Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ubuntu Desires Lower Audio Latency For Gaming

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #51
    Originally posted by RealNC View Post
    HW mixing is useless though. It was nice on my 486. That Gravis Ultrasound rocket the boat. But today, mixing can be done on the CPU so easily, it's not worth having it in HW.
    except that hw mixing just works and does not introduce any delays. Hmmmm...

    Comment


    • #52
      Originally posted by gQuigs View Post
      That seems like the only benefit for the *average* user, but pretty much no *average* user is ever going to modify per-application volume in this way. A "hack" to allow the volume control applet to directly modify volumes exposed from applications would let us get this benefit, while keeping the stack just ALSA.
      it is already there: hwmixer. It works. Well.

      Just don't use shitastic hardware and then complain.

      Comment


      • #53
        Originally posted by energyman View Post
        except that hw mixing just works and does not introduce any delays. Hmmmm...
        Hardware mixing doesn't work. Why? Because my hardware doesn't do mixing. So how can it work?

        Yeah, I'm joking. Point is, the hw mixing argument is just an excuse for shitty sw mixing implementations. In the age of dual core CPUs being the low end, not being able to do proper audio mixing sounds more like a bad joke to me.

        Comment


        • #54
          Originally posted by ninez View Post
          Yeah, something that i find analogous (on my jackd/ffado system) to the stuttering of PA, would be when i need to route an alsa app (ie: cannot use jackd directly - things like adobe flash, VMware, darkplays 11.1.c.a, skype(? i don't use it), etc). I have a couple of choices that use snd-aloop (alsa loopback device / virtual device) that these alsa apps will use - then i can use either alsa_in/alsa_out (tools that come with jackd that expose the loopback device into jack, as clients) or i can use zita-ajbridge....

          Well, in this scenario alsa_in/out would be PA, while zita-ajbridge would be ALSA.

          zita-bridge - solid, fast with no stuttering.
          alsa_in/alsa_out - 'can' be clunky/choppy in some scenarios (while in others being just 'okay'.) It also can be a bit lossy, unless i want to throw a little cpu at the problem.

          So obviously, you can imagine which solution that i personally use - zita-ajbridge instead of alsa_in/out, hands down. (and thus, in the scenario of ALSA vs. PA - i would be using alsa... Although, there are cases where PA is really needed, as discussed many many times here and elsewhere - i just wish ALSA had of been adapted/modernized/improved rather than introducing yet another soundserver (but that's just kicking a dead horse and isn't really my problem anyway... + if those were my only two choices i would probably be using CoreAudio, instead.).

          cheerz
          Except ALSA is not a soundserver, and anyone using PA is using ALSA because that's what PA is using. ALSA is low lever, PA is high level.

          Comment


          • #55
            Originally posted by Ancurio View Post
            Except ALSA is not a soundserver, and anyone using PA is using ALSA because that's what PA is using. ALSA is low lever, PA is high level.
            Except that you would be wrong (in part). ALSA has *both* user-space and kernel side code. PA replaces ALSA's user-side (when in use) ie: things like dmix. and pa uses it's adapters to then handle it... But when using just ALSA - you will be using it's userspace components, instead of PA... You obviously don't really understand linux' sound systems/plumbing if you can make such a silly comment.

            And regardless, my comparsion of zita-ajbridge/ALSA(user-space) vs. alsa_in/out/Pulseaudio in terms of stuttering, still stands.
            Last edited by ninez; 11-02-2012, 04:37 PM.

            Comment


            • #56
              Originally posted by curaga View Post
              Yay, flamebaiting! Name one thing he has fixed, instead of made worse.
              Both PulseAudio and SystemD were created as approaches to help simplify and unify the Linux desktop and offer a greater set of desktop features. NetworkManger, although not by Lennart Poettering, was too and I often hear it be much maligned by some, even though for my use it is a killer feature of Linux. But in the end I see no need to argue the quality of his work with you, as you obviously have your own entrenched positions and already actively dislike the work he has done.

              The real point of my post though is to simply point out that Ubuntu states these lofty goals but then puts little to no resources behind achieving them, while poor Poettering actually goes out and tries to get things accomplished to these ends and is decried as an evil for doing so by often the same people who hold Ubuntu in such high esteem. It is getting quite irritating.

              Originally posted by Lattyware View Post
              And loose all the benefits of PulseAudio? I don't get why people still hate PA, it's a great bit of software that does really cool stuff - it's perfect for gamers. Sure, it could do with some latency reduction, apparently, but that doesn't mean it's bad as a thing to have. PA can do stuff like assign certain audio streams to certain output devices really easily - for example, send chat to my headphones and game audio to my speakers - that is really useful for gamers.
              Indeed, PulseAudio is very useful to have when dealing with peripheral audio devices like headphones or headsets

              Comment


              • #57
                Originally posted by psycho_driver View Post
                I've never had my dmix setup induce audio stuttering into games/other highly cpu intensive apps like PA does every other time.
                And I never had any audio stuttering with PulseAudio, and I hardly have the worlds most powerful setup.

                Comment


                • #58
                  Originally posted by RealNC View Post
                  Yeah, I'm joking. Point is, the hw mixing argument is just an excuse for shitty sw mixing implementations. In the age of dual core CPUs being the low end, not being able to do proper audio mixing sounds more like a bad joke to me.
                  Not that I am necessarily casting off hardware mixing like you are, but I am doing all of my mixing in software on a single core Sempron and have never had an issue.

                  Comment


                  • #59
                    Originally posted by christian_frank View Post
                    to be more specific , this is only the fact for non hw mixing cards ...which sadly seem to be very popular nowadays ..i love my hw mixing soundblaster
                    Well the fact is that most of us are using onboard sound these days, which means that it's not going to have hw mixing. I missed my soundblaster when it died too, until pulseaudio came along.

                    Comment


                    • #60
                      Originally posted by ninez View Post
                      Except that you would be wrong (in part). ALSA has *both* user-space and kernel side code. PA replaces ALSA's user-side (when in use) ie: things like dmix. and pa uses it's adapters to then handle it... But when using just ALSA - you will be using it's userspace components, instead of PA... You obviously don't really understand linux' sound systems/plumbing if you can make such a silly comment.

                      And regardless, my comparsion of zita-ajbridge/ALSA(user-space) vs. alsa_in/out/Pulseaudio in terms of stuttering, still stands.
                      I don't regard dmix as part of core ALSA because it is a plugin. And it was developed as an afterthought hack due to the problems posed by pure ALSA.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X