View Single Post
Old 04-22-2018, 09:02 AM   #460
acebone
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 229
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Winter View Post
It's all a bit complicated to explain Also haven't run reaper in wine for ages... That said a realtime kernel is unlikely to make things worse and will probably make them better.
Thanks for an great answer, that of course raises some more questions

> 1. Use a realtime kernel

I'll explore the possibility some more, and then probably return with some newbie-questions


> 2. Change the priority of the soundcard interrupt to something high like 95.

In fact right now I use two soundcards - an old H4 Zoom to record voice and guitar and the onboard soundcard for playback. I'm not sure if the H4 can do both at the same time. Should I give them both a priority of eg. 95?

> 3. Possibly use the wine-rt patch (or wine-staging) with the right environment variables.

I'll look into that as well ... the right env. vars you say ... you know of a tutorial on that?

> We discovered a few things torturing reaper for linux lately.

Oh, you are mean and nasty people!

> 2. It also seems beneficial to use anticipative fx processing on tracks that have no fx.

eh ...fx-processing where there is no effects, I don't get it?

> I'd be happy to answer any questions you have, but don't feel like writing a complete tutorial on the topic right now

Thnx a lot!

> Also possibly worth investigating the native linux version and running windows vsts via the linvst wrapper.

I depend a lot on Sampletank 3, the only samplelibrary that I have. Also I am quite fond of the Voxengo line of free WinVSTs. How is the WinVST stability?

Will I be able to access the GUIs of various WinVSTs much the same way I do now, or will have to run them in a JACK-session (Carla, or similar)?

Another question: I noticed that higher sample rates gives considerably lower blok-latency - on my onboard-soundcard (intel I think) I get 5,2 ms at 48k but 1.3 ms at 192K. Of course the H4 Zoom will max run at 48, but if I get the Behringer I can run at that speed. But ... that seems too easy, there's gotta be a tradeoff or a gotcha of some kind?

Hmmm ... it just occurred to me: why not feed audio from my litte 5-chn mixer directly into the computer? If the internal card can run faster than the Zoom H4, that might be a better option, at least until I get the Behringer ...

Thinking aloud and asking a lot of questions here, hope it's not too much
acebone is offline   Reply With Quote