Upgrading Problem

I always have two versions on my system. (Though currently I have two instances of 2.4.1 on my system as Free upgraded the version on 64studio testing) Yes, your RAM would be a huge factor. I currently have 2GB and this means I never have to use the swap space. Using higher latencies is not only for slow systems. It gives your hardware a bigger buffer, and acts as a safety net.

Is the "DJ EQ (mono)" on 2 guitar tracks, and I tried reading deactivated ... The DSP consumption was 30-35 % at 11ms latency ... I think with a 3 Ghz intel mono-core processor (P IV 631 ), my system could be largely better ... But perhaps, my memory amount isn't enought (512 Mo )? Is stopping some processes started at the boot could free some ressources ? Quentin said : "If you want to check this, set up a ridiculously high latency, a second or so, and do a test recording. I think you will be surprised by the result..." Perhaps is it a good solution with old hardware which can't works with good performances, and I think it's not yet the case for mine . In all case I'll try it just by curiousity, it could be a fine feature to works in bad conditions ....

Even if you record with higher latency, you will find that ardour compensates for this by lagging the position of the recorded material according to the latency setting. If you want to check this, set up a ridiculously high latency, a second or so, and do a test recording. I think you will be surprised by the result... My system rarely use up so much resources... Which plug-in are you using?

I have checked, and all my denormal options are available for selection. Perhaps your system does not aloow the other options? Is this now on the 2.1RC version of 64studio, or the 1.0 on steroids version? I use the 2.1 RC version for everything - no problems here. Another thing, the latency is only important if you record with software monitoring, for instance: Your guitar player plays trough the system into a electric huitar plugin (like creox). Your player would like to hear himself play, and without low latency the player can get confused. For normal recordings and mixing, i use a latency of around 11ms, just to be 100% sure of a fault free product, even though my system would be able to do it with 2.9ms latency. It is like driving your Ferrari at 140km/h - Very safe, but you can go fast if you want.

It works fine, now, even if DSP ressources are "a little bit" higher than with my old config (around 10 % before and now 18 to 20 % without reading, capturing, editing ...) About denormals, I find the options to use in Ardour, but just one is active . What have I to do to activate others ?

If you invoke jack with the -R flag (as above) it is exactly the same as Jackstart, running in realtime mode. What I was referring to is that the command in the section above: jackstart -R -p128 -dalsa -dhw:0,0 -r44100 -p32 -n4 has conflicting flags. These say: -R : Use realtime -p128 : Use 128 frames per period -dalsa : Use alsa -dhw:0,0 : Use sound device 0,0 -p32 : Use 32 frames per period (conflicting with the first flag) -n4 : Use four buffers. Most setups use 2 or at most 3. I tried the combination you gave here with my (quite professional) RME Hammerfall 9632 ADAT interface. It fails every time.

I compile Ardour for testing regularly. Be sure to compile 2.4.1, as there are many fixed issues in this new release. As for Latency, Humans starts to stop hearing the latency at around 5ms or less. I use 2.9ms with excellent results. 1.45ms starts pushing the envelope a bit. What sound device do you use? If I look at the command you use (jackstart) you have conflicting command line options. Here is mine, as invoked by QjackCtrl 08:53:56.298 /usr/bin/jackd -R -dalsa -dhw:1 -r44100 -p64 -n2 It gives me 2.9ms, no problems. 64studio 2.1 should work ok. Just check your settings.

Finally, after some tries upgrading 1.0 to 2.0 or testing, or installing from DVD, they gave me bad performances (impossibilities to start Jack with the "jackstart" command, only "jackd" work with a lot of xruns ), I reinstalled my 1.0 version of 64Studio, that had good performances ... and retrieve my 1,45 ms latency without problems or xruns with "Ardour" . I just wanted to upgrade to solve my denormal(?) problems with plugins in Ardour ... I'll try to compile myself a 2.4 Ardour versus, and, perhaps, some plugins ... Is it a good idea or not ?...

But, not many things are if you try to upgrade from 1.0 to 2.1 Your best bet would be to install the 2.1 release when it comes out! Would save you many frustrating hours. Cheers,

An upgrade from 1.x to current will be many, many changes. Running out of HD space added into this problem? I am not sure of what that outcome would be. As root, try: apt-get clean Then reload the repos. I have learned to fear a manual dist-upgrade. Synaptic (or the appropriate Debian package manager) is often a better way.

After a reboot, my problem is the same . I hoped a reboot would clean my errors, but not ... Would a classical"apt-get dist-upgrade" have chances to work correctly ?