I'm currently running into problems using fout to record output
streams from different instruments. I'm using windows 7 64bit and I
have two main instruments which are writing output streams to disk
during a live performance. After some time I start to get intermittent
drop-outs in the audio. If I stop writing to disk these drop-outs go
away. Writing just one file also seems to help improve things, but I
would like to record the input signal as well as the processed signal,
into separate tracks. I'm sure the problem is with my laptops just not
being fast enough to do all these operations in real-time(i5 2.4GHz,
8gbs RAM) but I'd be curious to see if people had any advice on how to
improve things. I'm currently stuck to windows for this project so
Linux and OSX are just not options for me right now. Any ideas?

Hi Peiman. I don't think Soundflower exists for windows but I can use
jack and I have it installed and it works fine. But sending the 3
outputs to something like reaper seems not so easy. I could also try
writing just one 3-channel audio file instead of two separate files.
I'll try it and see if it works any better.

On 7 August 2012 13:57, peiman khosravi  wrote:
> yes I gave up on that ages ago. It's the same on OSX. Can't you use
> soundflower on windows?
>
> On 7 August 2012 12:53, Rory Walsh  wrote:
>>
>> I'm currently running into problems using fout to record output
>> streams from different instruments. I'm using windows 7 64bit and I
>> have two main instruments which are writing output streams to disk
>> during a live performance. After some time I start to get intermittent
>> drop-outs in the audio. If I stop writing to disk these drop-outs go
>> away. Writing just one file also seems to help improve things, but I
>> would like to record the input signal as well as the processed signal,
>> into separate tracks. I'm sure the problem is with my laptops just not
>> being fast enough to do all these operations in real-time(i5 2.4GHz,
>> 8gbs RAM) but I'd be curious to see if people had any advice on how to
>> improve things. I'm currently stuck to windows for this project so
>> Linux and OSX are just not options for me right now. Any ideas?
>>
>>
>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>             https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>> csound"
>>
>

Have you done all the standard things to speed up Windooz?
E.g.:

Create a swap file twice the size of your physical memory but with minumum
and maximum size the same,
no wallpaper, turn off all fancy effects, optimise for speed, etc?

Richard






--
View this message in context: http://csound.1045644.n5.nabble.com/recording-output-streams-tp5714694p5714697.html
Sent from the Csound - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

If you can, try a disk with faster write time, and I agree with Rory
that writing more channels to one file is better: it slows down the
hard disk quite a bit to jump constantly between writing in two or
more different places, so better to keep it writing in one place if
you can. It isn't your CPU or RAM that is slowing you down here, it is
the speed of filesystem io.

On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 5:22 AM, zappfinger  wrote:
> Have you done all the standard things to speed up Windooz?
> E.g.:
>
> Create a swap file twice the size of your physical memory but with minumum
> and maximum size the same,
> no wallpaper, turn off all fancy effects, optimise for speed, etc?
>
> Richard
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://csound.1045644.n5.nabble.com/recording-output-streams-tp5714694p5714697.html
> Sent from the Csound - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>             https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
>

Why not just fout the monitor?

On 8/7/12, Justin Smith  wrote:
> If you can, try a disk with faster write time, and I agree with Rory
> that writing more channels to one file is better: it slows down the
> hard disk quite a bit to jump constantly between writing in two or
> more different places, so better to keep it writing in one place if
> you can. It isn't your CPU or RAM that is slowing you down here, it is
> the speed of filesystem io.
>
> On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 5:22 AM, zappfinger  wrote:
>> Have you done all the standard things to speed up Windooz?
>> E.g.:
>>
>> Create a swap file twice the size of your physical memory but with
>> minumum
>> and maximum size the same,
>> no wallpaper, turn off all fancy effects, optimise for speed, etc?
>>
>> Richard
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://csound.1045644.n5.nabble.com/recording-output-streams-tp5714694p5714697.html
>> Sent from the Csound - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>>
>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>             https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>> csound"
>>
>
>
> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>             https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
> csound"
>
>

Because I want to keep a copy of the dry input signal as well as the
processed signal. This way I can better mix the overall results at a
later stage. I'm sure it's the read/write speed of my hard drive. With
the cost of SSD drives dropping every day it might be worth adding an
extra SSD drive to my laptop.



