Can audio interface improve latency?

What's Hot
BeexterBeexter Frets: 597
edited May 2020 in Studio & Recording
Are some interfaces better than others for latency or is the computer you are running the software on the biggest culprit?
Put another way, would a new audio interface be the cheapest/ easiest way to improve latency? I'm wanting to run Helix Native as a plugin in Reaper on a laptop (Intel Core i5 8th gen).

I've got a Soundcraft Notepad FX 8 that can function as a USB interface - would I notice a difference with something like a Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 or a Presonus iTwo (I understand that the Presonus will also connect directly to an ipad which is a bonus and also comes with a version of Studio One) or are they all much of a muchness? Is there anything I should look for on the spec sheets?

I don't want to spend a fortune - i just fancy trying to put some backing tracks together for practising and to help me learn how to use a DAW.
0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
«1

Comments

  • octatonicoctatonic Frets: 33725
    Beexter said:
    Are some interfaces better than others for latency or is the computer you are running the software on the biggest culprit?

    snip

    I don't want to spend a fortune - i just fancy trying to put some backing tracks together for practising and to help me learn how to use a DAW.
    Yes but trying to do it on the cheap is where people often come unglued.

    If you are wanting to record something that is already processed (so recording a hardware Helix unit into Reaper then I'd suggest something with hardware monitoring, which is to take the feed straight off the input and route it to the output, bypassing the computer's buffer. This is near 'zero latency' as makes no odds. This means you track without computer plugins but if you are using a modeller then you would track using its effects, not the DAW's. You can still set up something with delays and reverbs in the DAW but the latency of the interface just gives you a degree of 'predelay'.

    But you do not want to do that so the best solution is a native audio interface with the lowest latency possible, which would currently be the Presonus Quantum or the Focusrite Red series interfaces.
    The Red series (is what I have) has a whole feature set you don't need and they are expensive.

    The Quantum series what you want and from your description I would say you want the smaller unit, the Quantum 2.
    You can get extremely low latency with these devices but you will need a Thunderbolt capable computer and it will not work with an iPad.

    The cheaper Focusrite and Presonus interfaces don't have the same low latency capabilities as the more expensive devices.
    It is up to you as to whether that is acceptable or not.

    IMHO the best solution here is a hardware modeller and some audio interface that allows you to monitor off hardware.
    Focusrite, RME and various other companies have devices that allow this.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • StuckfastStuckfast Frets: 2393
    TBF the 2nd and 3rd generation Scarletts achieve pretty good latency figures even over USB. Not quite in the same league as the best Thunderbolt interfaces but not a million miles away and very usable.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • octatonicoctatonic Frets: 33725
    Stuckfast said:
    TBF the 2nd and 3rd generation Scarletts achieve pretty good latency figures even over USB. Not quite in the same league as the best Thunderbolt interfaces but not a million miles away and very usable.
    You're right.
    For a couple of tracks it probably isn't a huge issue- but if you have a fairly large session with a lot of processing you can find yourself having to go from a 32 or 64 sample buffer out to 512 or 1024.
    At that point it isn't really possible to track anything whilst monitoring off hardware.

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • BeexterBeexter Frets: 597
    Thanks for the replies - certainly some points to consider that hadn't occurred to me.
    My requirements are very much entry level at the mo- just putting a basic drum, rhythm guitar and bass track together to practice over and learn a bit about how to use a DAW and virtual instruments/ plugins. The basic Focusrite Scarlett and Presonus interfaces seem popular so i just wondered if they would be an improvement on my Soundcraft USB mixer.

    If I'm intending on using Helix Native,  i assume hardware monitoring is academic since the computer has to process the signal before sending it back out? In that instance, is it worth monitoring directly from the laptop headphone out, or is that not a done thing?
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • stratman3142stratman3142 Frets: 2177
    There's some useful data on latency at the link below:

    which includes the following link:
    According to the above table (on paper) the Focusrite Scarlett 2nd generation looks reasonable provided your computer has the oomph to run at 64spls, (or you might just get away with 128spls) for tracking.

    I'm using a Zoom UAC-2 and getting a usable round trip latency of 5.4ms at 64spls (at 44.1kHz) without any problems, which matches the figure in the table. But that's with USB 3.0. My computer has an Intel i7-6700K processor.

    An alternative, if you've got a Helix type interface, is to monitor with the Helix unit, but set it to record dry, then playback with Helix Native on the track. That's what I used to do with a Pod and Pod Farm in the old days when I had an old slow computer.

    It's not a competition.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom
  • StuckfastStuckfast Frets: 2393
    USB 3 won't make any difference to latency.

