Low-Latency DAW

[TheForgotten]

Yeah, I use two of the Delta 44s and I've got them down to 2ms in Reaper.
Reaper also provides for a manual input and output offset in ms or samples to tweak latency to perfection (I'm sure the other DAWs have something similar).

Sonar does auto latency compensation, even for overdubs, its great, no more nudgin tracks after each taker.

Word!

Definitley helpful.

[RodC]

I think this will really help my band mate and I. I just bought a headphone amp with two stereo inputs. This way each of us can have a separate mix while we track. I was going to use the extra (3/4 and 5/6) outs on my Firebox to feed the headphone amp. The way I was planning on setting it up, was to create two stereo buses in Sonar, one for each stereo out as mentioned above. Then I could add these sends to each track in the mix, and adjust levels within each track to customize both mixes. That way, we'd have two individual headphone mixes, plus the main master mix going to the speakers. I wonder how this setup compares (pros/cons) to hardware monitoring through the DSP mixer. I have never worked with separate headphone mixes like this so any suggestions would be great.

Sorry, I don't mean to derail the thread with this. Does it still pertain?

I have a Delta 1010 and 2 44s. I use a Mackie HMX 56 matrix mixer. I record most of my drum tracks using the 1010. I can then use the 1010 mixer to make a submix of the drums. I then feed this mix to the Effects in on my matrix mixer. (Plus a little compression so I can get the volume up a bit, this is only in the headphone mix, not recorded.) I then route one of my delta 44 cards so that each of the 4 inputs are routed right to its output. (Disable the internal mixer) I then feed each of the outputs to my matrix mixer.

I also put a cheap 2 channel EQ in the headphone chain for the guitars. Direct guitars can really sound like ice picks to the ears. (Again this is only for the headphone mix, not recorded)

This gives me 6 different mixes. I can record Vox, Bass, 2 guitars and the drum mix can each be varied by each headphone channel. Makes recording a whole band nice.

I sometimes record guitar direct and reamp it:
http://messageboard.tapeop.com/viewtopi ... 6&start=15

I guess it pertains, not sure how much more derailed we can get.

BTW Sonar rocks lol

[wedge]

If your just a singer sonwriter you should be able to monitor via hardware and not worry about Latency.

I have a small mixer patched in before the Mbox, and I monitor from the mixers headphone / monitor out. I guess that you're suggesting that if I use the headphone jack on the Mbox itself, then my latency will decrease, by matter of physical fact? I'll give it a try...

I also realized that I don't need another full-fledged DAW, just to record basic tracks, so I'm looking into Garageband-type programs... Simple but effective. Since I'm on a PC, I can't use Garageband, but Steinberg has a program called Sequel, which I'm fooling with now. It's their version of Gargeband, and so far it looks like it might fit the bill.

Does Sonar have a "Garageband" version?

[RodC]

I have a small mixer patched in before the Mbox, and I monitor from the mixers headphone / monitor out. I guess that you're suggesting that if I use the headphone jack on the Mbox itself, then my latency will decrease, by matter of physical fact? I'll give it a try...

Yes you should have no latency, the mixer you are using basicly works the same way.

Does Sonar have a "Garageband" version?

There is Sonar LE and Sonar Home Studio. Not sure what the feature list is. I think LE is a trimmed down version of Producer. I think Home Studio is a different code set. There are some interfaces that ship with LE, if you are in the market for a new interface.

[kronosonic]

RME gear is great for low latency recording (the PCI stuff)

I currently record with a Multiface and Reaper with 32 samples (0.7 ms) of latency.

If I want some more tracks I bump it up to 1.5 ms and it's still so low you don't notice it

[chris harris]

RME gear is great for low latency recording (the PCI stuff)

I currently record with a Multiface and Reaper with 32 samples (0.7 ms) of latency.

If I want some more tracks I bump it up to 1.5 ms and it's still so low you don't notice it

RME also has one of the most awesome DSP mixers out there. Super flexible.

[Mradyfist]

There are a couple of other less-obvious sources for latency. Many popular programs (I'm fairly sure Cubase, Sonar, and Logic all have this feature) will do what's called "plugin delay compensation", or PDC. This is intended to ensure that no track is delayed from the others due to added latency from a plugin, and it's done by delaying all the other tracks to match. It's important in mixdown, but if you toss a high-delay plugin onto a track (linear EQs are a common culprit) you're going to delay everything if you leave PDC on. Cubase has a dedicated button for disabling it; I don't know what you do in Sonar or Logic.

Also, keep in mind that regardless of how much delay your buffer settings are adding, if you're monitoring with effects and you add on a plugin that uses a specific amount of time to do its job, it will delay it. Most programs will show you how much delay each plugin adds, and this is in addition to the delay from the ASIO buffer. Linear EQs almost always add a significant delay, and anything that has a predictive attack time will add a delay.

Of course, it's not the end of the world if you have a little delay on a track. Some people like to claim that they can hear any delay at all and therefore need to go analog/direct monitoring, but that's bullshit. The simple fact is that sound is delayed all the time even in an acoustic environment, due to the speed of sound in air. A good rule of thumb is that sound is delayed a little under 1 millisecond per foot of distance, so if your drummer says he can hear a 1.5 ms delay when he hits the snare drum he's lying. A close mic on the snare that was delayed by 1.5 ms and coming through the phones is actually getting sound to his ears FASTER than it would travel acoustically.

