Latency and Core Audio Issues with DP

bigcityrecording · Post by **bigcityrecording** » Sat Mar 03, 2007 12:37 am

I am quite disappointed to find out that DP really doesn't integrate very well with core audio in terms of latency and track count. Logic, for example, has a latency setting as low as 32 whereas DP's lowest is 64.

When I select 64 on DP, I encounter spikes with very low track count and low FX count whereas with Logic on the same system and at 32 latency, I can get high track and plug-in count with hardly any processor load.

I am using a G5 Dual 2.5ghz machine/DP4.61 (soon 5.11 with MacPro)/2408mk3.

What gives, MOTU?

There are other DAWs that also have higher latency settings than Logic such as Cubase, but I personally consider DP above Cubase for whatever it's worth.

Come on MOTU, let's get the latency down so I can get rid of my digital mixers and do it all inside DP!

Does anybody else agree with me on this? Any comments?

Shooshie · Post by **Shooshie** » Sat Mar 03, 2007 12:59 am

I find it to be rather academic. Maybe our situations are different, and the things that I do just aren't as dramatically affected by latency as yours, but even a buffer of 128 serves me just fine. I've been known to record with 256. It's all a matter of what you're comfortable with in your playing.

Latency only affects the audio that you're playing in real time, and only when it's being produced inside DP, and not being monitored from outside DP through hardware monitoring. In other words: it mainly affects performance on Virtual Instruments. That's about the only time that latency rears its ugly head in actual live situations in DP. But each VI has its own latency issues. DP is merely the host. Likewise Logic. If you are running a lot of VIs, and you are playing, say, Ivory, then I have doubts that you'd be getting a latency of 32 in Logic. Maybe you do; I can't say that with any authority; logically speaking, I doubt it.

In all other situations, DP either compensates for all timing issues, or allows you to compensate for them manually. Latency is just a measure of the human factor, that which we are comfortable with in performing and hearing what we've performed. Even our real instruments have a little latency in them. Anyone who has practiced an upright piano and then gone out on stage and played a grand knows the feeling of real-life latency, though it's quite small. For me, 128 is not a terrible delay. It does not affect my technique to a point that I'm uncomfortable.

As far as anything that originates outside of DP -- microphones or rack units -- they can be monitored through hardware where the latency is virtually zero. In theory the lowest latency possible is a good thing, so I'm not saying you're wrong. Of course, anything approaching Zero latency is the best, but I just find it a little academic in "real life."

Shooshie

bigcityrecording · Post by **bigcityrecording** » Sat Mar 03, 2007 1:13 am

Hey Shooshie!

Well, the problem is that I do a lot of jazz recordings, esp quartets and quintets. Latency is quite noticeable to them and how it makes their instruments sound (think phasing or chorusing) in their phones, esp when they're playing finely crafted instruments and are inspired or discouraged by how they sound while recording.

I agree with you that one can certainly "live" with it esp if that "one" is me, but when clients are paying an hourly rate at a studio with fine convertors, mics, and instruments, why ruin it with noticeable latency?

Also, with computers as fast as they are, there shouldn't be latency issues. Logic is a great example of its implementation with core audio. It's why CueMix exists and why I use it.... for now. But, I shouldn't have to - not with a MacPro....

Shooshie · Post by **Shooshie** » Sat Mar 03, 2007 2:14 am

Well, I'm assuming they aren't playing VI's, so why don't you monitor through the hardware, where latency is zero? If you have a MOTU interface, which is designed to run with DP and compliment its latency shortcomings, you can let them monitor their playing through the hardware box, and you set up their headphone mixes through CueMix. Then they have no latency.

That's why I said it's academic. The only ones it affects are those who are playing the VI's. Your jazz and classical quintets are going to be playing their own instruments and/or singing.

Someone who plays VI's has to learn to live with latency. It's kind of like following a metronome; it's not hard to do once you're used to it, but musicians who don't normally experience latency feel insecure with it. I take it you're not using a MOTU interface, and not monitoring through the hardware.

