Page 1 of 2
Survey - Buffer Size
Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2005 10:57 am
by grimepoch
Just out of curiosity,
CPU: Dual 1.8 Ghz G5
Hardware: MOTU 896 & Built-In Optical TOSLINK
Recording: 128
Mastering: 256
Re: Survey - Buffer Size
Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2005 11:29 am
by FM
cpu: dual 867 mac
apogee rosetta AD - using optical in
motu 2408 mk3
512 - tracking and mixing
FM
FM can end stress, tension and reduce belly fat.
Re: Survey - Buffer Size
Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2005 11:36 am
by qo
Recording: 128 - 256
Mixing: 512 - 1024
Recording range depends on how many other tracks have already been recorded, and whether or not the artist needs to hear all of them. I normally start out with 128. With a few projects, where the number of tracks got out of hand, we had to decide on unassigning tracks, disabling plugins, etc, while tracking or increasing buffer. Some people just want to hear everything while overdubbing and don't mind the additional latency. Others choose low latency over being able to hear all previously recorded parts.
With mixing, this depends on plugins. Some projects being very light on plugs and other clients wanting to use seemingly every plugin available.
Nice topic!
EDIT: Opps, 2.7 G5, Apogee firewire-based converters.
<small>[ August 03, 2005, 02:38 PM: Message edited by: qo ]</small>
Re: Survey - Buffer Size
Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2005 11:49 am
by maintiger
recording, 256, 512
mixing 1024
Re: Survey - Buffer Size
Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2005 12:12 pm
by chrispick
Recording: 128 - 256
Mixing: 1024
Gear specs below.
Re: Survey - Buffer Size
Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2005 2:27 pm
by aplanchard
Recording 128; mixing -- whatever I can get away with.
Re: Survey - Buffer Size
Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2005 2:42 pm
by thermos
Always 1024 for everything.
Re: Survey - Buffer Size
Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2005 2:42 pm
by Splinter
Recording/Mixing - 1024 + low latency monitoring on PCI-424 card, unless I'm tracking VIs and then I change the buffer to 128 or 256. I just have to be careful either to not use Waves plugs during the tracking phase or to change back to 1024 and play before I close and save or I lose all my settings. I can't believe Waves refuses to fix this bug! How much did I pay for these. Lame.
Re: Survey - Buffer Size
Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2005 3:46 pm
by Timeline
Not sure you can get the result this thread is looking for without referencing track count and SR used. The computer CPU speed will also make a difference.
@96K when I do live rhythm, I start at 512 /512 when recording 12 -19 tracks. If recording a single track I can reduce buffers to offset delays.
Mixing has other dependancies as well. Large audio sessions over 40 tracks @ 96K require big buffers so for stability & sound I generally use 1024 disk 1024 voice
For lessor tracks or lower sample rates you can easily use less
for instance by starting out 512 512 I think most issues like disk calls will become quite apparent in the sound as disk access increases. Plugs also effect the buffer needs.
I think you need to ask:
SR & BR:
Disk buffers:
Voice Buffers:
IO buffers:
Multipal IO buffers:
Computer's CPU speed & number:
<small>[ August 03, 2005, 09:04 PM: Message edited by: Timeline ]</small>
Re: Survey - Buffer Size
Posted: Thu Aug 04, 2005 5:11 am
by grimepoch
I did ask for CPU speed

I agree with you that all that other information is important, I guess I just wanted a general description. For instance, running about 20 tracks at 128 was causing spikes in CPU (about 5 VI's as well), and now I feel comfortable with cranking that up to 256 or 512, since a lot of other people are running with that as well.
I think the biggest fear I typically have is that I am doing something stupid and not getting the most out of my setup.
Re: Survey - Buffer Size
Posted: Thu Aug 04, 2005 5:15 am
by fokof
if the 2048 and + would be available , that would be it......
Always 1024 , thanx to Cue mix.....
Re: Survey - Buffer Size
Posted: Thu Aug 04, 2005 5:20 am
by grimepoch
I stay away from the cuemix stuff, which I am assuming you mean the zero latency monitoring. I ALWAYS listen to the audio patched through the computer. At least with the 896, when I monitor an input, it's an analog passthrough I believe. Because, when I record it, and then play it, it sounds different. This is HIGHLY annoying when you've been tweaking actual hardware outside the box.
So, instead, by monitoring through the software, you hear EXACTLY what is going to be recorded, and so that part is done. This saves me LOTS of time. Right now I run 18 inputs on the 896 (2 AES and 8 ADAT In).
Re: Survey - Buffer Size
Posted: Thu Aug 04, 2005 6:08 am
by waddo
i love a big buffer. I like chinese buffer best. The problem I find is I always eat too much at a good buffer.
And where do u geys get such cheap buffer??? I mean 512? Its at least 16.95 where I live.
Re: Survey - Buffer Size
Posted: Thu Aug 04, 2005 6:11 am
by grimepoch
Hahah

Not all Buffer are same, some buffer have big selection and food good, others have two dishes and flies. For 128 you get flies.

Re: Survey - Buffer Size
Posted: Thu Aug 04, 2005 6:22 am
by danes
Recording 256/512
Mixing 512, sometimes 1024
