Latency, Direct Hardware Play through

[jbyerly1]

I went through the manual looking for answers. Found it interesting that it almost says latency is normal.

Is there a setting I'm not finding to allow "direct hardware play through". It defaults to "Monitor record-enabled through effects and will not let me select the other. It is grayed out. Is this an Apogee thing or a DP preset

On the Hardware setup. What is the lowest buffer DP will allow for recording audio and how does the Host multiplier effect these settings.

For what ever reason I was fighting Latency issues yesterday and every setting in Audio Patch Through gave me the same results. End up setting my buffer really low and that helped.

What will happen if Auto-compensate for plug-ins is disabled.

Is there a thread I did not find or a source that would direct me on useful ways of setting these different parameters of options on the configure studio settings and configure hardware settings. I will gladly do my own research if someone has a place to start even if it's about other daws

I know I'm asking a whole bunch of different subjects here but the user guide is not very helpful especially with the grayed out Direct hardware button under the input monitoring mode

I swear that gremlins come in and re-arrange my settings on my recording chain when I'm not looking.

[James Steele]

I'm guessing direct hardware play through might apply only to MOTU PCI-424 based audio interfaces?

[rodger1811]

I'm guessing direct hardware play through might apply only to MOTU PCI-424 based audio interfaces?

Yep......

[James Steele]

You know... I gotta say, there's a few things I like about the PCIe based solutions. One of which is that I only recently learned that CueMix on Firewire systems can only work across ONE hardware device at once. For example you can't monitor 8 inputs on one interface and 2 on a second one at the near zero latency. PCI-424 based systems don't have that limitation.

[Tritonemusic]

I'm guessing direct hardware play through might apply only to MOTU PCI-424 based audio interfaces?

Yep......

It works with my UltraLight as well.

[rodger1811]

You know... I gotta say, there's a few things I like about the PCIe based solutions. One of which is that I only recently learned that CueMix on Firewire systems can only work across ONE hardware device at once. For example you can't monitor 8 inputs on one interface and 2 on a second one at the near zero latency. PCI-424 based systems don't have that limitation.

I didn't know that!!!! Wow.... Just a few days ago, I purchased a brand new Mac Pro 12-Core to replace my 2008 8-Core machine. I was rather disappointed that the so called update to the Mac Pro wasn't a major redesign or at least have a Thunderbolt port. But when I thought about it, I concluded that it really didn't matter quite so much for me because I'm entirely MOTU PCI based anyway and I'm not planning on really needing USB 3. I've considered making the change over to some of MOTU's new interfaces primarily because of the FX that are included with CueMix, but if I can't get near zero latency with more than one interface, that's a DEAL BREAKER for me..... I'm good with my PCI based system and a 2012 12-core Mac Pro even if it doesn't have Thunderbolt!

[rodger1811]

I'm guessing direct hardware play through might apply only to MOTU PCI-424 based audio interfaces?

Yep......

It works with my UltraLight as well.

Yeah, it would make sense that it would work with any of MOTU's hardware now that I think about it....

[James Steele]

It works with my UltraLight as well.

Yeah, it would make sense that it would work with any of MOTU's hardware now that I think about it....

Oops... I apologize if I was incorrect about this. I was shooting from the hip. CueMix works, but I was just wondering if the "direct hardware playthrough" option inside DP, was only PCI-424 only?

[Tritonemusic]

It works with my UltraLight as well.

Yeah, it would make sense that it would work with any of MOTU's hardware now that I think about it....

CueMix works, but I was just wondering if the "direct hardware playthrough" option inside DP, was only PCI-424 only?

Yes, Direct Hardware Playthrough is an available feature within DP when using the UltraLite. Sorry about my last post. I tried quoting from my phone and messed it up.

[KarlSutton]

You know... I gotta say, there's a few things I like about the PCIe based solutions. One of which is that I only recently learned that CueMix on Firewire systems can only work across ONE hardware device at once. For example you can't monitor 8 inputs on one interface and 2 on a second one at the near zero latency. PCI-424 based systems don't have that limitation.

Do you know if this is true if you're using the ADAT input? Let's say with an 828mkii and an 8pre going into the 828's ADAT?

[James Steele]

You know... I gotta say, there's a few things I like about the PCIe based solutions. One of which is that I only recently learned that CueMix on Firewire systems can only work across ONE hardware device at once. For example you can't monitor 8 inputs on one interface and 2 on a second one at the near zero latency. PCI-424 based systems don't have that limitation.

Do you know if this is true if you're using the ADAT input? Let's say with an 828mkii and an 8pre going into the 828's ADAT?

No clue. I just know it had to do with using 8 analog inputs one one FW interface and 2 on the other.

[jbyerly1]

Any opinions on the lowest buffer size for recording audio and a explanation on how the multiplier works within DP. Is this all about ram allocation?

[James Steele]

Any opinions on the lowest buffer size for recording audio and a explanation on how the multiplier works within DP. Is this all about ram allocation?

AFAIK, the host buffer multiplier is supposed to equal the number of audio DRIVERS that are in use, so most of the time that's one. Some people think it means how many interfaces are connected, to the computer, but for example, if you're using all MOTU interfaces there's only one driver being used.

You'll notice the more you lower your buffer, the latency will be reduced but your computer will work harder. But the solution to monitoring inputs with almost zero latency is using the separate CueMix app.

[Dan Worley]

Any opinions on the lowest buffer size for recording audio and a explanation on how the multiplier works within DP. Is this all about ram allocation?

AFAIK, the host buffer multiplier is supposed to equal the number of audio DRIVERS that are in use, so most of the time that's one. Some people think it means how many interfaces are connected, to the computer, but for example, if you're using all MOTU interfaces there's only one driver being used.

You'll notice the more you lower your buffer, the latency will be reduced but your computer will work harder. But the solution to monitoring inputs with almost zero latency is using the separate CueMix app.

All great info James gave you here. Does your Apogee interface have any kind of direct monitoring software like Cuemix? For instance, I use RME's PCI interfaces and they have TotalMix, so there's no worry about lowering buffer settings when recording audio, it's always set to 1024. I turn Audio Patch Thru off.

If I actually have to monitor through a record-enabled track, the buffer is usually set to 64. Sometimes you can get away with 128, if it's a slower song or part, but anything with speed or a tighter feel needs 64, for most players.

[jbyerly1]

Apogee has maestro but there manual is pretty week as far as latency issues. It gives you the ability to set up different mixes and change settings etc. I'm going to try some diff things tonight with it to see if I'm missing something