Edit: Oh... I just realized you said you DO use CueMix. Then... what's to complain about? It's not a drawback. It's an advantage!

Shooshie

bigcityrecording · Post by **bigcityrecording** » Sat Mar 03, 2007 9:13 am

Because I just bought the Apogee Symphony system.... It also has its version of cue mix, but here's the problem with CueMix or Maestro:

If one wants to use FX during recording: EQ, Compression, Reverb (definitely), etc, then one must monitor through the computer, UNLESS you have a mixer (like the d8b) - only problem is, the d8b only goes up to 48k.... Are you starting to get the picture?

I could buy an outboard analog mixer for phones during tracking, but why should I have to when Logic will run at 32 samples buffer setting at 96k (believe me, that's acceptable!)?

This is where these systems are headed. It's what ProTools has been doing all along, but charging 10's of thousands of dollars to do it....

Paul

Shooshie · Post by **Shooshie** » Sat Mar 03, 2007 1:44 pm

bigcityrecording wrote:Because I just bought the Apogee Symphony system.... It also has its version of cue mix, but here's the problem with CueMix or Maestro:

If one wants to use FX during recording: EQ, Compression, Reverb (definitely), etc, then one must monitor through the computer, UNLESS you have a mixer (like the d8b) - only problem is, the d8b only goes up to 48k.... Are you starting to get the picture?

I could buy an outboard analog mixer for phones during tracking, but why should I have to when Logic will run at 32 samples buffer setting at 96k (believe me, that's acceptable!)?

This is where these systems are headed. It's what ProTools has been doing all along, but charging 10's of thousands of dollars to do it....

Paul

Yikes, that's a major cash outlay, and I guess in context of THAT, I can see why you're a little upset. Maybe you need to track with Logic and do the rest in DP. People do use both, you know. Metheny and Mays do their stems in DP, and the final mixdown in PT, or something like that. It gives them the freedom to take it with them on the road, and to get bits and pieces set up the way they want them.

I wasn't sure in the first post or two whether you were just getting into recording or what, but now I realize that you probably know as much as I do about this, if not more, and are just venting the frustration. Well, I understand. While latency isn't one of my bugaboos, there are many others. The snap-crackle-pop on input with multiple interfaces, for me, is a huge disappointment, and all the workarounds I try seem to cause worse problems.

I quit barking up the latency tree when I realized that a) MOTU is a small company that's just not up to the task, and b) it just doesn't affect what I do that much. I just don't see MOTU making it a priority.

However, if they switched from SDII to some other form of audio data, and rebuilt MAS, maybe they'd be encouraged to tackle the latency issue. I think the problem is just too deep as things stand, unless they're going to shake up the whole works.

Meanwhile, I'm just a poor musician trying to do some things that just weren't available to me (or anyone else) when I was composing and arranging my ensemble and solo concert books back in the early 1980's. That's been relegated more to "personal projects" or hobbies. I'm just fortunate to be able to use DP both for my hobby and my profession, which mostly takes place away from home. Latency isn't a problem in either one. OR... we've just learned to compensate for it. But if I had strangers paying me to come to my place and record, and if they were expecting the high-dollar treatment, I'd probably be concerned about latency as you are!

Shooshie

waxman · Post by **waxman** » Sat Mar 03, 2007 2:00 pm

That is exactly why I bought a Trident console. Save yourself a headache. It is their new 16 ch Series 8 T... it is small and easy to transport if you are mobile. The mic pre's are swwwwweeeet... Also has a bunch of cool routing and auxes, talk back etc. I use a little lexicon to send the players some verb and they are as happy as can be.

I do sessions with great players and use the hear back or aviom system. It allows them their own mix and they play better much better. The ease of set up compared t cue mix alone is worth it. that leave you to concentrate on good sounds and levels. The hearback goes right in to the aux outs and I set a consistent level and let the players adjust.

You can at any buffer you want then. I cut 48 tracks live every week straight through for 35 minutes no break no saving and I it never crashes. The tracks come back to my mix room and then I crank the buffers down to 128 and do the fixes with VIs.

bigcityrecording · Post by **bigcityrecording** » Sat Mar 03, 2007 2:41 pm

Shooshie wrote: Maybe you need to track with Logic and do the rest in DP.

