[...]
> > I'm working on this, but it is not that easy since merging MIDI streams
> > is non-trivial and I want to be able to have hardware do the scheduling
if
> > it supports it and this means events can only be queued in timed order.
>
> Not necessarely; If you have the ability to adjust when y
On Mon, Aug 19, 2002 at 01:39:02PM +0100, Martijn Sipkema wrote:
>
> The MIDI API just allows scheduling MIDI for transmission at a certain
> future UST.
> Either scheduling is done (partly) in hardware or in a process that
> schedules
> the messages (using POSIX clock_nanosleep() or a similar fu
At Sun, 18 Aug 2002 19:17:01 -0300,
Juan Linietsky wrote:
>
> On Sun, 18 Aug 2002 14:48:49 +0200
> Frank van de Pol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Aug 18, 2002 at 05:57:40AM -0300, Juan Linietsky wrote:
> > > Hi! I wanted to ask, how about forcing
> > > an absolute times
[...]
> Well, i guess i didnt make myself clear enough.
> Technically, when you use some count/clock/tick based method
> for doing things, there is a certain hardware that generates such
> things.
> How are you sure that you will be able to generate those reliably
> within
> the OS? The only way i
On Mon, 19 Aug 2002 07:41:30 +0100
"Martijn Sipkema" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [...]
> > > - Callback based.
> >
> > Callbacks on midi are retarded, and VERY annoying. It's simply
> > throwing more work to the programmer which the lib can and should
> > do. Seriosly, think about it, what is b
[...]
> > - Callback based.
>
> Callbacks on midi are retarded, and VERY annoying. It's simply
> throwing more work to the programmer which the lib can and should do.
> Seriosly, think about it, what is better?
Actually I was talking about the audio API in this case.
> > - All buffers in a call
[...]
> Is there already a commonly available UST on linux? To my knowledge the
only
> thing that comes close is the (cpu specific) cycle counter.
No, not yet. I think we should try to get hard- or firm-timers and POSIX
CLOCK_MONOTONIC into the Linux kernel.
--martijn
-
On Sun, 18 Aug 2002 21:12:52 +0100
"Martijn Sipkema" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi! I wanted to ask, how about forcing
> > an absolute timestamp for _every_ midi event?
> > I think this would be great for softsynths,
> > so they dont need to work with root/schedfifo/lowlatency
> > to have a d
On Sun, 18 Aug 2002 14:48:49 +0200
Frank van de Pol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sun, Aug 18, 2002 at 05:57:40AM -0300, Juan Linietsky wrote:
> > Hi! I wanted to ask, how about forcing
> > an absolute timestamp for _every_ midi event?
>
> It's not 100% clear to me wat you mean. When
Hi Martijn,
I read the pages explaining the position of UST for synchronising audio/midi
etc. It really looks good!
It this moment the ALSA sequencer API supports already accurate timestamping
of incoming midi data, but since the it is not coupled to the audio streams
synchronisation is still
> Hi! I wanted to ask, how about forcing
> an absolute timestamp for _every_ midi event?
> I think this would be great for softsynths,
> so they dont need to work with root/schedfifo/lowlatency
> to have a decent timing. Not allways you are willing
> to process midi at the lowest latency possible.
On Sun, Aug 18, 2002 at 05:57:40AM -0300, Juan Linietsky wrote:
> Hi! I wanted to ask, how about forcing
> an absolute timestamp for _every_ midi event?
It's not 100% clear to me wat you mean. When using the sequencer api you
already have a timestamp (either tick/clock) for every event schedul
Juan Linietsky wrote:
> Hi! I wanted to ask, how about forcing
> an absolute timestamp for _every_ midi event?
> I think this would be great for softsynths,
> so they dont need to work with root/schedfifo/lowlatency
> to have a decent timing. Not allways you are willing
> to process midi at the lo
Hi! I wanted to ask, how about forcing
an absolute timestamp for _every_ midi event?
I think this would be great for softsynths,
so they dont need to work with root/schedfifo/lowlatency
to have a decent timing. Not allways you are willing
to process midi at the lowest latency possible.
I say becau
14 matches
Mail list logo
