From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: asbjs@stud.ntnu.no (Asbjørn Sæbø) Subject: Re: Q: Periodsize for capture, SBLive Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 10:19:18 +0200 Sender: alsa-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Message-ID: <20041019081918.GB24099@stud.ntnu.no> References: <200410190807.i9J87NmG000466@www6.pobox.sk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200410190807.i9J87NmG000466@www6.pobox.sk> Errors-To: alsa-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: To: Peter Zubaj Cc: alsa-devel@lists.sourceforge.net List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 10:07:23AM +0200, Peter Zubaj wrote: > > OK. Any idea why I get 384? > I think hardware can't do less. If you need less latency use hw:0,2 > and set more channel count (1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32) Thanks for your advice. I do however not think I understand this fully. Why will increasing the channel count give lower latency? Asbj.S. ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: IT Product Guide on ITManagersJournal Use IT products in your business? Tell us what you think of them. Give us Your Opinions, Get Free ThinkGeek Gift Certificates! Click to find out more http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/guidepromo.tmpl