Latency Tolerance

Cirrus

WiresDreamDisasters said:

First time I played on a big stage was an odd experience. Coz I definitely felt some latency with the cabs being 4 meters away from me. I always bring them forward a bit now. Well.. I used too... when gigs were a thing....

I prefer playing smaller places really. Better vibe. 

For me I always find that distance from a cab is no problem... until suddenly it's a problem and I hate it, and have to go back.

WiresDreamDisasters

octatonic said:

The advantage of HDX is I just never think about latency.

The cost of entry is vast- but I can track a full band through it, manage the tracking and cue mix from the same location.
It is really seamless compared to all other solutions and I know this because I've had most of them here, either as purchases or as reviews.

Recorded the first TNBD album on a pair of 192's we had at the FX studio at the time. It was pretty smooth! But I'm not a Pro Tools fan really. Find it awkward to use versus something like Reaper or Studio One.

That was even before they supported ASIO!! Wow... remember that?? When Pro Tools didn't even support ASIO!?! Crazy how time flies!

octatonic

WiresDreamDisasters said:

octatonic said:

The advantage of HDX is I just never think about latency.

The cost of entry is vast- but I can track a full band through it, manage the tracking and cue mix from the same location.
It is really seamless compared to all other solutions and I know this because I've had most of them here, either as purchases or as reviews.

Recorded the first TNBD album on a pair of 192's we had at the FX studio at the time. It was pretty smooth! But I'm not a Pro Tools fan really. Find it awkward to use versus something like Reaper or Studio One.

That was even before they supported ASIO!! Wow... remember that?? When Pro Tools didn't even support ASIO!?! Crazy how time flies!

That is the one downside of Avid.
Their native drivers suck- the MTRX I have here is £13k retail and you get over 12ms of latency when using it natively.

Fortunately I can aux in a native solution over Dante so my native latency is under 3ms.

I've learned to appreciate Pro Tools.

I am doing some sound design for my post grad (game audio).
It is much quicker doing it in Pro Tools.

Stuckfast

WiresDreamDisasters said:

thegummy said:

What interfaces don't have acceptable latencies at the lowest buffer setting? Not any that you can currently buy, even the cheapest.

I don't have an exhaustive list, but I'm sure there are going to be interfaces that give piss poor performance at low buffer settings regardless of the computer. I had to send a Roland Quad-Capture back to the shop because it was just absolute piss for audio-dropouts and poor latency performance. Don't know if they ever fixed it.

Off the top of my head, the PreSonus Studio series of USB interfaces would arguably fall into that category. They use the dreaded Thesycon driver and they add in a DSP mixer that has several ms latency of its own. Even at the lowest buffer size you can't get the round-trip latency below 10ms. They took a lot of flak for that (some of it from me) and I think that's what stung them into producing the Quantum.

The Roland interfaces are strange. I got shit low-latency performance when I first tested them, but was told afterwards that there's a box in the driver settings that needs to be ticked the other way around from what you'd expect. If you do this then they're quite good.

PolarityMan

I cant get the RTL utility to give reliable results at lower buffer sizes, it can go anything from 7ms to 300ms at 128 (which is what im currently running) and often doesnt detect the signal properly

stratman3142

thegummy said:

stratman3142 said:

thegummy said:

LooseMoose said:

Which Zoom interface do people recommend?

There are only really two - the UAC-2 with 2 inputs and the UAC-8 which I'd assume has 8 so it depends how many inputs you need.

I'm using a Zoom UAC-2. The reported specs for a Focusrite Scarlett gen 2 or 3 seem similar but I haven't got one to try. 

With my Zoom, I get 5.4ms at 44.1kHz at 64 spls without any issues.

It's a Scarlett I'm using and at 64 buffer is where I get the 8.4ms so the Zoom is literally the difference between unnoticeable and noticeable.

It's a shame it's only got 2 inputs though, that's the main reason I'm going for an RME rather than a Zoom if I need to get a new interface.

