|
|
|
01-13-2012, 09:31 AM
|
#1
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 351
|
Way to get NO Latency when monitoring live? Hard to play in time.
I have used a Line6 KB37 for a while now and with their monitoring setup there's hardly any latency. It's very easy to play and record at the same time.
I just installed my Digi001 interface and I'm having a near impossible time plugging in a bass into one of the inputs for instance and recording. It's so delayed that it's near impossible to play using the monitoring from the speakers.
It's not like this in Pro Tools. I can play and even use effects real time when recording.
Any tips?
Last edited by 777funk; 01-13-2012 at 09:39 AM.
|
|
|
01-13-2012, 10:52 AM
|
#2
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,027
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by 777funk
I have used a Line6 KB37 for a while now and with their monitoring setup there's hardly any latency. It's very easy to play and record at the same time.
I just installed my Digi001 interface and I'm having a near impossible time plugging in a bass into one of the inputs for instance and recording. It's so delayed that it's near impossible to play using the monitoring from the speakers.
It's not like this in Pro Tools. I can play and even use effects real time when recording.
Any tips?
|
What's your ASIO buffer size?
Set it to 64-samples
What you're encountering is round-trip latency.
If it's significantly higher than 5-6ms, monitoring is going to feel very sluggish.
|
|
|
01-13-2012, 12:18 PM
|
#3
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 351
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Roseberry
What's your ASIO buffer size?
Set it to 64-samples
What you're encountering is round-trip latency.
If it's significantly higher than 5-6ms, monitoring is going to feel very sluggish.
|
It was 1024. I just changed it to the minimum it gave in driver settings on the Digi001 driver and that was 128. That feels much better, now it's useable. There's just a slight amount of latency now.
Anything else I can do?
Last edited by 777funk; 01-13-2012 at 01:12 PM.
|
|
|
01-14-2012, 03:28 PM
|
#4
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 88
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by 777funk
It was 1024. I just changed it to the minimum it gave in driver settings on the Digi001 driver and that was 128. That feels much better, now it's useable. There's just a slight amount of latency now.
Anything else I can do?
|
The only way to get zero latency is to monitor what you are recording directly (not after it goes through the soundcard and computer).
Some audio interfaces offer true zero latency monitoring where the input goes straight to the output (as well as into the computer, of course). In this instance, you set record monitoring to OFF in Reaper.
If your sound card doesn't do this, you can do the same thing using a mixer (even a cheap 4 track mixer).
Of course, with direct monitoring you will hear the signal completely dry (without any VST effects) but if a dry signal bothers you can route your monitor feed through a cheap reverb or other effects pedal.
|
|
|
03-15-2012, 09:37 AM
|
#5
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 630
|
Well, could you please explain how to do this with a mixer? I mean I keep hearing that this is possible, but you have to hit some monitoring choice in Reaper. I didn't even know there were 4 choices, which one do you use or what is the best method for laying down a track while listening to the others using a mixer? TIA, psingman
|
|
|
03-15-2012, 09:54 AM
|
#6
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Surrey, UK
Posts: 19,681
|
It all depends on the mixer. Which one do you have in mind?
What you need to do is get the audio signal to take the shortest path from your guitar mike or whatever to your ears:
Mike >> Mixer >> "direct monitoring" feature >> amp >> speaker or phones >> you.
Note your Reaper system does not appear in the signal path at all, so does not introduce any latency (or FX etc), you get the dry signal as JeffM said.
__________________
DarkStar ... interesting, if true. . . . Inspired by ...
|
|
|
03-15-2012, 12:57 PM
|
#7
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Posts: 447
|
The problem with the 001 is that it doesn't have monitoring features that modern cards have. There is only the monitor mode button but that only works on a stereo pair on inputs 3+4. If you use a mixer to get around this you will turn the monitoring mode in reaper to OFF. This gives 0 latency but you will not be able to monitor with plugins.
|
|
|
03-16-2012, 01:06 AM
|
#8
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Lincoln, UK
Posts: 7,942
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by psingman
Well, could you please explain how to do this with a mixer? I mean I keep hearing that this is possible, but you have to hit some monitoring choice in Reaper. I didn't even know there were 4 choices, which one do you use or what is the best method for laying down a track while listening to the others using a mixer? TIA, psingman
|
If you use a mixer channel for your preamp, the signal is already in your mixer and you could use the L-R output, a sub mix or an aux send to route to the mixer's or a separate headphone amp or you monitors, etc.
If you don't use a mixer and your soundcard/preamp doesnt have direct monitoring features, then you need to split the signal first into a mixer or run through its preamps so that you can get your monitoring feed.
Of course, as mentioned above you won't be able to monitor through plugins (eg amp sim) with direct monitoring, the only way to do that is to optimise your DAW and get your latency down.
I use direct monitoring for vocals; I have a preamp with a headphone monitoring section. This takes a DAW cue feed which can be mixed into the vocalist's headphones, and an FX loop to add (outboard) reverb to the vocals in the headphones (but obviously not in the preamp's recording output).
You rarely get *zero* latency -there's about a millisecond for every foot between source and mic and monitor and your ears
>
|
|
|
03-16-2012, 06:14 PM
|
#9
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2,705
|
digi 001 user
Hi, I have nothing to add really except my 001 gives 2.9 ms latency with ease (on a dual core AMD not-super-specced machine). This latency is maintained BTW without stuttering with 10 tracks each with 2-3 VST effects.... maybe it shouldn't impress me but the fact that REAPER managed this seems quite a feat.
Anyhow I would be really interested to know if you have been able to set up an external editor to workk with the digidesign. I have tried several (Audacity, Audition, Soundforge...) and none can access the card. On the other hand REASON can. Any experience on this?
|
|
|
03-16-2012, 06:49 PM
|
#10
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Shaolin => NJ
Posts: 1,213
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by martifingers
Anyhow I would be really interested to know if you have been able to set up an external editor to workk with the digidesign. I have tried several (Audacity, Audition, Soundforge...) and none can access the card. On the other hand REASON can. Any experience on this?
|
Have you tried Goldwave? I dont have an 001, but GW is a beastly editor. Maybe it'll be able to see your 001.
|
|
|
03-20-2012, 07:03 PM
|
#11
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 79
|
Here is my setup. It is certainly "budget" but it accomplishes the task of no-latency monitoring.
Last edited by afaik; 03-20-2012 at 07:12 PM.
|
|
|
03-27-2012, 08:17 PM
|
#12
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 630
|
Hi, well, I tried this basic setup. You still have to check a monitoring button after you hit record button on track, or you won't hear the recorded stuff while you are playing or singing on the track you are practicing on and then recording to.
Beleive me, I have had a few people help me trying to achieve direct monitoring. We follow all the methods and NONE work unless you check a monitoring feature. How, everyone is accomplishing this is beyond me and all those who are attempting to assist me. What I am realizing, is, they are all checking something but just not realizing that is another one of the steps and it is still called direct monitoring. Well, let's keep this discussion going as there is a missing element that might be needed to explain configs, thanks, psingman
|
|
|
03-27-2012, 10:23 PM
|
#13
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 29,269
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by psingman
Hi, well, I tried this basic setup. You still have to check a monitoring button after you hit record button on track, or you won't hear the recorded stuff while you are playing or singing on the track you are practicing on and then recording to.
Beleive me, I have had a few people help me trying to achieve direct monitoring. We follow all the methods and NONE work unless you check a monitoring feature. How, everyone is accomplishing this is beyond me and all those who are attempting to assist me. What I am realizing, is, they are all checking something but just not realizing that is another one of the steps and it is still called direct monitoring. Well, let's keep this discussion going as there is a missing element that might be needed to explain configs, thanks, psingman
|
Direct monitoring (the verb) is simply the act of monitoring the signal you are recording directly off the sound card with the monitoring feature for that track in reaper turned off.
Direct monitoring (the feature) basically allows you to control the same sound card settings from within Reaper itself instead of opening the sound card mixer to do the same thing. Reaper doesn't have the "feature" but it only means you need to make the change in the sound card mixer unless it simply doesn't support it. Either way, you are monitoring the recorded signal directly off the sound card while a copy of that is sent on down to Reaper to be recorded. For direct monitoring you should be able to make the change on the sound card's mixer settings 99.9% of the time and simply turn off monitoring of that track in Reaper. I've done it this way since the late 90s so it should be very easy to accomplish once you get the hang of it. I suppose there are sound cards that don't have this option but I figured it was rare unless it was the built-in card.
None of the above is going to work if you need to monitor VST effects on that recorded track while recording it or if you are playing through an amp sim or using a VSTi. In this case, as Jim said you have to set your audio card buffer settings down to 64ms or so, so that you can't really distinguish the audio delay that will be added to the signal if you are monitoring through reaper instead of straight from the sound card. If you disable monitoring of the track you are recording in reaper itself and you can no longer hear the instrument then the sound card is not set to playback the direct signal in its absence.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like.
Last edited by karbomusic; 03-27-2012 at 10:35 PM.
|
|
|
03-28-2012, 01:06 AM
|
#14
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Near Cambridge UK and Near Questembert, France
Posts: 22,754
|
P.S. This isnt just a Reaper thing - all DAW software has to be set up correctly to match the monitoring capability of your sound card
|
|
|
03-28-2012, 01:47 AM
|
#15
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Lincoln, UK
Posts: 7,942
|
Take your computer out of the equation. Don't use it. Connect your mic to your mixer and use it to feed your headphones. If you can't do this you need more basic help. Once you've got this working, put an XLR Y-split in the mic feed to your mixer and feed that to your interface; set the gain, but don't monitor thru REAPER.
