Re: [LAU] Arch Wiki Professional_audio

On Thu, 30 Mar 2017 08:22:20 -0700 (PDT), Len Ovens wrote:
>On Thu, 30 Mar 2017, Joe Hartley wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 30 Mar 2017 14:17:29 +0200
>> Ralf Mardorf <ralf.mardorf@email-addr-hidden-dsl.net> wrote:
>>
>>> For professional hard disc recording OTOH it's
>>> completely irrelevant as long as you aren't doing software
>>> monitoring with your onboard audio for "Professional audio".
>>
>> Isn't it important when overdubbing?
>
>no

:)

Btw. I give up and don't continue editing the Wiki. Maybe, just maybe,
I'll add a note that more important than the lowest possible latency
for at least HDD recording is good latency compensation. Some apps
providing HDD recording don't provide latency compensation at all
and/or if you change the frames, the already recorded tracks don't fit
anymore to the changed latency.

Did somebody read the Wiki or is it just bikeshedding to discuss the
details of lowest possible latency?

I like low latency a lot, but I always thought that a good tuned audio
production environment is a chain of well considered tuning, where
super low latency is not the first point you mention. I would expect
this from advertisings to sell pro-sumer gear.

What about 1000Hz and the other questions? No opinions?

Regards,
Ralf

-- 
"Michael" described Floyd as "an idiot savant", and added, "Give him
any two numbers, and he can multiply them in his head, just like that."
Homer, testing Floyd, said, "Five times nine", and Floyd instantly
responded "Forty-five", which impressed Homer.
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user