Re: [linux-audio-user] alsa rme96 jack - 186 msec latency?

Paul Davis wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-09-07 at 01:36 +0200, Michael Rudolf wrote:
> > I bought an RME Digi96/8 PST because it was said to have good Linux
> > support and very low latency, therefore perfectly suitable for
> > hd-recording and the like.
>
> where does it say this? the digi96/8 is an entirely different product
> (different h/w design, different chipset, different interactions with
> the host CPU) from the digi9652, HDSP and HDSP9652 systems. this latter
> range is well supported and works exceedingly well on almost all
> systems. the digi96/8 has support, but it does not work particularly
> well, especially not for low latency work (this is not because of the
> driver design (other than the overall way that ALSA works), but because
> of the h/w design).

Thanks for the info Paul. So do you say the digi96/8 is significantly less
well supported on Linux than the Hammerfall/HDSP? If so, shouldn't that
info be on alsa soundcard matrix?

Since the Hammerfall series didn't seem appropriate for my needs (digital
I/O only, high cost), it seemed that the digi96/8 and the M-Audio Delta
1010 LT would be good alternatives. Would the 1010 LT have been the better
choice? What other alternatives are there for hd recording on Linux when
Hammerfall/HDSP is not an option?

> as for issues with xruns and delays, you need to tell us what kernel,
> what distribution, and what version of ALSA.

Sound Driver:3.8.1a-980706 (ALSA v1.0.9b emulation code)
Kernel: Linux neurose 2.6.12-oci2.mdk with realtime lsm module and
PREEMPT/PREEMPT_BKL enabled. Distribution is PCLinuxOS P91 fully updated
and with the Jack packages from thac
(jackit-0.100.1-050708.1.pclo2005.thac).

Thanks
Michael
Received on Fri Sep 9 00:15:09 2005