Dj Pari M
windows seems to naturally have this feature but is it being utilized by vdj,if not, are there intentions to?
more on it here
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/audioclient/nn-audioclient-iaudioclient3
more on it here
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/audioclient/nn-audioclient-iaudioclient3
Posted Tue 01 Aug 23 @ 11:01 pm
Adion
The best way to get low latency using ASIO is by enabling the option exclusiveAudioAccess in VirtualDJ.
Then the buffer size is determined by the 'latency' option.
Then the buffer size is determined by the 'latency' option.
Posted Wed 02 Aug 23 @ 6:39 am
Dj Pari M
most new gear dont come with their asio driver since wasapi improved to compete with mac core audio
i have read that the new low latency mode has more improvements..with a better shared mode latency(currently i see that in vdj with exclusive mode off,latency is around 20ms),i think the new mode claims that shared latency could be around 10ms..and i suspect that in exclusive mode it should be even lower and more stable...currently i get lowest 2ms with wasapi in exclusive mode but not as stable...i know it is machine dependent..but also it is a factor if vdj utilizes the newest wasapi implementation..so i just wanted to know if it does and if not..are u planning to implement it..
i have read that the new low latency mode has more improvements..with a better shared mode latency(currently i see that in vdj with exclusive mode off,latency is around 20ms),i think the new mode claims that shared latency could be around 10ms..and i suspect that in exclusive mode it should be even lower and more stable...currently i get lowest 2ms with wasapi in exclusive mode but not as stable...i know it is machine dependent..but also it is a factor if vdj utilizes the newest wasapi implementation..so i just wanted to know if it does and if not..are u planning to implement it..
Posted Wed 02 Aug 23 @ 12:55 pm
Adion
I'll give it a try, but if exclusive mode doesn't work at 2ms then I wouldn't expect shared mode to work any better at 2ms.
Also note that with wasapi shared mode, the reported buffer size has a slightly different meaning compared to asio.
Where asio uses 2 buffers, and one is filled by the software while the other is playing, wasapi shared uses a single bigger buffer that is read and written to at different positions. So the actual latency of 20ms wasapi shared is probably more close to 10ms asio.
(And the final latency to the speakers for both wasapi and asio also depends on the drivers itself that might do additional buffering)
Also note that with wasapi shared mode, the reported buffer size has a slightly different meaning compared to asio.
Where asio uses 2 buffers, and one is filled by the software while the other is playing, wasapi shared uses a single bigger buffer that is read and written to at different positions. So the actual latency of 20ms wasapi shared is probably more close to 10ms asio.
(And the final latency to the speakers for both wasapi and asio also depends on the drivers itself that might do additional buffering)
Posted Wed 02 Aug 23 @ 1:04 pm
Dj Pari M
ok nice info there
i meant if shared mode is definitely said to be improved...exclusive mode might also be given a small improvement also...nevertheless something worth investigating as most newer gear now seems to use native wasapi and provide no asio drivers
i meant if shared mode is definitely said to be improved...exclusive mode might also be given a small improvement also...nevertheless something worth investigating as most newer gear now seems to use native wasapi and provide no asio drivers
Posted Thu 03 Aug 23 @ 11:06 pm
Dj Pari M
any thing on this?
Posted Fri 11 Aug 23 @ 7:53 am