Take a cue mix (a mix of what you need in you headphones to sing to) and send it out of a stereo output on your interface. Feed this into line inputs on your mixer. Turn this up in your headphone mix until it can be heard over your vocals but doesn't bury them. Record a take or two and listen.
If this is beyond you then you need help, a sound-tech to help you connect your stuff up. Feel free to ask any specific questions about the above method.
>
|
|
|
03-28-2012, 08:51 PM
|
#16
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 630
|
(quote)Take a cue mix (a mix of what you need in you headphones to sing to) and send it out of a stereo output on your interface. Feed this into line inputs on your mixer. Turn this up in your headphone mix until it can be heard over your vocals but doesn't bury them. Record a take or two and listen.
If you feed the line inputs into the mixer you will get them recorded also as we just tried it. I think there is something that is being misunderstood. If you try to use a small mixer to accomplish these tasks, it works very well and you can lay down a lot of tracks, but there is no way to do this, unless you cliok on a monitoring feature on the track being recorded, that is the input monitoring selection. I had 3 people watching and working alongside me and they say, that you need a special setup for direct monitoring. However, we did figure out that input monitoring is very important and might be actually the setup that is called direct if need be. I ask your patience for this inquiry but want you to know I appreciate the assistance, psingman
|
|
|
03-29-2012, 07:47 AM
|
#17
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Lincoln, UK
Posts: 7,942
|
My apologies, I was presuming you knew how to use a mixer.
If you make your headphone mix from aux sends or even PFLs (solos), you can listen to a mix of the two without sending this mix out to your DAW. Analternative is mix on the faders and send the record feed on the Aux out. The whole idea of the routing and Auxiliary Sends on a desk is to allow different mixes. In this case vox only to DAW, and vox, possibly some reverb, and cue mix to headphones.
Some basic Qs as I can't see your setup.
(1) Have you got an XLR Y-split to hand, or are you using the desk for your mic preamp?
(2) what desk are you using?
(3) what's your audio interface?
>
|
|
|
05-01-2012, 08:28 AM
|
#18
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 79
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by psingman
If you feed the line inputs into the mixer you will get them recorded also as we just tried it. I think there is something that is being misunderstood. If you try to use a small mixer to accomplish these tasks, it works very well and you can lay down a lot of tracks, but there is no way to do this, unless you cliok on a monitoring feature on the track being recorded, that is the input monitoring selection. I had 3 people watching and working alongside me and they say, that you need a special setup for direct monitoring. However, we did figure out that input monitoring is very important and might be actually the setup that is called direct if need be. I ask your patience for this inquiry but want you to know I appreciate the assistance, psingman
|
PSingman, I believe you are just not well versed in routing. See the image I posted above, read the signal paths and ask a very specific question if you do not understand.
|
|
|
05-01-2012, 10:38 AM
|
#19
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,824
|
Hi I dont want to throw gasoline in the fire but.. A good interface goes a long way to get really low latency.
My edirol has direct monitoring which is a good thing. But my edirol running through Reaper( with heavy modification of it's drivers) now runs at 1.5 ms and is very stable, I use this for backup of guitar fx gear, In fact this saved my ass many times all with Reaper, Amplitube 3, Guitar Rig 2 during live situations, when the fx gear crapped out of the guitar players.
This is my secret backup and it has never failed me. I bought another Edirol
F101 as a backup just in case
Again this issue has to due with manufactors not with the OS.
I have been running XP ( now up to SP2, SP3 sucks for audio) since 2001 when the first betas hit the net, I first installed Beta 2454 and it found all my hardware and I did not install a single driver, that was the day I realize XP will be around for a long time . I have gone trough 3 computers ( upgrades and selling of old ones) and XP is still running on the new Counting the years I have been running xp for 11 years now.
How many Mac OS versions have come out? How many Microsoft versions have come out? I think Apple is the one that has way too many updates PAID updates they are not free like you think.
Now all my systems run Windows XP SP2/Wndows 7 64 bit dual booted
and with the XP kernel hacks(patches) you can get around the OS not seeing all the ram PS. the 32 bit apps will still use 2 gigs max per instance.
I also bought a RAM drive ( desktop internal) and loaded 16 gigs of ram on it, fastest drive I have ever seen. I think the SSD companies dont want this technology to go forward, there is no way in Hell an SSD of any kind or any speed can match RAM speed.
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:34 AM.
|