> * Q1: I assume that, if instead of the jack, you use a usb-c audio adapter accessory mode, there should be no extra latency either, right? (I'm using late pixel phones)
That's correct, by using either the 3.5mm jack, or USB-C adapter you won't incur any additional latency introduced by DSP to improve the speaker acoustics.
However, the USB path typically does have a few ms higher latency than the 3.5mm jack path.
> * Q2: which device are you using for the USB-MIDI input?
We've used a variety of devices and found the latency differences to be negligible. At the moment I test with an old AKAI LPK25.
* I find interesting that you are getting better correlations when you add a well-known noise burst instead of a less chaotic signal (e.g. a tone or a chirp). In retrospect, it makes sense
* for the uplink/downlink breakup, I see in the Usage.md file in oboetester that you're isolating the downlink measurement with the tap-to-tone experiment. For this experiment, the doc suggests to use (a) the jack to avoid the speaker processing extra latency, and (b) a USB-MIDI input device to replace the touch screen latency (15-30 ms).
2 questions here:
* Q1: I assume that, if instead of the jack, you use a usb-c audio adapter accessory mode, there should be no extra latency either, right? (I'm using late pixel phones)
* Q2: which device are you using for the USB-MIDI input?
Thanks again!
edit: s/markdown/formatdoc/g