    The big divide is between manufacturers who code their own Windows ASIO drivers (Focusrite, MOTU, RME, Zoom, Steinberg etc) and those who use the generic Thesycon driver (Arturia, Antelope, PreSonus and probably a few others I can't think of right now). The Thesycon driver always used to be pants, I don't know whether it's better now.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • stratman3142stratman3142 Frets: 2177
    edited May 2020
    Stuckfast said:
    USB 3 won't make any difference to latency.

    The big divide is between manufacturers who code their own Windows ASIO drivers (Focusrite, MOTU, RME, Zoom, Steinberg etc) and those who use the generic Thesycon driver (Arturia, Antelope, PreSonus and probably a few others I can't think of right now). The Thesycon driver always used to be pants, I don't know whether it's better now.
    Yes I've never checked the difference between USB2 and 3. Am I correct in assuming the Focusrite Scarlett 2nd Gen is USB 2? It appears (on paper) to give similar latency performance to my Zoom UAC-2.

    It's not a competition.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • octatonicoctatonic Frets: 33725
    edited May 2020
    Beexter said:
    Thanks for the replies - certainly some points to consider that hadn't occurred to me.
    My requirements are very much entry level at the mo- just putting a basic drum, rhythm guitar and bass track together to practice over and learn a bit about how to use a DAW and virtual instruments/ plugins. The basic Focusrite Scarlett and Presonus interfaces seem popular so i just wondered if they would be an improvement on my Soundcraft USB mixer.

    If I'm intending on using Helix Native,  i assume hardware monitoring is academic since the computer has to process the signal before sending it back out? In that instance, is it worth monitoring directly from the laptop headphone out, or is that not a done thing?
    Yes hardware monitoring only works if you had a hardware modeller, or microphones in front of an amp- the idea is you can hear the signal you are capturing through headphones without any noticeable latency because you are not going through the buffer.

    I explained it like that to draw attention to the fact that if you go through a buffer then you are at the mercy of the audio buffer size and the interface drivers.
    Even the best native interfaces are going to be a problem with a large session once you have loads of plugins instantiated.
    It might not apply in this instance but say you wanted to record some overdubs once you are 3/4 the way into mixing you will likely be loading the computer up enough to need to increase the buffer.
    If your buffer means you have 10ms roundtrip latency then playing in time will be challenging because you are hearing things later than you are playing them to such a degree that any sense of feel and groove goes.
    The work around in a native system without hardware monitoring is to disable all the plugins, lower the buffer and track the overdubs.

    With a DSP based system (so Pro Tools HDX or UA Apollo) you can usually monitor with effects in place despite the buffer setting of your DAW, albeit with the AAX DSP plugins in the case of Pro Tools HDX and the UA plugins for the Apple. Helix native won't run with zero latency on either systems, which is why I didn't suggest either to you (also HDX is a minimum of £7k and only works with Pro Tools)

    But if you want to record a few tracks of guitar, aren't working with big sessions, then you may well be fine.
    I just like to make people aware of the intricacies of a setup like that before they purchase because for some people they won't be happy and they end up selling their budget devices, lose money and buying something that works despite session size- it is just easier to get the right thing off the bat.

    I guess I'm saying that a budget interface might do what you want- Focusrite Scarlett's are really excellent value for money and they sound good. but you might get frustrated with it down the line- if you do you'll have the information you need to make the right decision. Sorry for going on this long- I don't know a more succinct way to say it all.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom
  • SnapSnap Frets: 6256
    Just get one of the new Native Instruments interfaces, cheap and very good indeed and have good drivers which can help with latency.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • BeexterBeexter Frets: 597
    @octatonic ; - no need to apologise, I really appreciate the detailed reply and especially from someone who knows their stuff.
    I have an HX Stomp so it would be just as easy to record with that and not have to worry about latency but it would be handy to have a class compliant interface to mess with Garageband on the ipad as well. The only time I tried that before was with an irig HD which was unusable due to latency. 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • StuckfastStuckfast Frets: 2393
    Yes I've never checked the difference between USB2 and 3. Am I correct in assuming the Focusrite Scarlett 2nd Gen is USB 2? It appears (on paper) to give similar latency performance to my Zoom UAC-2.


    The whole USB 2 vs USB 3 thing is really confusing.

    There are various different connector types in use, some of which were only introduced at a particular point in the history of USB. So for example the Type C connector was introduced with USB 3.1. But it's backwards compatible, and with an adaptor cable, you can connect any USB device at all to a USB 3 Type C input.

    Some generations of USB also introduced new data transfer protocols, which are not backwards compatible. For example USB 3.0 has a SuperSpeed mode. Only devices specially designed to use that more can take advantage of it. If a device only supported SuperSpeed mode, it wouldn't be compatible with a USB 2 input.

