On Sun, Mar 06, 2016 at 07:12:25PM -0600, Jonathan E. Brickman wrote:
> Greetings, everyone. Since I am using 85% of JACK DSP in my primary
> production box, while using 14% of the CPU and 1/8 of the RAM
> according to htop, it appears that I need to develop a way to move
> forward :-) It is ver
On Mon, March 7, 2016 7:49 pm, Adrian Knoth wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 06, 2016 at 07:12:25PM -0600, Jonathan E. Brickman wrote:
>
>> Greetings, everyone. Since I am using 85% of JACK DSP in my primary
production box, while using 14% of the CPU and 1/8 of the RAM
>> according to htop, it appears that
On 03/07/2016 02:12 AM, Jonathan E. Brickman wrote:
> Greetings, everyone. Since I am using 85% of JACK DSP in my primary
> production box, while using 14% of the CPU and 1/8 of the RAM according
> to htop, it appears that I need to develop a way to move forward :-)
14% of what? One physical core
On 03/07/2016 08:19 AM, Markus Seeber wrote:
On 03/07/2016 02:12 AM, Jonathan E. Brickman wrote:
Greetings, everyone. Since I am using 85% of JACK DSP in my primary
production box, while using 14% of the CPU and 1/8 of the RAM according
to htop, it appears that I need to develop a way to move f
On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 2:37 PM, Jonathan E. Brickman
wrote:
>
> What is happening right now, is I have seven synth+filter chains, all run
> through the single JACK server, all feeding eventually into the one sound
> card.
>
if the synths are all independent clients and they do not feed other, th
On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 01:37:48PM -0600, Jonathan E. Brickman wrote:
> What is happening right now, is I have seven synth+filter chains,
> all run through the single JACK server, all feeding eventually into
> the one sound card. I have more than ample CPU to run them all, but
> as you and others