On 02/19/2013 09:25 AM, Jeff Sandys wrote:
From: jonetsu@xxxxxxxxxxxx
If a better response time from the kernel is something that's Good, why
isn't lowlatency kernels a default in Linux distros (well, at least in
Linux Mint and Fedora) If it is So Good, what are the arguments for not
having a lowlatency kernel by default ? Any drawbacks ? I presume the
Audio-oriented Linux distros do have lowlatency kernels by default, do
they ?
The Fedora Musicians Guide has a good topic on Real-Time and Low-Latency:
http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora_Draft_Documentation/0.1/html/Musicians_Guide/chap-Musicians_Guide-Real_Time_and_Low_Latency.html
My understanding:
* A Real-Time kernel will give you more consistent, reliable latency.
- But not necessarily lower latency
* Useful, proven, RT features migrate into the main kernel.
- So use the RT patches to test and prove them.
* Current main kernels give reasonable performance for most musicians.
- Your mileage may vary, if you get some annoying x-runs use the RT patch.
- Sound travels ~1 foot per millisecond, 8 feet from the speaker =
8ms latency
So what's the latency for headphones?
--
David
gnome@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
authenticity, honesty, community
http://clanjones.org/david/
http://dancing-treefrog.deviantart.com/
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
