aRts vs JACK
stefan at space.twc.de
Sat Feb 22 21:59:45 GMT 2003
On Fri, Feb 21, 2003 at 10:53:03PM +0200, Eray Ozkural wrote:
> The synthesizers that could be designed in arts are not wholly useful either.
> Synthesizer is something that is geared towards music production and I don't
> think the server is where that kind of code ought to be located. As a long
> time user of various music programs on windows, I would welcome an
> achievement like buzz tracker or reason on windows platform but arts speaks
> only overhead to me.
If you go for low low low latency, then a context switch more or less can
make a difference. This is why having two applications involved in music
production (a sound server and a synthesizer) is worse than having only one
If you have ten synthesizers, and route audio back and forth between them,
ten applications are the much worse design (IPC costs!) than one application.
This is why I choose the design initially.
Fatally, by moving it into KDE and lots of people adding lots of things to
it, the low latency requirement can't be fulfilled by aRts-as-it-is-now any
longer. Which is why although I think the design is good, the implementation
should be redone or partially redone, especially for music production
-* Stefan Westerfeld, stefan at space.twc.de (PGP!), Hamburg/Germany
KDE Developer, project infos at http://space.twc.de/~stefan/kde *-
More information about the kde-multimedia