On Fri, 20 Mar 2015, Len Ovens wrote:
latency was constant. That is rather than playing imediately because it is late, it could delay by however much the event came in after the cycle it did come in on. I don't know if this is common practice though. Jack could impose this by making all event time stamps fit within the current cycle (use delayed time stamps). Because the jackmidi programming I was doing was
In fact this is what it does. (on rereading what Paul said)
control surface and I was not too worried about timing, all of my events were passed on the first sample of a cycle and incoming events where cycled through and read as if they should be processed then too. So i didn't pay as much attention to time stamping as I should/could have. I don't know if it is even possible for an application to send an event that should be played in the next cycle.
All events fall within the current cycle. If there is jitter then, it is because the developer is doing what I was doing, treating all midi events as if they were start of cycle. A developer who was doing a softsynth would already be dealing with sample numbers within the cycle in sound generation and _should_ find it natural to use the same practice when dealing with MIDI. It would be "wrong" not to.
-- Len Ovens www.ovenwerks.net _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