Yeah, I thought about that... but what a pain. Also, I don't really travel and I like build the mixes as I go. It would be pretty disruptive if I switched back and forth for me...

Shooshie wrote: <snip>...but now I realize that you probably know as much as I do about this, if not more, and are just venting the frustration.

I like to call it "rallying the troops"!! I am definitely venting, but I'm trying to find out what the consensus is with DP users - if they really don't care, I'm barking up the DAW. I really don't want to switch to another system. I've used Logic and really don't care for it - not intuitive and not laid out very well, esp for someone like me who grew up cutting tape...

I think MOTU IS going to have to deal with latency sooner than later partly because the SD2 thing is a big issue that most of the other DAWs are or have dealt with. If MOTU wants to keep up, and I think they do, they'll have to get that part right. I wish I knew programming (or not... ha ha) - I'd offer to fix it for free (I know, better be careful what I wish for).

Shooshie · Post by **Shooshie** » Sat Mar 03, 2007 11:48 pm

I answered a LONG answer in the other thread on this, but I'll try to sum it up here. DP 4.x was almost a total bust for me. After 4 long years of troubleshooting and "rallying the troops," I finally have DP 5.11, and it's time for me to catch up. I've got to eat, sleep, and breathe music for the next 10 years, not DAW improvement as I've done for the last 4 years. It's time for me to cut my losses, accept DP as it is, and run with it. Latency is not an issue for me. Sure, I'd love to see your goals come to fruition. Honestly and truly. I've just put in my time for the past 4 years, and now I've got to use the tools MOTU has given me in DP 5.11. In your situation, I use hardware patch-thru and hardware reverb, and I don't sweat what Logic can do. Remember, I'm not saying it's a bad idea. You want to see how I've spent a lot of my time over the past 4 years? Check out this thread, a sticky at the top of the forum. On page 2, you'll find something about a database I created, listing the hardware, software, and bugs of about 50 members of our forum. It's in Excel, so you can sort on it in many ways to learn what combinations of things cause various problems. Much of what I learned -- which proved to be totally accurate and enabled me to advise people on how to get rid of crashes and other bugs -- was contrary to what MOTU was telling people at the time. Now, that's all out of date. I don't know if I can trust MOTU to tell me what's best, but I don't have the time or wherewithall to make another database.

I've got music to make, and I'm happy with the tools I've got. Yes, I could be MUCH happier if they worked all the time, and if they kicked Logic's ass, but I've got to accept what I have and focus on music. I simply have to. I can't be a software advocate anymore. i'll accept the flaws of DP, because I love the advantages of it so much. This is what I've been willing to put up with just so I can use DP. Now, I've got a version that works pretty well, and I'm going to work.

But power to you, bigcityrecording! I truly hope you and the troops can get MOTU's attention and get them to make said improvements. Just don't make me have to beta test it for the next 4 years!

:D

Shooshie

bigcityrecording · Post by **bigcityrecording** » Sun Mar 04, 2007 12:56 am

Shooshie

Thank you for all you did with your trouble shooting and bug ID'ing... I know I must have benefitted tremendously indirectly at the very least. I know there were a few times I was directed to that list or someone quoted from it and got me out of hot water.

You're a MOTU veteran with several symbolic purple hearts - the most I'd ever ask of you at this point is to enjoy the fruits of any headway I might make on this latency problem...

Maybe because I am fresh to UN I'm willing to rally the troops a bit or maybe it's because I dumped thousands into this system and I insist that it work properly.... Either way, I can't just let it go... For my own sanity, I need to understand if MOTU wants it to work or not. Their answer will determine their long term future IMO. That's what I need to know. I'm just trying to get all of us on the same page (if possible) so they know this is serious.... or not...

