Tascam 4 sample buffer

[bayswater]

I noticed an interface from Tascam that supposedly can work with a buffer of 4 samples. Seemingly that puts latency below a millisecond. Anyone know if this is real and usable?

[mikehalloran]

I noticed an interface from Tascam that supposedly can work with a buffer of 4 samples. Seemingly that puts latency below a millisecond. Anyone know if this is real and usable?

Got a link?

A lot of reviews of various TASCAM interfaces go on about 4ms latency which is slower than the advertised RTL of most interfaces since October 2019. MOTU claims under 4ms, A couple USB 3.0 units claim just under 3ms and the PreSonus TB3 unit claims 1.9ms. The speed of sound being what it is, we're talking 18" closer to or further away from your speakers.

Core Audio appears to have a minimum sample buffer of 16. While I can go to 32 without a problem, 16 is just too low on my 18 core iMac Pro.

Yea, I'd like to see a link to what someone's talking about and if there's a Mac driver that allows this. Hmmmmm.... can one use Mac Driver and TASCAM in the same sentence since OS 9?

[bayswater]

4 samples, not 4 msec. Here's one. It's been around for a while.

https://recording.org/forum/recording-l ... ple-buffer

This from Tascam, with the statement "The Version 4.0 driver update significantly improves latency over the previous version, now offering a selectable latency setting between 4 samples and 2048 samples versus a previous minimum buffer size of 64 samples." Dated Feb 2020.

https://tascam.com/us/support/news/6192

I've come across it in SOS a couple of times too. 32 samples is pretty common and I've see a couple at 16, so I suppose there nothing to stop them from going lower, other the the load on the CPU.

[mikehalloran]

4 samples, not 4 msec. Here's one. It's been around for a while.

https://recording.org/forum/recording-l ... ple-buffer

This from Tascam, with the statement "The Version 4.0 driver update significantly improves latency over the previous version, now offering a selectable latency setting between 4 samples and 2048 samples versus a previous minimum buffer size of 64 samples." Dated Feb 2020.

https://tascam.com/us/support/news/6192

I've come across it in SOS a couple of times too. 32 samples is pretty common and I've see a couple at 16, so I suppose there nothing to stop them from going lower, other the the load on the CPU.

Thanks for the link.

So… are you planning to run Windows to take advantage of this? The press release was clear it only applies to Win. When we go to the downloads page, we see that the Mac “Settings Panel” is v. 2.1 from 2016.

https://tascam.com/us/product/us-16x08/download

And does not include drivers since the TASCAM interfaces use CoreAudio as mentioned in the product descriptions.
https://tascam.com/us/product/us-16x08/spec

I haven’t checked my M1 but on my iMP, the minimum buffer is still 16 which I find unusable—32 is as low as I can go. One of my friends has to run 512 on his 2014 Mini and my 2010 iMac had issues below 1024. I would think your 2018 Mini can handle 32 or, worst case, 64 on a large project without breaking a sweat.

Since these predate October 2019, they are not using the latest and greatest chips that get RTL below 4ms. Many online reviews state 10ms in, 4ms out. Most likely, no one tested and they’re all quoting some Gibson press release that I can’t find but that’s 14ms RTL in my book. Gibson still owned TASCAM through 2017.

[bayswater]

No, obviously I’m not about to switch to windows. The question is about the reality of a 4 sample buffer. If Tascam can do this for windows and make it work reliably, and if they did this two years ago, one might wonder if this is something to expect from others making interfaces, and an update in CoreAudio.

[mikehalloran]

No, obviously I’m not about to switch to windows. The question is about the reality of a 4 sample buffer. If Tascam can do this for windows and make it work reliably, and if they did this two years ago, one might wonder if this is something to expect from others making interfaces, and an update in CoreAudio.

Updates to CoreAudio come from Apple, of course.

I imagine that a Mac driver could be written to lower the sample buffer but it would be a ground up rewrite. The Mac drivers I’ve seen from MOTU and others are APIs over Core Audio. Unless there’s a demand, I don’t see it happening. That TASCAM did it two years ago for Windows doesn’t seem to have inspired a rush from others to follow suit.

[bayswater]

That TASCAM did it two years ago for Windows doesn’t seem to have inspired a rush from others to follow suit.

Yes, it's odd given the constant complaints from all those who can apparently hear the difference between a 4 and an 8 msec latency, and can't perform with direct monitoring.

[mikehalloran]

That TASCAM did it two years ago for Windows doesn’t seem to have inspired a rush from others to follow suit.

Yes, it's odd given the constant complaints from all those who can apparently hear the difference between a 4 and an 8 msec latency, and can't perform with direct monitoring.

Yea, that’s funny. So many hear with their eyes.

I can barely hear the RTL difference between 32 and 512 on my buddy’s 2014 Mini and it’s easy to ignore. An M4 doesn’t have CueMix and I don’t miss it when he overdubs. Performer Lite is stable on that machine at 512 and no lower. It’s one of those with only 4GB soldered RAM that can’t be upgraded. I did pull the original HDD and replace it with a SATA III SSD. Since it didn’t come with a Hybrid drive, there’s no socket for me to install an NVMe blade.