On 7 August 2012 15:33, Adam Puckett  wrote:
> Why not just fout the monitor?
>
> On 8/7/12, Justin Smith  wrote:
>> If you can, try a disk with faster write time, and I agree with Rory
>> that writing more channels to one file is better: it slows down the
>> hard disk quite a bit to jump constantly between writing in two or
>> more different places, so better to keep it writing in one place if
>> you can. It isn't your CPU or RAM that is slowing you down here, it is
>> the speed of filesystem io.
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 5:22 AM, zappfinger  wrote:
>>> Have you done all the standard things to speed up Windooz?
>>> E.g.:
>>>
>>> Create a swap file twice the size of your physical memory but with
>>> minumum
>>> and maximum size the same,
>>> no wallpaper, turn off all fancy effects, optimise for speed, etc?
>>>
>>> Richard
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> View this message in context:
>>> http://csound.1045644.n5.nabble.com/recording-output-streams-tp5714694p5714697.html
>>> Sent from the Csound - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>
>>>
>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>             https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>>> csound"
>>>
>>
>>
>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>             https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>> csound"
>>
>>
>
>
> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>             https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
>

I think he wants separate output from the instruments before they get
mixed down. But I think the best bet performance wise is eg. for a
stereo orchestra and two instruments to make a four channel file with
fout, or for a quad orchestra and two instruments an 8 channel file
etc. Making a csound orchestra to turn an n-channel file into separate
files in batch mode should be trivial. The big problem is probably the
seek times - it takes much longer for a hard disk to change locations
than it does to write, so you should do everything you can to keep
locations sequential when latency matters.

Now that I think of it, another option would be to put each output
file on a different disk.

On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 6:33 AM, Adam Puckett  wrote:
> Why not just fout the monitor?
>
> On 8/7/12, Justin Smith  wrote:
>> If you can, try a disk with faster write time, and I agree with Rory
>> that writing more channels to one file is better: it slows down the
>> hard disk quite a bit to jump constantly between writing in two or
>> more different places, so better to keep it writing in one place if
>> you can. It isn't your CPU or RAM that is slowing you down here, it is
>> the speed of filesystem io.
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 5:22 AM, zappfinger  wrote:
>>> Have you done all the standard things to speed up Windooz?
>>> E.g.:
>>>
>>> Create a swap file twice the size of your physical memory but with
>>> minumum
>>> and maximum size the same,
>>> no wallpaper, turn off all fancy effects, optimise for speed, etc?
>>>
>>> Richard
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> View this message in context:
>>> http://csound.1045644.n5.nabble.com/recording-output-streams-tp5714694p5714697.html
>>> Sent from the Csound - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>
>>>
>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>             https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>>> csound"
>>>
>>
>>
>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>             https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>> csound"
>>
>>
>
>
> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>             https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
>

I wonder if there isn't a way to improve things in code.  It seems to
me that fout is completely synchronous, though I only took a quick
look through.  I know that one of Apple's audio frameworks has audio
file writing functions that allow to write asynchronously.  Perhaps if
someone has some time it's worth looking into for Csound.

On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Rory Walsh  wrote:
> Because I want to keep a copy of the dry input signal as well as the
> processed signal. This way I can better mix the overall results at a
> later stage. I'm sure it's the read/write speed of my hard drive. With
> the cost of SSD drives dropping every day it might be worth adding an
> extra SSD drive to my laptop.
>
>
>
> On 7 August 2012 15:33, Adam Puckett  wrote:
>> Why not just fout the monitor?
>>
>> On 8/7/12, Justin Smith  wrote:
>>> If you can, try a disk with faster write time, and I agree with Rory
>>> that writing more channels to one file is better: it slows down the
>>> hard disk quite a bit to jump constantly between writing in two or
>>> more different places, so better to keep it writing in one place if
>>> you can. It isn't your CPU or RAM that is slowing you down here, it is
>>> the speed of filesystem io.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 5:22 AM, zappfinger  wrote:
>>>> Have you done all the standard things to speed up Windooz?
>>>> E.g.:
>>>>
>>>> Create a swap file twice the size of your physical memory but with
>>>> minumum
>>>> and maximum size the same,
>>>> no wallpaper, turn off all fancy effects, optimise for speed, etc?
>>>>
>>>> Richard
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> View this message in context:
>>>> http://csound.1045644.n5.nabble.com/recording-output-streams-tp5714694p5714697.html
>>>> Sent from the Csound - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>>             https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>>>> csound"
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>>             https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe
>>> csound"
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>>             https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
>> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
>>
>
>
> Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
>             https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
> Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
>

I just tried writing a 3-channel file to disk instead of two separate
ones and it works somewhat better, but eventually I still get the same
drop-outs. In response to Richard's suggestion, yes, the first thing I
did when I got this windows 7 laptop was turn off all the funky visual
effects.

One other thing, can someone explain to me why I get better
performance when recording the output into a DAW using Jack then when
I just use Csound to record its own audio signal with fout? I would
have thought just using Csound would have been more efficient than
launching a resource heavy DAW to do the recording while Csound is
also running?



On 7 August 2012 15:47, Justin Smith  wrote:
> I think he want