[HihiDanni]

Again, not from my experience. This is 2019, and Pulse has seen many releases since over a decade ago when it was first introduced to Ubuntu. I'm able to set latencies fairly low in games, including in my global OpenAL configuration, and audio feels quite snappy. The only real limit here is how much CPU I'm willing to allocate to audio processing. I'd say that in most cases Pulse only adds a couple milliseconds of latency which is going to be unnoticeable to the vast majority of folks. Only exceptions I can think of are PulseAudio extensions that do additional processing (like EQ), or a couple one-off issues I've had with latency being slightly higher after waking my system from suspend, but a 'pulseaudio -k' cleared those up. And since then I suspect even that issue has been patched. I have seen programs that actually had their audio latency *reduced* just by switching from a pure ALSA setup to ALSA/PulseAudio and thus using the Pulse driver for output.

But in any case I really don't want to spend my time arguing about PulseAudio, because that just wears me down. What I want to know is whether the devs will look into the buffer size not being set properly in Reaper's PulseAudio backend, or if ALSA can be used non-exclusively.

Also I just want to put it out there that I don't want the devs to feel that my use of Reaper is contingent on this, because that's mean. I've already bought a Reaper license since the current situation is already an improvement over my previous DAW. In fact I would like to congratulate Cockos for their work on the Linux version - it feels a lot more polished than the "Experimental" label would have one believe. But I would like to be heard...

Edit: I got it to work! I just had to enter "pulse" as the ALSA output device and everything worked! So now I have both low-enough latency and multiple programs playing audio! Could this be documented somewhere?