Latency?

[tdblanchard]

ok. so i'm recording vox and using a yamaha 01v, an old 828 and an mdd dual 1.25 in dp4.6. i want to be able to monitor my vox with the effects during recording but i'm getting major delay/latency.
is there any way to avoid this?
the thing that doesn't make any sense to me is that when you use outboard effects in the real world (ie. no cpu), there is no such thing as "latency". how can my dual processor have a problem with this???
sorry if this is all elementary...but i did a search on "latency" and none of the posts explained this.
thanks.

[oldguitars]

pg. 206 of the manual. also, you should specify what hardware you are using (computer, audio interface etc)

[tdblanchard]

ok. so i'm recording vox and using a yamaha 01v, an old 828 and an mdd dual 1.25 in dp4.6. i want to be able to monitor my vox with the effects during recording but i'm getting major delay/latency.
is there any way to avoid this?
the thing that doesn't make any sense to me is that when you use outboard effects in the real world (ie. no cpu), there is no such thing as "latency". how can my dual processor have a problem with this???
sorry if this is all elementary...but i did a search on "latency" and none of the posts explained this.
thanks.

i think i pretty much did.
audio interface is a yamaha 01v going to an old 828 into a g4 mdd dual 1.25

[Don T]

Hello:
Latency free monitoring, that is the question. The reality is, in the digital world, it does not exist. Even high dollar digital mixers have latency. It is a function of buffer size, processing speed, HD buffers and bus speed. You will find some "acceptable" work arounds in the manual depending on your gear setup. Personally, I use an analog console to generate my latency free monitoring.

[tdblanchard]

that's crazy that a $30 boss delay pedal can produce zero latency, but a multi-thousand dollar digital domain can't!
something's wrong here.
very very wrong

[sdfalk]

Hello:
Latency free monitoring, that is the question. The reality is, in the digital world, it does not exist. Even high dollar digital mixers have latency. It is a function of buffer size, processing speed, HD buffers and bus speed. You will find some "acceptable" work arounds in the manual depending on your gear setup. Personally, I use an analog console to generate my latency free monitoring.

Yeah I guess there's some, but I've tracked through a 2408mk3 with
CueMix DSP enabled and the latency is so low as to be almost
non-existent.
(No one in the band noticed anyway.)

[oldguitars]

oops, sorry, i see that you listed your gear.... more coffee please. Yeah, the latency thing is a bit of a drag. I use the 2408mk3 and 424, and the zero latency thing is great, but sometimes i wish i could throw a plug in on the recording track and hear it. I just go to "tape" with the efx if i need to, sometimes multing the signal on to 2 tracks with one having no fx for safety.

[Jaysplace101]

I had an old 828 and I think it would NOT do zero latency monitoring like an 896 or the newer interfaces. The latency is equal to your buffer, and you're stuck with that. I can't remember for sure. And, while it's true that there's no such thing as zero latency, with most interfaces now days, the latency incurred in a no latency monitoring situation is so minimal that it's imperceivable.

Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong, but I think he might be out of luck with that old 828.

j

[tdblanchard]

that's crazy that a $30 boss delay pedal can produce zero latency, but a multi-thousand dollar digital domain can't!
something's wrong here.
very very wrong

i re-stress this exact point!

[sushiboy]

I got a bit fed up with latency problems (which in some cases has actually been worse in OSX/4.6 than in OS9 3.1.1 - I have some old hardware, so I'm sure that's half my problem).

The buffer changes suggested in the manual really didn't work that well for me, so my work-around was to buy one of those dirt-cheap Behringer analog mixers (about 35 GBP, new price). I take side-chain outputs from my TL Audio input boxes into the mixer while feeding DP with the balanced outputs. I then monitor the master outs from DP on the mixer. Since I like to hear a bit of reverb on my voice when recording, and since the Behringer has a single auxiliary send on each channel, I slotted in an old digital reverb rack unit that had been laying in a cupboard unused for the past 10 years.

Not exactly elegant, but nicer for recording vocals. (And cost virtually nothing.)

[bongo_john_uk]

that's crazy that a $30 boss delay pedal can produce zero latency, but a multi-thousand dollar digital domain can't!
something's wrong here.
very very wrong

i re-stress this exact point!

Dedicated digital sound gear is built using very different processor architectures than a computer. The micro computer architecture was never designed with this in mind and is instead attempting to be so general purpose that some kinds of application will always suffer. Technically the main problem with computers is loop operations take up processing time so buffers is the only way around this (the loop logic itself then absorbs proportionally less processing time the greater the buffer size). Ideally you would have no buffer (i.e a buffer of 1 sample) and process each sample on the fly but this is impossible without a completely new type of computer. Maybe that will happen someday.. Either that or just use the computer as a controller for dedicated sound gear with very small latency.

If you want the flexibilty of a computer then you have to suffer the draw backs! A boss sound pedal doesn't have to be able to anything else like browse the internet!

[Tim]

that's crazy that a $30 boss delay pedal can produce zero latency, but a multi-thousand dollar digital domain can't!
something's wrong here.
very very wrong

i re-stress this exact point!

And how many tracks can you record to that pedal?

[Shooshie]

that's crazy that a $30 boss delay pedal can produce zero latency, but a multi-thousand dollar digital domain can't!
something's wrong here.
very very wrong

Funny thing. My cheap tv can play video instantly. Change to any channel, and the video is just..."poof"... there! No latency. But try to play a Quicktime video on my computer, and you have to wait forever for it to stream, or download, or boot up, or something. And the resolution? Pfah! Nothing like HDTV!

Plus, I was just thinking about how my hand-held calculator is instantaneous, whereas when I open up an Excel spreadsheet, it's a lot slower! And did you ever try broadcasting Internet Radio? Not nearly as fast or easy as real radio.

I tell you, these computers just aren't what they're cracked up to be, are they?


Shooshie

[dpdan]

I got a kick out of Sooshie's last post... ha ha ha
I tell you, these computers just aren't what they're cracked up to be, are they?


I agree

What's worse in TV is the fact that audio is almost always late from the video. At times, it is so bad, it's like someone else talking, and you sit there and think WHAT? It's so annoying that I shut it off, or watch something else if I'm that bored.
What's even worse is that folks like me pay for it.

dpDan

[superstar]

you know, personally, i find it very distracting to monitor my vocal recordings with all the fx running. i rather put down my vox raw and check up up on it afterwards, especially when i have a ton of reverb and echo and all kinds of audio destroyers on there to make my voice sound - ahh - bearable