>> for myself, because its already possible to run pd as a JACK client, >> the only interesting thing that i see in this effort is a push to ask >> the question: does pd in fact run much better than JACK at the same >> latency/buffer settings, and if so, why? >> >Oops, sorry for not making that question clear. I thought it was >obvious actually.
the question or the answer? and how well does pd handle moving 9-18MB/sec through its interaction with an audio interface? ie. the read/write access model requires lots of extra data copying.
