It is easy to see why you get a worse performance with
kr=sr. It's
as if all your signals were audio signals. More calculation,
more
computing time. If you need kr=sr for parts of your
instruments,
try to isolate them as UDOs and run a local ksmps=1.

You can check it out by simply looking at your task manager
CPU usage graphs, compare the same orc with different values
of kr. Ksmps=64 seems to be a good choice, but I often use
100. PD,
for instance, uses a default of 64 samples per block.

I'm not really sure why CsoundAV seems to work well, while
Csound5
does not, as I said, this could be a winXP thing, whereas in
my win2k
box, all's well.

It's fair to say though, that for these low latencies you
need ASIO, as
the MME in win2k/XP does not like small buffers, as it puts
the audio
to a software mixer rather than directly to the soundcard.
On win95
MME worked with much less latency, in fact.

Also make sure that whatever you are doing you're not using
more
than 100% CPU (denormals are a tinker for doing that).

Victor

>
> 
> > On my win2K box, I run csound5 with ASIO to a m-audio
> > quattro USB with lowest latency setting and low settings
> > of -B and -b. The best latency in town as far as
> > synthesis systems on Windows are concerned.
> >
> > Victor
> 
>
> :) I know - as you've said, and I am jealous, because it's
> not working as well on my machine. There are more than a
> couple of permutations I have not yet tried, but it really
> should work with the same buffering settings as I use with
> CSAV, shouldn't it?
>
> I have heeded Istvan's advice, and have tried all
> combinations of -b and -B one might think of, and
> monitored the control panel of my soundcard/interface as
> the case may be, to see that -B (samples per hdwr buffer)
> settings are reflected, and still no improvement.  I'm a
> fulltime programmer and have been using csound actively
> since 97, so I would THINK I'd be able to track it down by
> now, but I'm at a loss. :)
>
> Things I still need to try:
> 1) I have a suspicion that the ASIO stuff installed with
> Cubase is conflicting somehow with csound.  I obviously
> don't know enough about ASIO/VST to articulate that
> accurately - part of the problem.  I need to take a day,
> uninstall Cubase and anything associated with it, as well
> as all csound stuff, and see if performance changes with
> ONLY cs5 and drivers for my soundcard.
>
> 2) I don't understand why changing the ksmps to 1 (kr=sr)
> makes things so much worse in CS5.  If I have kr=sr, the
> crackling from latency is really bad.  It improves
> somewhat with ksmps=10, but not much.  Here's my test
> orc/sco
>
> orc:
> sr=44100
> ksmps=10
> nchnls=1
>
>     instr 1    ;untitled
>
> ain1    inch    1
> out    ain1
>     endin
>
> sco:
>
> i1 0 3600
>
>
> 3) I may have a stray portaudio dll on my machine that is
> introducing the latency.
>
> =-=-=-=-
>
> Also - just to be clear - RT output of _any_ orc/sco I've
> written is fine.  It's input that is the problem.  I would
> expect to hear the signal produce by the above orc/sco to
> hit the output clearly with less than .1 sec of delay.  Am
> I expecting too much?
>
> Viktor:  Are your pieces always processing RT input?  I
> could see that if your music is not rhythmically active,
> you might not notice the latency we do.
>
> Thanks for the feedback -- and thanks, Bill, for piping
> up! b
> --
> Send bugs reports to this list.
> To unsubscribe, send email to
> csound-unsubscribe@lists.bath.ac.uk