[pulseaudio-discuss] module-remap-source, module-virtual-source, and latencies

[guest271314]

I am not sure about different latencies re module-remap-source and
module-virtual-source. From my testing the quality of audio output when
using a remapped source with getUserMedia() is inferior compared to getting
the raw PCM using pactl or parec with fetch() on the browser side then
using AudioWorklet or MediaStreamTrackGenerator in Chrome/Chromium to
output the audio.



On Sat, Apr 16, 2022 at 9:49 PM Chase Lambert <chaselambda at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to make a low latency Virtual microphone. What that means is I
> make a null sink, and then a module-virtual-source or module-remap-source
> that has a master pointing to the sink's monitor.
>
> Then I can write to that sink, and get data to show up in this virtual
> microphone.
>
> I've found that module-remap-source has a lower latency
> than module-virtual-source, (~400ms lower it seems), but I don't have any
> idea why. And more generally -- what is the difference between these two
> modules? I looked at their source and also the git history, but that didn't
> clear much up for me.
>
> Also, is this the best way to make a low latency microphone? I have an
> application that I want to send data to Chrome, with as low latency as
> possible. Chrome operates directly with pulseaudio[0].
>
> Thanks,
> Chase
>
> [0]
> https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:media/audio/pulse/audio_manager_pulse.cc
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/pulseaudio-discuss/attachments/20220417/4c4bd5b3/attachment.htm>