|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
24.23.202.251
In Reply to: Re: RAM Disk = Waste of Time posted by Janson on September 11, 2006 at 05:43:44:
Reducing the buffer size in Foobar2000 creates a dependency on the hard drive to keep up with the datarate on a regular basis. This can't be a good thing. Unless you like the way this sounds (possibly someone who likes the sound of jitter?).The latency is definitely a drawback (your Foobar2000 Spectrum Analyzer will be slightly ahead of what you are hearing, and won't be as smooth). I don't really watch this very often though...I'd rather be certain that the data is there is memory, ready to be send to the sound device (and give my hard drive some rest, or time to work on getting data for other programs).
Follow Ups:
In order to prevent dependency on the hard drive. Put music file in RAM drive is a good direction. Also data rate of RAM drive much higher than hard drive. This will decrease the Foobar2000 latency induced by hard drive mechanical seek & rotation time.
But this plug-in is doing the same thing as Foobar's buffer...it's taking data off the hard drive in one large piece and storing it in RAM so that playback can continue without a dependency on the hard drive.The two should be functionally identical, though I'd be surprised if the Ramdisk plug-in's method was as simple as Foobar's buffer.
But how do we know what is right in Computer Audio when no ones seems able to pin down what exactly happens when one sets this and that. In Foobar, there are so many settings that it is just trial and error. No one seems to have made any measurements on jitter that are meaningful.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: