Talk:Audio Stream Input/Output

message: ASIO list archive link doesn't work anymore. I'll remove it there are no objections. Shinobu 15:10, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

message: There is nothing on the history of the standard. It would be helpful if we had some info on the begining and major milestones.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.23.71.108 (talk) 02:26, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  History of the ASIO Standard 

message: Should we include a more detailed section on ASIO4ALL? Also, I have redirected ASIO4ALL to come to this article. Ishmael Rufus (talk) 17:55, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  ASIO4ALL 

message: Don't clutter the article with discussion about the article.  That's what this page is for.  Removed the controversial statement and a following confusing sentence ("They were then bought by Yamaha in late 2004 after years of joint development.")  Also corrected the stub; this has nothing to do with networking.  Also, is the comment abuot DirectSound entirely accurate?  Sony ACID and SoundForge seem to use it just fine, and from my limited experience programming against it, even in a .NET environment, it seems more than capable of low-latency I/O.  DCrazy
----
I noticed this article seems to favor American spellings. cf. synchronization. Just taking note in case someone decides it should be ise instead Sumergocognito 06:42, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup 

message: I've gone and readded several, which seem to have been removed without any great reason. Is there any objection to these links being present? -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 03:15, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links 

message: Sorry, but can't help thinking that the second part of the second sentence of the item might be a mistake. It says: 
"ASIO allows musicians and sound engineers to process their audio via Windows computer software instead of external hardware." 
Is this not the exact opposite of the situation? I thought I understood that the point of ASIO (also kernel streaming, which I think may be essentially the same thing) is to allow you to output a bit-perfect data stream from your computer to an external digital/analogue converter (or high-performance internal soundcard), including via USB in the case of an external device. 
I suggest the sentence should read: "ASIO allows musicians and sound engineers to process their audio via external hardware instead of Windows computer software."
A simple error, I expect, but with a profound impact on the credibility of the item. Perhaps it could be corrected?
Dc23 (talk) 01:44, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  I think a key sentence in this entry might be mistakenly inverted 

message: :ASIO bypasses the normal audio path from the user application through layers of intermediary Windows operating system software, so that the application connects directly to the videocard hardware. Each layer that is bypassed means a reduction in latency, the delay between an application sending video information and it being reproduced by the videocard, or input signals from the videocard being available to the application. In this way ASIO offers a relatively simple way of accessing multiple audio inputs and outputs independently.
:: Shouldn't this read connects directly to the audio card? Geocrash (talk) 14:40, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've let this comment sit for 3 days now with no responses.  Because ASIO has nothing at all to do with my video card, I am going to make the changes in the article. Geocrash (talk) 10:55, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Nevermind, I see that User:Dhethic already took care of it.  Cheers, Geocrash (talk) 10:57, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Don't we mean sound/audio instead of video? 

message: To me it's not entirely clear what the function of this section is. In the introduction if the article it's already clear that ASIO is a Windows driver protocol, so a section on operating systems comes somewhat as a surprise. The section itself seems to be more about the (in itself relevant) question why ASIO is needed (and some less relevant boasting about other OSs that presumably don't need such a driver) than about Operating Systems. Moreover I think the sentence "WaveRT cannot provide synchronized audio to multiple devices and does not support external clocks." should be removed as it does in no way make clear why this information is relavant (do other OSs have these features? is this a problem? does ASIO solve this problem?) Elmarj (talk) 22:17, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Operating Systems section 

message: I have removed the "External links" section. It was an indiscriminate collection of non-notable products.
:
The sole criterion for inclusion in this section was: Someone added it. Of all the links included, the best description, IMO, was "yet another independent universal ASIO driver for Windows. Project appears to have been abandoned".
:
External links should be reliable sources that provide additional information on the subject of the article, not links to various projects and products connected to the subject. - SummerPhD (talk) 15:40, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Linkfarm 

message: The article claims that DirectSound would not permit direct hardware access. In fact, the opposite is the case: DirectSound offers the programmer to install callbacks that are called straight from the hardware driver. It's even possible to have a callback called N samples before a waveform finishes playing. 93.228.40.213 (talk) 01:41, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  False Claims about DirectSound 

message: The article fails to compare ASIO to Windows Core Audio, which is the "new" audio interface that was introduced with Windows Vista. 93.228.40.213 (talk) 01:43, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Windows Core Audio not mentioned