* alsa or jack?
@ 2002-08-05 12:06 sion
2002-08-05 15:02 ` Patrick Shirkey
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: sion @ 2002-08-05 12:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: alsa-devel
Hi,
I'm going to write a program whitch should get the audio-data from 8-10 mono
audio channels, and for example save it to a file. Latency is absolutely no
problem, but xruns wouldn't be very nice.
My questions:
1. Should I use ALSA directly or via Jack? I remember some people saying
Jack would be easyier. Can Jack handle 10 channels?
2. Is it always (i.e. with all soundcards) possible to open the channels in
non-interleaved-mode?
Thanks,
Florian Bartels
--
GMX - Die Kommunikationsplattform im Internet.
http://www.gmx.net
-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: alsa or jack?
2002-08-05 12:06 alsa or jack? sion
@ 2002-08-05 15:02 ` Patrick Shirkey
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Patrick Shirkey @ 2002-08-05 15:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: sion; +Cc: alsa-devel
sion@gmx.de wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm going to write a program whitch should get the audio-data from 8-10 mono
> audio channels, and for example save it to a file. Latency is absolutely no
> problem, but xruns wouldn't be very nice.
> My questions:
> 1. Should I use ALSA directly or via Jack? I remember some people saying
> Jack would be easyier. Can Jack handle 10 channels?
> 2. Is it always (i.e. with all soundcards) possible to open the channels in
> non-interleaved-mode?
>
> Thanks,
> Florian Bartels
>
JACK can allow you to access multiple channels (pcm devices). The main
reasons for using JACK as the default interface are that people who use
your app will be able to interact with other apps that support JACK and
it will also allow you to get low latency audio performance which is
pretty much neccessary for more than two channels.
It has also been reported many times that designing around JACK is
easier than using ALSA directly because you don't have to worry about
hardware level problems anymore as JACK takes care of that for you.
People also say that the code is very well set out and easy to read once
you grasp the basic concepts.
Also, If you write your app to access ALSA directly and in the future
you decide you would like JACK support, unless you have designed your
app around the callback principal you will find it a diffcult task to
rewrite your code to work with JACK. If you start with JACK now then
your app will use ALSA anyway.
--
Patrick Shirkey - Boost Hardware Ltd.
For the discerning hardware connoisseur
Http://www.boosthardware.com
Http://www.boosthardware.com/LAU/guide/
========================================
-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2002-08-05 14:57 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2002-08-05 12:06 alsa or jack? sion
2002-08-05 15:02 ` Patrick Shirkey
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.