On Tuesday 28 September 2010 16:21:48 Patrick Shirkey wrote:
> I'm pretty sure that this is the reasoning behind going with the filter
> option. The resources are available even on a eeepc as Ken has reported so
> it is not really a big deal as jamin is intended for use post pro.
I don't actually remember Ken saying that he runs jamin on his eeepc. True, he
is running an awful lot of software on there, but I doubt that he is adding
10ms artificial delay from jamin to his live-setup...
> If you want to have it running during production then you should probably
> just get a very powerful machine or invest the time to correct the issues
> as near as possible to source.
Yes, a 1.8GHz turion64 running jack (3x1028@email-addr-hidden) and an ardour session with
two stereo tracks, 4 plugins (SC4-compressor and an eq for each stereo) is to
weak to also run jamin.
Please get a grip! I am not using jamin on an under-spec machine. And I am not
mis-using it during mixing/recording of a >48-channels session either. I even
stopped dreaming about using jamin for live-foh usage (because of the delay
introduced by the filter).
All I am saying is that jamin takes up a good amount of resources for its
processing. [*]
And I combined Fons' argument that the filter used is not a good implementation
and probably not needed anyway with my idea of a simpler but equally useful
tool.
Have fun,
Arnold
[*] It would be uber-cool if one could switch off that analyzer-view to save
processing cycles.
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Sep 28 2010 - 20:15:06 EEST