On the Orville, and H8000FW, the central control processor runs the UI and also the control code of the algorithms. So, UI responsiveness and control rate are intimately tied together. The H9000 is different, in that the control code runs on the DSPs, but the UI still runs on the main control processor. Effectively, what this means is that the control rate of the H9000 should be faster than on the Orville/H8000FW – not only is it not waiting for the UI, but it runs on a much faster processor (1GHz). I don’t have any actual measurements to back this up, but when I have some time to gather some, I will.
Regarding the occasional slowness of the UI on the Orville/H8000FW, this should also be improved on the H9000 for the same reasons. The central processor does a lot of tasks, including networking and MIDI, and the UI is also quite a lot more graphically complex, but we’ve done our best to keep it snappy and responsive.
It sound like control rate things might be in better shape on the H9000. Can you comment on what sort of scheduler is running the control stuff?
