On ds, 2008-08-02 at 23:32 +0200, Pau Arumí wrote: > On ds, 2008-08-02 at 13:07 +0200, Fons Adriaensen wrote: > > On Sat, Aug 02, 2008 at 01:01:12PM +0200, Pieter Palmers wrote: > > > Florian Faber wrote: > > > > Peter, > > > > > > > >> I doubt that it is easy over a transport protocol that doesn't have a > > > >> global absolute time reference (like ethernet). > > > > > > > > What time reference do you have in mind on ethernet that can be used as > > > > word clock source? > > > > > > My formulation is a bit unfortunate. I mean that ethernet does NOT have > > > a global absolute time reference. And word clock is not a time > > > reference. It's a 'rate' reference, which does not contain absolute time > > > information. What you need to output signals on different devices with > > > sample accurate phase is an absolute time reference. Which ethernet does > > > not have. > > > > The solution I'm using in this case is to distribute > > a single audio signal (similar to the one used in jdelay) > > to all computers. The signal can be decoded into a sub- > > sample accurate time, and all network data are timestamped > > using this time scale. > > Very interesting project indeed. > Up to how many channels the (gigabit) ethernet would be able to scale? > Could the synch audio signal be "linked" from one station to the next, > or should they all receive from a central server? The first would enable > many stations without needing a huge central multichannel device.
Yup, ignore the last question -- the synch signal is the same for all stations so one output split to many inputs is enough. Easy. :-) _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
