On Wednesday 10 February 2010, at 22.45.40, Emanuel Rumpf
wrote:
> 2010/2/8 Paul Davis :
> > not all PCs can do it. but its simply not true that "PCs can't do it".
>
> Accepted.
>
>
> When running any 32 polyphonic hw synth,
> it is able to do those 32 voices anytime.
> When running out of the
2010/2/8 Paul Davis :
>
> not all PCs can do it. but its simply not true that "PCs can't do it".
>
Accepted.
When running any 32 polyphonic hw synth,
it is able to do those 32 voices anytime.
When running out of the voices, something will
happen (e.g. voice killing/stealing). But it won't start
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 10:32:48AM -0800, Fernando Lopez-Lezcano wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-02-04 at 20:30 +0100, Emanuel Rumpf wrote:
> > 2010/2/4 Arnold Krille :
> > > On Thursday 04 February 2010 18:50:28 Emanuel Rumpf wrote:
> > >> Has anyone ever played a plugin in realtime ( live )...
> > >> ..
On Thu, 2010-02-04 at 20:30 +0100, Emanuel Rumpf wrote:
> 2010/2/4 Arnold Krille :
> > On Thursday 04 February 2010 18:50:28 Emanuel Rumpf wrote:
> >> Has anyone ever played a plugin in realtime ( live )...
> >> ...and I don't mean a one-finger melody, but a mutli-polyphonic piano
> >> piece, even
On Mon, 2010-02-08 at 19:02 -0500, Joshua Boyd wrote:
> If OpenCL DSP code would run on my desktop using CPUs only, faster than
> a reasonable C implementation ...
You are smoking some illegal substances tonight?
___
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux
On Mon, Feb 08, 2010 at 10:01:03PM +0100, Emanuel Rumpf wrote:
> Actually OpenCL seems to already be supported, (in new hardware only ?),
> by the large graphic players:
> http://www.nvidia.com/object/cuda_opencl.html (there's a lot of docu
> here too !)
> http://developer.amd.com/gpu/atistreamsd
On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 4:01 PM, Emanuel Rumpf wrote:
> I still somehow wonder, how cheap low MHz Chips can outperform my
> GHz PC system. The answer seems to be parallelism of computations,
> which the GPUs (or DSPs) support better than CPUs.
> This also means, that faster CPUs won't necessarily
2010/2/8 Joshua Boyd :
>
> However, I don't think it is generally right for linux audio until I can
> write cuda code (or a similar language) and have it run on Nvidia cards,
> ATI cards, at least one card using open source drivers, and plain CPUs
> using SSE (and/or threading).
>
> It seems that a
On Sun, Feb 07, 2010 at 12:18:51AM +0100, Jens M Andreasen wrote:
> In which one of those two codepaths would you like to spend your spare
> time? Which one looks the most civilized? Just wondering ...
> [OK... That might be enough CUDA advocacy for tonight? :-D]
The cuda stuff is impressive
On Sat, Feb 06, 2010 at 09:36:20PM +0100, Emanuel Rumpf wrote:
> Running the rt-check script, indeed, I found some issues.
> Fixed them.
Glad you found it useful
> Now, the only remaining warning is:
> Checking for Generic PCI bus-master DMA support... not found.
> ** Kernel without Generic PCI b
On Sat, 2010-02-06 at 23:07 +0100, Emanuel Rumpf wrote:
> article: Audio Processing on the GPU
> http://www-sop.inria.fr/reves/projects/GPUAudio/
>
That article is so out of date, I dont know how to even begin to
explain? Really, you might as well be talking about how M56k code does
wonders on
On Sat, 2010-02-06 at 21:36 +0100, Emanuel Rumpf wrote:
> 2010/2/4 Jens M Andreasen :
> >
> > Zap the Gnome on steroids and dedicate your GPU for audio then!
> >
>
> How to ?
I can only say what I have done and _very_ _carefully_ point out that I
know _absolutely_ _nothing_ about RT-performance
2010/2/6 Julien Claassen :
> Emanuel!
> No DMA? That does seem bad!
>
I've been surprised myself, that the rt-kernel doesn't have it.
It is from the xubuntu repository.
Maybe I will recompile the kernel with DMA enabled to see what happens.
This is an Athlon64x2 with 4gb ram, radeon gfx. I'm not u
As to the GPU usage: I believe there were some discussions about it, a few
years back. I think it will be a matter of a kernel driver or small
hack or additional module, which you might download somewhere. Sounds more
reasonable and it triggers something in my memory.
Kindly yours
Emanuel!
No DMA? That does seem bad! Direct Memory Access is VERY helpful and has
been there for years - not to say decades. It's also supported by the Linux
kernel since version 2.0.X something. If not enabled this can take up
considereable amount of CPU time. So no wonder. Your system MUST
On Sat, Feb 6, 2010 at 3:36 PM, Emanuel Rumpf wrote:
> Would it be worth to design an open-hardware DSP-add-on with an open API ?
no, no and a thousand times no.
there have been several attempts at this ... i think they have all
failed so far. Chameleon is the one that springs to mind.
