On Tue, September 28, 2010 5:47 pm, Jan Depner wrote: > > On Tue, 2010-09-28 at 18:22 -0700, Patrick Shirkey wrote: >> On Tue, September 28, 2010 7:33 am, Arnold Krille wrote: >> > On Tuesday 28 September 2010 16:21:48 Patrick Shirkey wrote: >> >> I'm pretty sure that this is the reasoning behind going with the >> filter >> >> option. The resources are available even on a eeepc as Ken has >> reported >> >> so >> >> it is not really a big deal as jamin is intended for use post pro. >> > >> > I don't actually remember Ken saying that he runs jamin on his eeepc. >> > True, he >> > is running an awful lot of software on there, but I doubt that he is >> > adding >> > 10ms artificial delay from jamin to his live-setup... >> > >> >> Good point. Maybe Ken could clarify if he used his eeepc for the >> mastering >> stage on his album? >> >> >> >> If you want to have it running during production then you should >> >> probably >> >> just get a very powerful machine or invest the time to correct the >> >> issues >> >> as near as possible to source. >> > >> > Yes, a 1.8GHz turion64 running jack (3x1028@48kHz) and an ardour >> session >> > with >> > two stereo tracks, 4 plugins (SC4-compressor and an eq for each >> stereo) is >> > to >> > weak to also run jamin. >> > >> > Please get a grip! I am not using jamin on an under-spec machine. And >> I am >> > not >> > mis-using it during mixing/recording of a >48-channels session either. >> I >> > even >> > stopped dreaming about using jamin for live-foh usage (because of the >> > delay >> > introduced by the filter). >> >> Well, it was never designed as a foh tool. It is and always has been a >> stereo channel post prod tool. >> >> When it was developed I was running a 1 ghz celeron. It ran on there >> without issues. I don't see why it would have problems on any recent >> (past >> 8 years) notebook/netbook or PC. >> >> >> > All I am saying is that jamin takes up a good amount of resources for >> its >> > processing. [*] >> >> This is by design. When the 2 very experienced DSP engineers Steve >> Harris >> and Jack O'Quin and the very experienced mastering engineer Ron Parker >> spec'd the backend they decided that this was the most appropriate >> method >> given the available resources at the time. >> >> The idea was to provide as much smoothing of the bands as possible to >> create a very "clean" sound as per traditional mastering technique. >> >> Now if you want to use a tool that is designed explicitly with that goal >> in mind then you should definitely be considering jamin as an option. >> >> >> >> > And I combined Fons' argument that the filter used is not a good >> > implementation >> >> Which has not been corroborated and in fact has been out right dismissed >> by my contact here. >> >> > and probably not needed anyway with my idea of a simpler but equally >> > useful tool. >> >> I think it would be worth your time to build a little mock up with pd or >> jack rack and listen to the difference in the audio quality. >> >> I have very good reason to trust my sources that Fons is not correct >> when >> he says the current implementation is defective. >> >> The point about using a stand alone parametric eq plugin as you >> suggested >> is that it would definitely add artifacts to the end result which is why >> the decision was made to use the linear filter. >> >> >> > [*] It would be uber-cool if one could switch off that analyzer-view >> to >> > save processing cycles. >> >> That is a good point. I know you have the skills to make that happen. Do >> you have the time to craft a patch? >> > > Since the analyzer view is only redrawn by default 10 times per > second there really isn't much overhead to save. Take a look at > draw_EQ_spectrum_curve in hdeq.c. You'll see that all it's really doing > is drawing a predefined pixmap, converting 1023 levels to dB, and then > drawing 1023 line segments. This is hardly a drag on any system. Be > that as it may, you can adjust the frequency of the update in > Edit->Preferences to be any value from 10 times per second to 0 times > per second. In other words, the ability to switch off the analyzer view > is already there. > Good point, thanks for the reminder. Yet another reason why nothing has been done on jamin for a while now ;-) -- Patrick Shirkey Boost Hardware Ltd. _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
