Albert Santoni wrote:
> I don't think it would improve responsiveness to sync more often. (I may
> be wrong here, so anyone should feel free to point out any flaws in my
> logic.) If, for example, we were to sync the ControlObjects twice per
> buffer, the second update of the position/pitch wouldn't do anything
> because the audio callback would likely be past the time/pitch
...
> Again, a practical way to do sub-latency pitch/position changes isn't
> immediately obvious to me. That being said, I'm open to suggestions
> here, although I think we're going to be limited by the latency no
> matter what. (This is why you need a good soundcard/fast CPU for vinyl
> control.) I'm also open to suggestions on all of the vinyl control code.
> It's an area of Mixxx that hasn't seen much peer-review, and I think
> there's lots of room for improvement there.
>
> Thanks,
> Albert
>   

I see your point. Once VinylControlMsPinky is done, I will try to take a 
closer look at the overall sound engine.
Thanks for the clarification.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference 
Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. 
Use priority code J8TL2D2. 
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone
_______________________________________________
Mixxx-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mixxx-devel

Reply via email to