On Thu, 2010-09-16 at 02:58 -0400, David Santamauro wrote: > On Wed, 15 Sep 2010 21:08:33 -0400 > Paul Davis <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 8:57 PM, Jonathan E. Brickman > > <jeb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Anyone using Pulse in realtime or high-priority modes? > > > Experiences, anyone? I have a nice stable system in which Pulse > > > sends all to Jack which then sends to ALSA, and am wondering if I > > > should perhaps just use Pulse to take external inputs. Or is there > > > a straightforward way to get one Jackd patchbay to handle input > > > from two or three different whole audio devices? > > > > JACK itself handles only a max of 2 devices, 1 for input 1 for output. > > For additional (ALSA-accessible) devices, use the alsa_in client. > > > > Combining Pulse & JACK is likely to be a misstep, even if it works. > > I agree... alsa_in is much more stable than pulse+jack for my > dual-card setup. > > David I have no complaints about pulse's stability. On my card you can't get as low latencies with pulse+jack as you can with jack alone, though, even in real-time mode for both. Lennart on the PA ML has mentioned before that 'real-time' aims for Pulse are much more relaxed than what Jack aims for, due to their different focus. Its terrific that Pulse automatically gives up the device to jack2 though. So much for the naysayers who see them as competing systems. _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
