On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 10:39 AM, alex stone <compose59@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Given the relative and elegant simplicity of jackmidi structure, > perhaps those much wiser than i about these things will have a fit of > enthusiasm, and consider implementing it, so we can all go forward > together. :) unfortunately, this misses a much deeper aspect of the difference between ALSA and JACK MIDI. ALSA MIDI delivers MIDI (in all likelihood) to something other than the thread doing synthesis/processing. This can be nice when using MIDI for application control (transport, solo/mute/rec-enable etc etc) but it makes it a bit more difficult to use it in the synthesis thread. JACK MIDI delivers MIDI to the thread doing synthesis/processing. This makes it very easy (and accurate) to use MIDI for synthesis/processing, but harder to use for application control (which likely happens in another thread). finally, JACK MIDI *only* allows MIDI output (directly) from the processing thread, whereas doing that in ALSA is a recipe for xruns etc and you really have to do MIDI output from some other thread. so for example, switching Ardour from using ALSA MIDI to JACK MIDI wasn't just about using a different API for getting MIDI in and out. it required a substantive re-engineering of how all MIDI I/O is done. _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