_
2010/2/4 Jens M Andreasen :
>
> Zap the Gnome on steroids and dedicate your GPU for audio then!
>
How to ?
Where is the switch that would tell ladspa/dssi to use the GPU for processing ?
> I have success with 3 audio buffers в 0.3 ms + another 0.3 ms for the
> PCIe roundtrip to the GPU. Voicecoun
Hi Emanuel, regarding LinuxSampler the reliability and performance it
can achieve (polyphony, dropout-free playback etc)
depends from several factors:
hardware: mainboard, cpu, RAM, harddisk, audio card, gfx card
software: linux kernel (real time extensions), other running drivers, apps
as others
Hello Emanuel!
I see, that you've already got some answers, here's mine though.
I have a 1.8GHz CPU, OK I run NO GUI at all, yet still. I play all my music
"live". I play sessions with LinuxSampler (big pianos and all), I also record
them that way, so the harddisk recorder is running at the
On Thursday, February 4, 2010, Emanuel Rumpf wrote:
> Has anyone ever played a plugin in realtime ( live )...
>
> ...and I don't mean a one-finger melody, but a mutli-polyphonic piano
> piece, eventually with sustain held down, which resulted in about 20 to 40
> simultaneusly processed voices.
>
>
On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 4:12 PM, Adrian Knoth wrote:
> I don't expect Pianoteq to be anything else than a piano, but this
> doesn't change the point that there's no allround virtual instrument on
> Linux that's suitable for the average pop producer or live keyboardist
> playing in a Top40 band. (th
On Thu, Feb 04, 2010 at 03:32:23PM -0500, Paul Davis wrote:
> >I don't need 20 pianos, I also need
> > strings, pads, hard synths, Atmo-FX and the lot.
> given that pianoteq is using physical modelling, its hard to see how
> their technology could be applied to hard synths, pads or atmo-fx.
That'
On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 3:28 PM, Adrian Knoth wrote:
>I don't need 20 pianos, I also need
> strings, pads, hard synths, Atmo-FX and the lot.
given that pianoteq is using physical modelling, its hard to see how
their technology could be applied to hard synths, pads or atmo-fx.
_
On Thu, Feb 04, 2010 at 11:46:35AM -0800, James Warden wrote:
> > a good virtual instrument. It's the confession that HQ virtual
> > instruments on Linux (besides LS) won't happen any soon.
> are you kidding ?? have you tried Pianoteq ?
I tried it some years ago, and it was crap. I tried it five
On Thu, 2010-02-04 at 18:50 +0100, Emanuel Rumpf wrote:
> We have dedicated hardware for graphics, why not for audio ?
>
Zap the Gnome on steroids and dedicate your GPU for audio then!
I have success with 3 audio buffers × 0.3 ms + another 0.3 ms for the
PCIe roundtrip to the GPU. Voicecount i
On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 2:46 PM, James Warden wrote:
> are you kidding ?? have you tried Pianoteq ?
> I use it at 1ms lat for RT playing together with Addictive Drums via
> dssi-vst. Not a single glitch.
>
> I use a dedicated PC, with a Core 2 Duo @ 2.4 GHz, 4GB RAM and RNME HDSP +
> Multiface I
--- On Thu, 2/4/10, Adrian Knoth wrote:
> From: Adrian Knoth
> Subject: Re: [LAD] Has anyone ever played a plugin in realtime ... [related
> to:] hard realtime performance synth
> To: linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
> Date: Thursday, February 4, 2010, 1:46 PM
> On Th
2010/2/4 Arnold Krille :
> On Thursday 04 February 2010 18:50:28 Emanuel Rumpf wrote:
>> Has anyone ever played a plugin in realtime ( live )...
>> ...and I don't mean a one-finger melody, but a mutli-polyphonic piano
>> piece, eventually with sustain held down, which resulted in about 20 to 40
>>
On Thu, Feb 04, 2010 at 06:50:28PM +0100, Emanuel Rumpf wrote:
> Has anyone ever played a plugin in realtime ( live )...
>
> ...and I don't mean a one-finger melody, but a mutli-polyphonic piano
> piece, eventually with sustain held down, which resulted in about 20
> to 40 simultaneusly processed
On Thursday 04 February 2010 18:50:28 Emanuel Rumpf wrote:
> Has anyone ever played a plugin in realtime ( live )...
> ...and I don't mean a one-finger melody, but a mutli-polyphonic piano
> piece, eventually with sustain held down, which resulted in about 20 to 40
> simultaneusly processed voice
On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Emanuel Rumpf wrote:
> Has anyone ever played a plugin in realtime ( live )...
>
> ...and I don't mean a one-finger melody, but a mutli-polyphonic piano piece,
> eventually with sustain held down, which resulted in about 20 to 40
> simultaneusly processed voices.
>
Has anyone ever played a plugin in realtime ( live )...
...and I don't mean a one-finger melody, but a mutli-polyphonic piano piece,
eventually with sustain held down, which resulted in about 20 to 40
simultaneusly processed voices.
I just realized, that I've never been able to do that. Neither
32 matches
Mail list logo
