-audio-user] Delta 1010

Hi Joachim,

On Wednesday 01 Jun 2005 14:59, Joachim Schiele wrote:
> On Wednesday 01 June 2005 14:46, Florian Schmidt wrote:
> > On Wed, 01 Jun 2005 12:32:10 +0200
> >
> > Mario Lang <mlang@email-addr-hidden> wrote:
> > > > What about the driver quality?
> > >
> > > And, what are the minimum period sizes for both cards?
> > > 64 for the RME afaik, does the Delta manage 32?
> >
> > my delta 66 handles 32 frames just fine :) I can even go down to 8 [just
> > running jack though. haven't used it for anything serious, as the idle
> > cycle load is already at 20% with this on my 1.2 ghz athlon :). no xruns
> > though]
> >
> > As the delta 1010 is basically the same chip afaik, it should give
> > identical results..
>
> So one question still remains: what advantage(s) would a RME card have
> compared to M-Audio?

I use a Delta 44 all the time, they are very well functioning with good sound
quality.
I'd expect that you would be able to get even better sound quality using an
RME card... though at a considerably higher price.

Several years ago we did some work (at my day job) with Hammerfall cards and I
recall that these cards provide their data in an noninterleaved format. Since
this is what you generally want it is possible the CPU load will go down
since decoding/encoding isn't necessary.

Besides, using anything lower than 64 frames is in my mind purely academic,
there are so many other latency inducers that it's just not feasible.

/Robert

>
> Greets,
> Joachim

-- 
http://spamatica.se/musicsite/