PeterMcCStrat · Post by **PeterMcCStrat** » Tue Mar 06, 2007 3:26 pm

bigcityrecording wrote:Because I just bought the Apogee Symphony system.... It also has its version of cue mix, but here's the problem with CueMix or Maestro:

If one wants to use FX during recording: EQ, Compression, Reverb (definitely), etc, then one must monitor through the computer, UNLESS you have a mixer (like the d8b) - only problem is, the d8b only goes up to 48k.... Are you starting to get the picture?

I could buy an outboard analog mixer for phones during tracking, but why should I have to when Logic will run at 32 samples buffer setting at 96k (believe me, that's acceptable!)?

This is where these systems are headed. It's what ProTools has been doing all along, but charging 10's of thousands of dollars to do it....

Paul

Hi Paul-

I'm not at all familiar with DP, but may buy it soon. I am familar with cue mix though, and RME total mix,.. they all do the same thing.

I know for a fact that it is simple to set up a hardware verb/delay etc,.. for zero latency monitoring and have the effects in the cans only not print them.
You need to think of your inteface as a digital mixer or patchbay.
loop a hardware verb on a channel pair, and feed it into the cans via cue mix.

I did this for years with MOTu hardware and cue mix, and now with RME and total mix. I never monitor through software using Nuendo and Cubase. I know this can be done in DP.

I suppose if you don't have a cheap hardware verb around,.. or a spare pair of ins and outs,.. then hou are hosed... sorry

Best-

PMcC

bigcityrecording · Post by **bigcityrecording** » Tue Mar 06, 2007 5:52 pm

Thanks, man... I know the ability to do all of this in the box is in the very near future - perhaps by the time I get my macpro...

I'm done with gerry-rigging stuff at this point. These systems are designed so you don't have to do that. I'm fighting to get it to work as intended...

kassonica · Post by **kassonica** » Tue Mar 06, 2007 8:08 pm

All I can say in response is 10 years ago (maybe less) DP now was a dream now that dream is in the waking hours I'm pretty happy. No DAW, nothing is perfect but DP (and I'm still useing 4.61) enables me to do what i love which is not operating computers but composing, playing and my great love of mixing.

There are always work arounds and shoostie has given some damm good advice (that man is a gem i av learnt more off him than the manual) but i made the decision after learning on logic for a couple of years to stick with DP and despite it's limitations, which for me arn't that many.
i could not and will not use another program as my main DAW.

I think it's important to make decisions and stick to your guns and above all else 'ENJOY' what your doing no matter what your doing.
And I enjoy DP greatly and prefer to look at the bright side of it and there is so much left to learn that it will provide me with many more years of income and enjoyment

horses for courses

Best

Kassonica

bigcityrecording · Post by **bigcityrecording** » Tue Mar 06, 2007 8:31 pm

kassonica wrote:There are always work arounds... <snip> I think it's important to make decisions and stick to your guns and above all else 'ENJOY' what your doing no matter what your doing. <snip...prefer to look at the bright side of it...

I agree wholeheartedly with what you are saying ideally, and I love DP and plan on sticking with it as well.

But, when I have clients sitting in my studio and the sound is not good in the phones due to latency, I know we've got a problem. That's all it is - a problem. I'm not saying MOTU is bad people. I love the product - in fact, to me, it's one of the best out there. I just want MOTU to attend to one specific sticking point they have neglected for many many years... that's it!

It's a fundamental issue that affects 80% of the users. It's something that would benefit everyone. I've been working around this issue for years. There's no reason for it anymore. The computers are way beyond latency issues and it's time for the software to be right there with them.

PeterMcCStrat · Post by **PeterMcCStrat** » Tue Mar 06, 2007 9:42 pm

Hi Paul,

I still don't know why you aren't monitoring through the hardware, it's a great feature to take advantage of, there are very good sounding hardware processors for dirt cheap now, everyones dumping hardware.

get one, route into your i/o and use it as a send to the cans for tracking, ZERO latency and all will be happy.

Maybe I missed something,.. I dunno?

Hey Kassonica!
I am set ready to go buy DP and a MacIntel would you be kind enough to share some of the " limitations" you refer to in DP with me?

I'd apprecite it.

thanks guys

PMcC