> On 09/21/2016 11:24 AM, Perry Nguyen wrote: >> >> Though after reading your post to LAD a couple times over it seems like >> there is possibly overlooked but important incongruity between BPM and >> "linear/real-time".. and perhaps that limits the ability of word-clock >> time designators like JACK from seamlessly following BPM? If that is the >> case it is still unclear to me what the specific technical details of >> that incongruity are. >> > > (continuing my own babbling...:)) > > read this? > > http://github.com/jackaudio/jackaudio.github.com/wiki/TransportLimitations > (JACK Transport Limitations) > > ok. now from the top of my head. > > a. jack-transport/timebase (JT) is a centralized master/slave model, > including its API approach; corollaries follows: all JT clients start > and stop on demand and at the same time; netjack clients might drift > apart, unless they implement some sort of PLL/DLL device (anyway, this > assumes one of the participants is master); time reference is absolute > frame position, constant sample-rate (frames/second), starting from a > designated master application, linear (tape-like) timeline model (a > song, session or project as a whole length continuous composition or > arrangement). > > b. ableton-link (AL) is a distributed metronome facility and API; any AL > client may or not be playing its thing on any given time, but when they > play, they *should* start and sync (internally on their own premises) > on beat boundaries on their own best-fit strategy model; time reference > is tempo (BPM; beats/minute); tempo changes are broadcasted (well, dang > truth is multicasted), may be initiated by any participant, then each > other participant may react accordingly (or not) on their own chance, > next cycle or phase, whichever fits best their own designed playback > model--this is why, AL is more suited for loop-based contraptions that > straight linear-tape model ones. > > you can map AL to JT (timebase) if you will, but it's one master's job > to do it--make the time calculations according to its own master, static > tempo-map. > > hth. > cheers > -- > rncbc aka. Rui Nuno Capela
It seems that the lack of interest in adding similar functionality to JACK has opened up a gap in the "market". Is there any specific reason that JACK *cannot* be used to enable a similar looping mechanism via the transport control or in parallel? -- Patrick Shirkey Boost Hardware Ltd _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev