Well, no responses, no surprise... since this is a Windows/Mac issue. But if you are curious, we scoped a win2k machine with a audiophile card running vstack.
The latencies showed that the 128 sample setting matches an ALSA "semi buffer". That is, a minimum of 256 samples of latency. This despite the 128-sample-like latency claims in the MAudio driver setup dialog. Anyway, more info for the curious... mo On Thu, 2004-06-10 at 20:52, Michael Ost wrote: > Hi. > > Does anyone out there know what the audio buffer size settings in > Windows and MacOS really mean? If you say "128 samples" does that > translate to 2 buffers of 128 samples --- one buffer playing, one buffer > filling --- or 2 buffers of 64 samples? Is it 256 samples of latency or > 128? > > I realize this isn't _exactly_ a Linux audio question, but perhaps > someone out there knows something about this. We're trying to get an > apples to apples comparison of our Linux/ALSA based system with a > Windows/MacOS system. > > We set the ALSA driver to 2x128 and we get results that jibe more with > the 256 setting in Windows. > > But when we hooked a Windows system up to a scope it looked more like > the 128 sample setting was running 2x64 samples. So... we're confused. > > Any pearls of wisdom out there? ... mo > > =================================== > Michael Ost, Software Architect > Muse Research, Inc. > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
