On 28 September 2012 03:32, Holger Marzen <[email protected]> wrote: > I'd like to discuss the latencies with you that can occur and how and > where they should be compensated before we actually create patches.
That sounds like a good idea. I seem to remember the problem that the existing implementation ran into, was that it was initially trying to do wholly automatic latency compensation when recording -- which isn't possible, because the necessary compensation depends on what you're recording. What it probably needs is automatic compensation only for the known output latencies (e.g. effects plugins) across all track types -- which it is supposed to do, but which you've found isn't working properly -- plus easy nudges for new tracks forward and backward by common latency periods following recording, with some more useful options than the current delay setting. Chris ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Got visibility? Most devs has no idea what their production app looks like. Find out how fast your code is with AppDynamics Lite. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;262219671;13503038;y? http://info.appdynamics.com/FreeJavaPerformanceDownload.html _______________________________________________ Rosegarden-devel mailing list [email protected] - use the link below to unsubscribe https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rosegarden-devel
