Re: [LAU] PHASEX-0.10.2

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: A list for linux audio users <linux-audio-user@...>
Date: Thursday, May 24, 2007 - 11:43 am

On Mon, 21 May 2007, David Adler wrote:

> nice sounds - seems quite cpu-hungry, i get lots of xruns when polyphony

Yes, I'll be the first to agree that there's still a lot of room for
optimization. For reference, on my 2GHz athlon-xp box, I just
barely get full polyphony (six voices by default) out of two
simultaneous instances undersampled to 48k with jack running at 96k.
Not great, but not bad for code that would give me a max polyphony
of 3 (requiring 3 instances) just a few months ago. Optimization is
already on the roadmap, and it's the first priority after the patch
selection system gets reworked a bit.

If you're maxing out your CPU, you'll get xruns no matter how fine
tuned your system is, so I wouldn't blame the jack/priority setup
just yet. If you have a 1GHz or below processor, I would recommend
editing src/phasex.h, changing NUM_VOICES from 6 to 3, and
recompiling. The configure script also supports an
'--enable-arch=' flag to get gcc to optimize for specific
processors.

Also, you may want to use the Mono MultiKey mode whenever you can
get away with it. This keymode uses only one voice and maps the
midi keys in play round-robin, in order of play, to the Midi Key
sourced oscillators.

BTW, could you give me some more details about your system, like cpu
type/speed, kernel, ram, sample rate, etc. I might be able to give
better advice.

Cheers,
--ww

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[LAU] PHASEX-0.10.2, William Weston, (Sun May 20, 1:56 am)
Re: [LAU] PHASEX-0.10.2, Dragan Noveski, (Mon May 21, 10:04 am)
Re: [LAU] PHASEX-0.10.2, William Weston, (Thu May 24, 10:55 am)
Re: [LAU] PHASEX-0.10.2, David Adler, (Mon May 21, 12:43 pm)
Re: [LAU] PHASEX-0.10.2, William Weston, (Thu May 24, 11:43 am)
Re: [LAU] PHASEX-0.10.2, Nigel Henry, (Sun May 20, 3:49 pm)
Re: [LAU] PHASEX-0.10.2, Ken Restivo, (Thu May 24, 11:37 pm)
Re: [LAU] PHASEX-0.10.2, William Weston, (Thu May 24, 11:52 pm)
Re: [LAU] PHASEX-0.10.2, Dragan Noveski, (Sat May 26, 1:27 pm)
Re: [LAU] PHASEX-0.10.2, Ken Restivo, (Fri May 25, 1:37 am)
Re: [LAU] PHASEX-0.10.2, Geoff Beasley, (Fri May 25, 12:34 am)
Re: [LAU] PHASEX-0.10.2, William Weston, (Thu May 24, 10:24 am)
Re: [LAU] PHASEX-0.10.2, Nigel Henry, (Thu May 24, 3:22 pm)
Re: [LAU] PHASEX-0.10.2, William Weston, (Thu May 24, 11:37 pm)
Re: [LAU] PHASEX-0.10.2, Geoff Beasley, (Sun May 20, 2:05 am)
Re: [LAU] PHASEX-0.10.2, Carlos Pino, (Sun May 20, 10:01 am)
Re: [LAU] PHASEX-0.10.2, William Weston, (Thu May 24, 10:17 am)
Re: [LAU] PHASEX-0.10.2, Atte André Jensen, (Sun May 20, 6:05 pm)
Re: [LAU] PHASEX-0.10.2, Carlos Pino, (Mon May 21, 12:56 pm)