Of course, you're usually reading off your delay in samples instead of milliseconds, so you need to convert it to know how much you're actually adding. The trick is that this also depends on your sample rate. Basically, latency is samples divided by sample rate, so for example 128 samples at 96Khz is 1.33 ms. That same buffer size at 48Khz is twice as much, or 2.66 ms. At my studio, I default to 128 samples @ 96Khz. I can do 64, but it gets dicey too quickly for my tastes. I'd have no qualms about going to 256 if things started popping, and even 512 is within range, but I probably wouldn't want to track any higher than that without switching to direct monitoring.

[JdJ]

If your just a singer sonwriter you should be able to monitor via hardware and not worry about Latency.

I have a small mixer patched in before the Mbox, and I monitor from the mixers headphone / monitor out. I guess that you're suggesting that if I use the headphone jack on the Mbox itself, then my latency will decrease, by matter of physical fact? I'll give it a try...

I also realized that I don't need another full-fledged DAW, just to record basic tracks, so I'm looking into Garageband-type programs... Simple but effective. Since I'm on a PC, I can't use Garageband, but Steinberg has a program called Sequel, which I'm fooling with now. It's their version of Gargeband, and so far it looks like it might fit the bill.

Does Sonar have a "Garageband" version?

Can you mult the inputs going into your Mbox using the mixer for monitoring? It almost sounds like this is what you are doing already... If you are, there shouldn't be any latency because you are monitoring pre-computer (maybe I am misunderstanding your setup).

I use a 002- so long as I have the buffer at 256 or lower I have never have anyone complain about latency. Did you try the "low latency" mode in one of the menus? I cant remember what it's really called, but it essentially disables plugs etc that would add latency. The difficult situation for me is trying to overdub w/ plugins on the other tracks- then I start getting into latency issues because I can't use low buffer settings.

Hope it helps...

Josh

[wedge]

Can you mult the inputs going into your Mbox using the mixer for monitoring?

This is what I do, if I understand "multing" properly... (what's multing?!?)

I think PTs LE lack of PDC is also a culprit. A-holes!!! I've already downloaded a few entry level apps that can run off Digidesign's AISO software, at very low buffer levels, thus very low latency. Unlike my experience with LE, of course.

I'm trying Sequel now and also Guitar Tracks, and they both work like a simple, easy charm...

[Mradyfist]

[quote="wedge"]
I think PTs LE lack of PDC is also a culprit. A-holes!!! I've already downloaded a few entry level apps that can run off Digidesign's AISO software, at very low buffer levels, thus very low latency. Unlike my experience with LE, of course.
[/quote]

Hmmm.. PDC actually will only increase the amount of latency. It's intended to make sure all your tracks line up properly in time, and the way it does that is by adding delay to all the tracks so they match up with the most delayed track. It's been a while since I've used Pro-Tools, but I do remember that they had a simple two-setting latency system; there's a setting in the menus somewhere that lets you choose between a low latency tracking mode, and a high latency mix mode. Then you should just make sure that you don't have any plugins on the track that add latency, and you're all set.

[joel hamilton]

DAW life generally get's real nice once you get away from Digidesign.

Best regards,
Steve Berson

Steve, I usually agree with you 100%, but this is a misleading post. So buying the budget version of a product, then saying it isnt as good as the top of the line product is Digi's fault? I am by NO means a super Digi supporter. They are almost as draconian and annoying in their policies as Waves (which is the worst I have ever experienced on EARTH). BUT: my Protools rig is not the "home" version, it is the HD3 rig, and i have a TON of processing, and no latency, and what latency there is when using a converter for a H/W insert is totally and automatically correctable.

To just say "getting away from digi" is a great thing, you have to qualify that.
How about "when you do research and figure out what DAW has the best feature set IN MY PRICE RANGE, things get real nice." This seems to be the crux of most conversations about this topic.
Steve this is now not directed at you, as I just thought of it while typing about your true, but misleading [to the less seasoned of us around here] post IMHO...

Am I crazy for thinking that there is a way to make all this stuff work without just blaming the manufacturers like they are the mean high school prinicpal's setting arbitrary power trip based rules to punish the kids?

[Mradyfist]

Yikes, man, take it easy. Weren't we talking about latency?

[joel hamilton]

Yikes, man, take it easy. Weren't we talking about latency?

Yes.
I am in the middle of quitting smoking cigarettes.

But prickly though my post is in wording, I do believe in the sentiment.

I will offer a more ON topic post:

The only thing that digi makes that is zero latency, is the TDM/HD systems, and they are expensive.

Hope that helps.

[Cellotron]

DAW life generally get's real nice once you get away from Digidesign.

Best regards,
Steve Berson

Steve, I usually agree with you 100%, but this is a misleading post. So buying the budget version of a product, then saying it isnt as good as the top of the line product is Digi's fault? I am by NO means a super Digi supporter. They are almost as draconian and annoying in their policies as Waves (which is the worst I have ever experienced on EARTH). BUT: my Protools rig is not the "home" version, it is the HD3 rig, and i have a TON of processing, and no latency, and what latency there is when using a converter for a H/W insert is totally and automatically correctable.

To just say "getting away from digi" is a great thing, you have to qualify that.
How about "when you do research and figure out what DAW has the best feature set IN MY PRICE RANGE, things get real nice." This seems to be the crux of most conversations about this topic.

Joel -
You're completely right in this. Let me qualify my statement then - DAW life when you are running them natively on PC's gets a lot better when you get away from Digi. (and I also think there are a good number of AD and DA converters on the market that sound a good bit better than PT HD192's also - but that's another topic!).

But an PT HD rig will indeed run without latency - and that's indeed one of the big reasons you'll see them in commercial recording studios over nearly any other solution.

Best regards,
Steve Berson

[Mradyfist]

Aw, everybody's friends again!