[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Traverso-devel] Behaviour of mute/solo
From: |
Nicola Doebelin |
Subject: |
Re: [Traverso-devel] Behaviour of mute/solo |
Date: |
Sun, 24 Sep 2006 17:03:55 +0200 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.9.3 |
Hi Remon,
Am Freitag, 22. September 2006 16:00 schrieb Remon Sijrier:
> The question however is, what should be prefered?
> A (relatively) small optimization by not syncing 'silenced' AudioClips, or
> a slightly better user experience by not having a 'lag' after an
> unsolo/mute before the audioclip is 'audible' again.
Is it just the position of the play cursor that would be kept in sync? Or
would all real time effects be processed, but not played back? What is
important IMO is that all sound processing steps of muted tracks are bypassed
in order to save cpu consumption. The gap between switching and hearing the
effect is no problem IMO, but it should be possible to reduce cpu *and hard
disc* usage by muting certain tracks. This can be handy when working close to
the limit of cpu and disc performance.
> The buffers size will become user configurable btw.
That's great, as the setting is heavily dependent on hardware performance and
type of project (e.g. many tracks vs. a stereo project).
Cheers,
Nic