On 11/21/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks for all the good advice.. Yup recording tracks and then playing
> them back seems to be the way forward for me - not ideal as I like to
> twiddle the knobs on amSynth while I'm recording, but in fact I only
> usually do this with 2
On Wednesday 21 November 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I've had a go at this and it's a bit annoying because it's hard to get
> everything playing in sync - is there a way I can press one button, and
> have Seq24 start playing, and some other piece of software that can play a
That's what I was
Thanks for all the good advice.. Yup recording tracks and then playing
them back seems to be the way forward for me - not ideal as I like to
twiddle the knobs on amSynth while I'm recording, but in fact I only
usually do this with 2 or 3 amSynths per song so the rest could be
pre-recorded.
I've ha
> I'm not sure what you could do then. Does seq24 sync to JACK transport?
> Maybe you could record some of the tracks in Ardour or Rosegarden, and sync
> them to play with the live tracks in seq24.
>
Yes, it does sync. Just a bit annoying to re-record tracks if you want
changes but it works well h
On Monday 19 November 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> So my questions is, is there
> anything I can do to fix this, short of buying a faster computer?
1.5 GHz is really underpowered. As suggested, you might be able to trade
increased latency for lower CPU usage. If that isn't satisfactory, the
> Finally I got tired of this, reinstalled Ubuntu and got Jack and amSynth
> working together in real time (it took me a day and a half, but I managed
have to work if possible. My laptop is an IBM Thinkpad T40, 1.50 GHz, and
> it!) Now the sound quality is beautiful... if I only open 4 or 5 instan
