Monitoring Latency

[MicGees]

I am using an 07 Imac24", the presonus firebox, and Logic Studio. I cam getting a latent response when monitoring vocal tracks of more than 14 ms. This has never happened with any other system that I have used in the past. I have tried to update all apps for firebox and I am using the Leopard Operating system. This is my only issue with Logic at the moment, but indeed a big issue...so if anybody has a firebox please tell me how your buffer is set and are you using the firebox to monitor while recording...because if so my settings are just near un-usable.

 

 

Thnx

[Spunkadellic]

is 14 ms really a big deal while recording?

[seagate]

Make sure you haven't got any plugs on your 2-buss...

[blueintheface]

Why not use the Firebox's zero-latency direct monitoring?

[triplets]

Make sure you're not using an Adaptive Limiter, Linear Phase EQ or Multipressor when recording, they create latency. Also make sure that the plugin delay compensation is not enabled when you record. And is the Firebox Leopard compatible?

[MicGees]

The firebox really has no control of buffers and such from its two apps, one is a mixer...the other is a checkbox to turn different I/O on and off.

 

...so much for zero latency monitoring

 

any noticeable latency is bad when you are trying to drop solid backups dude.

 

ANYWAYS...I found a solution to this purely on accident. Arm the (i) button on the audio track to which you are recording...thats it...I felt really silly of course, but hey, maybe this will prevent somebody else from going thru 4 days of panic.

 

~Gee$

[triplets]

You control the I/O buffers from Logic, not from the interface. You do that in the Audio Preferences of Logic. The lowest Logic goes is 32k, which very few computers so far can actually handle when you have more than 5 or 10 tracks. 64k is pretty good and has no audible latency when doing drums, vocals or guitars. 128k you can do guitars still and vocals, but live drums is on the limit of audible latency.

[Spunkadellic]

even recording on analog has latency...between the play head and the rec head

 

if its that big a deal, find a way to hear your mic seperate from going through the computer

[davidrice]

Analog recorders use a sync head to eliminate latency in recording.

 

I don't understand why latency deemed unacceptable for drums would be any more acceptable for vocals and guitars. I can't bear any at all and that's my chief gripe with native systems (though I'm eager to try the Apogee Symphony).

[nickweston]

I've been using Logic for 8 years and love it.

 

that being said, this latency issue is HUGE. I can't wait for January (new MacPros), when I will set up my Apogee system with 1.7ms of latency.

 

This is the only thing I am jealous of in PT, the rest is a dream.

[Tapeworm]

I always used to just run my computers output and my instruments that I'd record thru my outboard mixer instead of thru the software. I use with that old system the first version of the motu2408.

 

Does anybody bother to do that anymore? Because thats were the big concern over monitoring latency rears its ugly head, yeah? Its because folks want to monitor directly through the software nowadays?

 

Now that I got a newfangled laptop and all the interfaces have self contained pre's and I guess are kinda like little self contained mixers in themselves. The Saffire LE I got to with the laptop has a nice low/zero latency mixer control panel which I should..uh...look into

[Eric Wikman]

I always used to just run my computers output and my instruments that I'd record thru my outboard mixer instead of thru the software. I use with that old system the first version of the motu2408.

 

Does anybody bother to do that anymore? Because thats were the big concern over monitoring latency rears its ugly head, yeah? Its because folks want to monitor directly through the software nowadays?

 

 

Well, I am a songwriter first, but I learned long ago from engineers... that you always want to monitor what is being recorded. I used to monitor thru the board, but that is not really listening to levels etc... coming from the actual recording. I know you can set it up so it seems that you are getting the right recoding, but things can go wrong... like bad cables etc. That is one plus.

[Musicianista]

I always used to just run my computers output and my instruments that I'd record thru my outboard mixer instead of thru the software. I use with that old system the first version of the motu2408.

 

Does anybody bother to do that anymore? Because thats were the big concern over monitoring latency rears its ugly head, yeah? Its because folks want to monitor directly through the software nowadays?

 

 

Well, I am a songwriter first, but I learned long ago from engineers... that you always want to monitor what is being recorded. I used to monitor thru the board, but that is not really listening to levels etc... coming from the actual recording. I know you can set it up so it seems that you are getting the right recoding, but things can go wrong... like bad cables etc. That is one plus.

 

This is true, but in the world of audio cards and latency etc, one pass of recording to check playback for cables, dodgy level, eq etc will expose all. Once you have a signal you are happy with you should be able to monitor from anywhere you like? Especially for singers who get urked by the slightest evidence of latency. The rest of us just get on with it warts and all!

 

I suppose a headphone mix with the direct mic signal for a singer etc will leave you to engineer with the recorded signal?

[nickweston]

yeah, direct monitoring is a huge hassle.

 

different reverb on playback, you have to trim the part before you punch so the performer can hear the old part, unacceptable.

 

Unfortunately, that's how I have to work now. Before I went 100% virtual instruments we software monitored and it was heaven.

 

MacPro huge machine please with Apogee Symphony, this is getting old. Just wonder if I can wait until January.

[xpulsar]

even recording on analog has latency...between the play head and the rec head

 

if its that big a deal, find a way to hear your mic seperate from going through the computer

 

This comment is a joke! you obviously never have used a professional analog tape machine such as a Studer,MCI,Otari,Ampex,Scully ect....

