T.J. Duchene wrote:
> Adam Borowski wrote:
> >I think it's better to think about what do we get to gain and what to lose
> >from pulseaudio.
> >Problems:

> > * likes to take 100% of a CPU core for no obvious reasons
> Older versions, yes. There is also the fact that is more than just one
> layer to the audio stack, you can't always blame PA. Jack is known for the
> same issue.

Hi T.J.,

Do you have reference for that?

I've been involved in the Linux audio community for many
years, and I've never heard of jackd using 100% of CPU. In
fact, what's cool about JACK is it doesn't cost much to run.

> Either can go south if it is not setup correctly.

The jackd daemon only requires an ALSA recognized soundcard
and a couple of command-line parameters. There is no setup
required. Once it's running, it *doesn't* go south.

It was developed by Paul Davis and the Linux audio community
to be stable for professional use.

JACK provides for creating connections among multiple audio
applications without contention, and protecting the entire
graph by dropping a client if a client program fails to meet
its processing deadlines.

JACK has different goals than pulse audio, and does not
provide per-client volume control.

cheers


--
Joel Roth