View Single Post
Old 11-08-2017, 10:57 AM   #22
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 1,528

Originally Posted by drumphil View Post
Well, you can basically multiply that by 4 to get your latency at 44.1Khz at the same buffer size. Unless you want to use 4 times as much cpu running at 192k all the time to achieve that latency figure. We're also assuming that the drivers are reporting the latency accurately in the first place. The chances of this figure being accurate are better with Roland than Behringer, but until you actually test you never know for sure.

The unit may be capable of running at smaller buffer sizes to keep the latency down at lower sample rates, but there is no way of knowing from that video.
At 44.1kHz, the buffer is fixed at 80 samples/channel instead of 144 samples/channel@192 kHz, and the reported latency around 3.2ms/3.2ms if I recall well.
Asio4all doesn't report converter latency or any other buffers beyond the asio buffer size, so you can't just go by the figure stated in the top right corner of reaper. You actually have to use a round trip latency testing utility to find out what your latency really is.

Whats more, as we can see from the testing by chucky5p that I posted, the actual official behringer drivers understate the latency by 3ms.

A combined one and a half hours of video about the interfaces, and still not one loopback audio fidelity or round trip latency test in sight!
Yes, this video was laborious and really lacked that RMAA round trip test.
At least Roland advertises specs on their website:
Residual Noise LevelINPUT (1L, 2R) --> OUTPUT (1L, 2R): -94 dBu typ. (SENS 1L, SENS 2R knobs: min., input terminated with 600 ohms, IHF-A, typ.)

Dynamic RangeAD block INPUT (1L, 2R) jacks: 104 dB typ. (SENS 1L, SENS 2R knobs: min.)
DA block OUTPUT (1L, 2R) jacks: 109 dB typ.
If it's anywhere near as good as they say, it is pretty good.

Last edited by lolilol1975; 11-08-2017 at 11:24 AM.
lolilol1975 is offline   Reply With Quote