  They have no latency,When you are recording you are monitoring off of the machines analog inputs. When you are punching in you are monitoring off of the sync/record head. Get your fact straight before you make a comment like this. This is the reason so many people are misinformed about analog tape.

 

 

-Collin

[xpulsar]

I've been using Logic for 8 years and love it.

 

that being said, this latency issue is HUGE. I can't wait for January (new MacPros), when I will set up my Apogee system with 1.7ms of latency.

 

This is the only thing I am jealous of in PT, the rest is a dream.

 

Don't hold your breath. We are running a Quad core 2.6 with 16 gigs of ram and the Apogee Symphony system and even with the buffer settings set to 32 in logic there is still noticeable latency when using software monitoring.

 

-Collin

[nickweston]

Hey Collin-

 

thanks (I think) for sharing your experience with the Apogee Symphony system.

 

so at a buffer setting of 32 you still have latency problems?

 

I was told by a Sweetwater representative that they set up 80 Symphony systems and everybody was raving, that they were getting 1.7ms of latency at 192.

 

That is certainly manageable, the lowest number I've ever seen (including PT HD).

 

but now I read your post, the first one I've seen of someone who actually owned the symphony system and wasn't happy.

 

Of course there will always be latency, just like there is for a guitar player standing at the front of the stage (unless it's analog), the concept is to make it manageable.

 

I'm severely bummed if this is the case!

 

thanks, all the best

[xpulsar]

Hey Collin-

 

thanks (I think) for sharing your experience with the Apogee Symphony system.

 

so at a buffer setting of 32 you still have latency problems?

 

I was told by a Sweetwater representative that they set up 80 Symphony systems and everybody was raving, that they were getting 1.7ms of latency at 192.

 

That is certainly manageable, the lowest number I've ever seen (including PT HD).

 

but now I read your post, the first one I've seen of someone who actually owned the symphony system and wasn't happy.

 

Of course there will always be latency, just like there is for a guitar player standing at the front of the stage (unless it's analog), the concept is to make it manageable.

 

I'm severely bummed if this is the case!

 

thanks, all the best

 

We bought our rig from Sweetwater!

I was just starting some vocal overdubs this last week and was like " I'll try software monitoring to see if it works like PT"

Nope! The singer notices as soon as she put on her head phones.

Unacceptable. All of my settings are correct my system fat is trimmed. Recording at 24bit/48k.

 

 

 

Luckily I use a neve console at the studio to track into Radar's converters through the Apogees 16x-DA's AES inputs in advanced routing mode. I am monitoring off of the Radar's outputs that come up on the board and Logics playback in coming up on a Stereo external input on the console.

  It's funny that a Radar that is 5 years old has no latency that I or anyone can hear and essentially is a computer hard disk recorder with a slow CPU compared to today's standards. You think that with all of the ram and CPU power we have ,the latency thing would be gone.

 

-Collin

[nickweston]

dude-

 

you are a wealth of information. Your explanation of the RADAR defies imagination, why does it work and a Mac that's 5 times as powerful doesn't?

 

OK, INVENTORS-there's a market here...

 

my god I don't want to buy any PT cards or anything...

 

so that puts me in the same situation I'm in now with my $1300 MOTU unit, which I use with Apogee AD&DA16s as convertors, except I'd have to re-build my system and spend a bunch of money to get back to where I already am!

 

your line about the singer noticing immediately after putting the headphones on gave me chills. I work with a lot of "legends" let's say, and I am working in a compromised situation when I'm recording them (direct monitoring, having to trim parts before I punch so they can hear their previous take up until the "punch"). They deserve better, and so do I!

 

what's the answer here?

 

all the best to you for your info, you may have saved us a ton of money and hassle.

[xpulsar]

dude-

 

you are a wealth of information. Your explanation of the RADAR defies imagination, why does it work and a Mac that's 5 times as powerful doesn't?

 

OK, INVENTORS-there's a market here...

 

my god I don't want to buy any PT cards or anything...

 

so that puts me in the same situation I'm in now with my $1300 MOTU unit, which I use with Apogee AD&DA16s as convertors, except I'd have to re-build my system and spend a bunch of money to get back to where I already am!

 

your line about the singer noticing immediately after putting the headphones on gave me chills. I work with a lot of "legends" let's say, and I am working in a compromised situation when I'm recording them (direct monitoring, having to trim parts before I punch so they can hear their previous take up until the "punch"). They deserve better, and so do I!

 

what's the answer here?

 

all the best to you for your info, you may have saved us a ton of money and hassle.

 

Unfortunately the answer seems to be you get what you pay for.

If you think of it in the terms of the 1980's.When you had to have a 2" 24 track that cost $100,000 and a console that cost at least that much in-order to stay in business and compete. Spending $5000 to get an HD1 Rig is peanuts. And is more powerful than a 2" 24 track.

   It just does not make sense that everyone wants their s#!+ to work flawlessly sound great and only spend $400-$1200 to get all of that. If you want a Neve or API console sound buy a  Neve or API, or you could try to convince yourself that the Neve or API Like plug-ins sound just as good as a Neve or API. Keep smoking that pipe!

  I would rather spend more money and get stability and ease of use than a billion features I'll probably never use.

  I will say this I do like mixing in Logic more than in PT HD,but I rarely mix ITB.I like to use my analog compressors, EQ's and my funky stomp box's and Analog Filters.

I think Logic sounds better. But recording and editing audio in Logic pales in comparison to PT.

 

My 2 cents

 

-Collin