Re: [LAU] Successor/replacement for RME HDSP+Multiface?

On Friday 29 August 2014 03:21:27 Kaza Kore did opine
And Gene did reply:
> > From: gheskett@email-addr-hidden
> > To: linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden
> > Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 22:45:41 -0400
> > Subject: Re: [LAU] Successor/replacement for RME HDSP+Multiface?
> >
> > On Thursday 28 August 2014 21:14:48 Kaza Kore did opine
> >
> > And Gene did reply:
> > > > From: gheskett@email-addr-hidden
> > > > To: linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden
> > > > Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 20:37:53 -0400
> > > > Subject: Re: [LAU] Successor/replacement for RME HDSP+Multiface?
> > > >
> > > >...Hi-8 tape...
> > >
> > > I thought we were talking about the future here! The 80s wants its
> > > property back!!
> > >
> > > Also Hi8 is an analogue format so everything in the post is plain
> > > bollocks! Maybe you meant Digital8?? Still 15 years old and any
> > > tape format is pretty much dead and definitely not the future!
> >
> > Not this one, it uses metal tape in the same casette as a Hi-8 would
> > use, but about a tenner more expensive. and is "digital Hi-8"
> > format.
> >
> > Reasonably sharp too at 720p. Go look it up, its a Sony HandyCam
> > DCR- TRV460 NTSC. and about 11 years old IIRC.
>
> So not Hi8 then! :p (If you look I did mention Digital8 too.) Not sure
> where you get the idea it's 720P capable! Specs on website state
> 640x480 and you even state in the name you provided it's NTSC, which
> is never 720P, same as PAL and SECAM aren't. They are old, SD
> standards. 720/1080 P/I are very different beasts really.
>
> Anyway it's probably more important to talk about the standardised DV25
> and DV50 protocol all these commercial/prosumer products use for
> communication that tape/card formats. There are some Sony and
> Panasonic camera that do this fine over USB so it's not impossible or
> a problem with USB itself. I see yours (and apparently many others)
> claim to have some kind of USB Streaming but for some reason it's not
> usually full quality, as you would get from Firewire. Wonder why...

The std says the speed is there. But on this Asus M2N-SLI Deluxe
motherboard that cost $287 USD when I bought it, all USB ports claim to be
USB2.0. The throughput to/from a hard drive in a self powered usb box
that I have 2 of, one 40Gb, one 300Gb drive, has a hard time out running a
floppy disk. No mistakes ever, but the usable bandwidth simply is not
there. My next door neighbor bought one of the 40's the same day I bought
mine, runs it as a backup on her windows machines. On her windows boxes,
it has no problem moving data in either direction at about 50 megabytes a
second.

A 640x480 USB2.0 camera, plugged into the rear port of a D525MW Atom
powered board, only make 3 frames a second.

The linux version of USB is a 1 legged dog in comparison. Why we put up
with that poor usb performance is beyond me. We had the original USB in
full usage on linux a good year ahead of the Redmond version, but IMSNHO,
linux has been sitting on its butt for at least a decade.

What the bloody hell, a copy of the std reference is well within the
financial reach of both Red Hat and Ubuntu & even SuSe. But I don't see
any improvements in the speeds here, and I am currently running a 3.16.0
kernel on a quad core phenom.

Cheers, Gene Heskett

-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>
US V Castleman, SCOTUS, Mar 2014 is grounds for Impeaching SCOTUS
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user