On Tuesday 10 August 2004 03:28 am, David Baron wrote: > > > Problem with Jamin is that is a process to process thingie. Another > > > program, eating precious CPU cycles, must be playing and pre-processing > > > the audio to feed Jamin. I just do not have the CPU guts to run this > > > way. Under that other OS, I can run this type of software as a > > > standalone (file-to-file) or DX/VST plugin OK. The three-process > > > (playing app, jack, Jamin, jack) system is just not efficient. > > > > While the JACK overhead is measurable, I doubt it's your main problem. > > > > JAMin uses an FFT for linear-phase filtering. ?This is quite expensive > > in CPU, but sounds great. ?We made that tradeoff consciously, choosing > > sound quality over CPU cost, recognizing that some older CPUs would > > have trouble keeping up. ?Moore's Law is rapidly fixing that problem > > even as we speak. ?JAMin only uses about 25% of my relatively old > > Athlon XP 1800+. > > > > IIUC, most Windows mastering applications use lower-cost non-linear > > filters, so they run comfortably on low-end hardware. ?That is a > > reasonable business tradeoff for them to make. > > Yup. I use several FFT based plugins and the eat it up quite nicely. They > get some improvement by using assembler rather than C++ for the math but > they still eat it up. BUT, I can use them. If I use the worst ones or too > many, then I need to destructively apply. Great examples are "CloneBoy" and > "CloneEnsemble". I can make MIDI choirs sing (and well!), but not "live" if > I am using both of these. > > > If your machine is close to being able to hack it, try using a large > > JACK buffer size (-p2048 or -p4096). ?This reduces both JACK and FFT > > overhead. ?Mastering does not require low-latency operation, anyway. > > My Qjackctl show 46ms latency now. I run my Windows junk at > 100ms > routinely so as not to run afoul of plugins that neglect to use the > lookahead calls. What do I set that here as well and give it a try. > > > > A standalone or LDASCP Jamin would be worthwhile for those of us with > > > older equipment. > > > > You're welcome to contribute one yourself. ?The GUI is far too complex > > for LADSPA, but there's nothing particularly complicated about adding > > file I/O to JAMin, itself. ?We just didn't feel like working on that. > > There are so many good JACK-based solutions already available. > > I might just try it. I fail to compile anything that wants QT3 (I do have > it and cannoct figure out why the ./configure cannot find it) but other Set QTDIR > stuff will usually compile. If I do and can get that working, how do I > contribute it to the project?
