[ardour-users] [ardour-dev] bug or stupidity ?
paul at linuxaudiosystems.com
Mon Jul 9 12:55:07 PDT 2007
On Mon, 2007-07-09 at 11:38 -0700, Mark Knecht wrote:
> happy that others see the value in using loop recording this way and
> very happy that Jesse and Paul have worked so much the last few weeks
> on these features.
no credit is due to me.
> Anyway, from now long distant memory I do think Pro Tools created
> separate audio files for each pass. since I always have some pre- and
> post- time in my loop recordings I suspect that there was pleanty of
> time to close one before opening another but I suspect none of that
> really makes as much difference with today's high powered machines. I
> no longer recall how the file naming worked but I suspect that it was
> done by appending something like _a, _b, or _1, _2, etc.
the filesystem hit is not really a function of processor speed. creating
a new file involves lots of logic and synchronization with other things
that are accessing the filesystem, and although its probably faster on a
3GHz Core 2 Extreme than a 100MHz Pentium, the difference is not likely
to be anywhere close to a factor of 3000.
in all likelihood, i've just been overconservative when worrying about.
the chances are that we could open a new file on every loop and it would
be fine. so far, though, my conservatism and concern about burning
needless CPU cycles and causing slowdowns with synchronization seem to
have benefitted ardour quite well compared to some other DAWs.
More information about the Ardour-Users