    As of now, there are lots of audio interfaces that are touted as 'USB 3', but very few of them actually make use of SuperSpeed mode or other USB 3-specific features. Nearly all of them are basically USB 2 devices with a different connector. So, as long as you have the right cable, you can use nearly all USB audio interfaces with a USB 2 input and they will behave exactly the same as they would with a USB 3 input.

    The only interfaces I've tried that are genuinely USB 3 devices are from RME and Steinberg. Even they offer a compatibility mode for USB 2 and there is no latency benefit in using USB 3, you just get more channels.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom
  • newi123newi123 Frets: 850
    Interesting info - thanks all.

    I`ve also been looking at an interface upgrade - currently running a first generation focusrite scarlet solo.

    I don`t need to record a whole band. Guitars and vocals at home is fine. Does the UA Apollo solution of having a processor in the interface to run their plugins provide a tangibly better solution than the other high end offerings? As far as I can see, UA appear to be the only firm to do this, and it`s kind of the equivalent of using a helix stomp, albeit the hardware is not just guitar centric.

    In my case I`m running a windows laptop with thunderbolt.

    Don`t mean to hijack the thread, but I think it`s all linked to the same question!

    CHeers

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • goldtopgoldtop Frets: 6101
    UA set-up works fine, and I like it, but I don't think the latency is actually that low (i7 3.1GHz iMac).

    RME, on the other hand, was great. For guitars/vocals at home, I'd definitely think about a Babyface (used, if cash is tight).
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • HeartfeltdawnHeartfeltdawn Frets: 22096
    Stuckfast said:
    USB 3 won't make any difference to latency.

    The big divide is between manufacturers who code their own Windows ASIO drivers (Focusrite, MOTU, RME, Zoom, Steinberg etc) and those who use the generic Thesycon driver (Arturia, Antelope, PreSonus and probably a few others I can't think of right now). The Thesycon driver always used to be pants, I don't know whether it's better now.
    This. In the cheap interface market, Steinberg and Zoom have the best drivers. I don't know who writes the drivers from the Komplete Audio 2 but they're not quite up to the Steinberg ones with the UR22. 





    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • HeartfeltdawnHeartfeltdawn Frets: 22096
    newi123 said:
    Interesting info - thanks all.

    I`ve also been looking at an interface upgrade - currently running a first generation focusrite scarlet solo.

    I don`t need to record a whole band. Guitars and vocals at home is fine. Does the UA Apollo solution of having a processor in the interface to run their plugins provide a tangibly better solution than the other high end offerings? As far as I can see, UA appear to be the only firm to do this, and it`s kind of the equivalent of using a helix stomp, albeit the hardware is not just guitar centric.

    In my case I`m running a windows laptop with thunderbolt.

    Don`t mean to hijack the thread, but I think it`s all linked to the same question!

    CHeers


    So £643 for the Apollo Twin at Andertons. 

    I personally wouldn't buy it. Even a budget USB interface (UR22, NI KA2, Zoom UAC-2) are more than good enough to operate with low enough latency to be able to play and monitor your recordings. I'd rater go with a cheap audio interface and buy Helix Native, or you buy a Helix Stomp for £400 and pay another £80 for Helix Native. 





    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • octatonicoctatonic Frets: 33725
    Apollo is only low latency with UA plugins.
    The latency with regular AU plugins is unacceptably high.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom
  • lentolento Frets: 116
    I'm looking at an Apollo for use with Cubase 10 on a Windows i7 PC.                                                                                  
    Currently using a Focusrite Scarlett 6i6 with a round trip of about 16ms at 160 samples.
    Would the Apollo better this ...?
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • StuckfastStuckfast Frets: 2393
    No idea what Apollo performance is like on Windows but do be aware that you need a Thunderbolt connection, which many Windows machines don't have.

    On the Mac the Thunderbolt Apollos can give quite good low-latency performance, but you have to take care with the settings. Most likely you'll only get good low-latency performance with native plug-ins if you don't try to use UA ones simultaneously, and vice versa.

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • lentolento Frets: 116

    Yes, I do have a Thunderbolt 3 port and aware that the older Apollo uses Thunderbolt 2.
    Would need an adaptor and can be a bit hit and miss with the Apple ones ...
     
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • FreebirdFreebird Frets: 5821
    goldtop said:
    RME, on the other hand, was great. For guitars/vocals at home, I'd definitely think about a Babyface (used, if cash is tight).
    They come with a 5 year warranty too.
    If we are not ashamed to think it, we should not be ashamed to say it.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
Sign In or Register to comment.