Btw. I'm using my Zoom with USB 3 interfaces on my PC and laptop. I've not tried my UAC 2 with USB 2, so I don't know if that would make a difference.

LooseMoose

Sorry all, learning a lot from this but some of it is still flying a million miles over my head.  Am I right in saying that as Macs (like I use) use 'Core Audio' that the discussion around drivers doesn't matter?  Or does it?

Am hovering over buying a Zoom UAC 2 as suggested but don't want to spend the money out if it's not going to improve on the latency from my Presonus 24c on Catalina

John_A

LooseMoose said:

Sorry all, learning a lot from this but some of it is still flying a million miles over my head.  Am I right in saying that as Macs (like I use) use 'Core Audio' that the discussion around drivers doesn't matter?  Or does it?

Am hovering over buying a Zoom UAC 2 as suggested but don't want to spend the money out if it's not going to improve on the latency from my Presonus 24c on Catalina

In Summary 

Although a high power computer helps you run smaller buffer sizes to get lower latency the main bottleneck is the interface (USB in particular).  If you have a Mac, thunderbolt is a much better interface to use than USB.  To confuse things a bit the new USB-C interface supports very high speed transfer, but quite a few USB-C interfaces are actually USB-2 with a USB-C socket.

So for low latency on a mac choose Thunderbolt 2 or 3 every time over USB

On another note I'm selling a Zoom TAC-8 (8 channel thunderbolt version of the UAC-2)  sub 5ms latency

https://www.thefretboard.co.uk/discussion/191842/couple-of-thunderbolt-audio-interfaces-zoom-focusrite-usb-interface-steinberg#latest

LooseMoose

John_A said:

LooseMoose said:

Sorry all, learning a lot from this but some of it is still flying a million miles over my head.  Am I right in saying that as Macs (like I use) use 'Core Audio' that the discussion around drivers doesn't matter?  Or does it?

Am hovering over buying a Zoom UAC 2 as suggested but don't want to spend the money out if it's not going to improve on the latency from my Presonus 24c on Catalina

In Summary 

Although a high power computer helps you run smaller buffer sizes to get lower latency the main bottleneck is the interface (USB in particular).  If you have a Mac, thunderbolt is a much better interface to use than USB.  To confuse things a bit the new USB-C interface supports very high speed transfer, but quite a few USB-C interfaces are actually USB-2 with a USB-C socket.

So for low latency on a mac choose Thunderbolt 2 or 3 every time over USB

On another note I'm selling a Zoom TAC-8 (8 channel thunderbolt version of the UAC-2)  sub 5ms latency

https://www.thefretboard.co.uk/discussion/191842/couple-of-thunderbolt-audio-interfaces-zoom-focusrite-usb-interface-steinberg#latest

Oooh that Zoom looks lovely but a bit of overkill for what I need.  Let me know if you receive a bang on the head and drop the price a lot but I wouldn't blame you if you don't haha!

John_A

LooseMoose said:

John_A said:

LooseMoose said:

Sorry all, learning a lot from this but some of it is still flying a million miles over my head.  Am I right in saying that as Macs (like I use) use 'Core Audio' that the discussion around drivers doesn't matter?  Or does it?

Am hovering over buying a Zoom UAC 2 as suggested but don't want to spend the money out if it's not going to improve on the latency from my Presonus 24c on Catalina

In Summary 

Although a high power computer helps you run smaller buffer sizes to get lower latency the main bottleneck is the interface (USB in particular).  If you have a Mac, thunderbolt is a much better interface to use than USB.  To confuse things a bit the new USB-C interface supports very high speed transfer, but quite a few USB-C interfaces are actually USB-2 with a USB-C socket.

So for low latency on a mac choose Thunderbolt 2 or 3 every time over USB

On another note I'm selling a Zoom TAC-8 (8 channel thunderbolt version of the UAC-2)  sub 5ms latency

https://www.thefretboard.co.uk/discussion/191842/couple-of-thunderbolt-audio-interfaces-zoom-focusrite-usb-interface-steinberg#latest

Oooh that Zoom looks lovely but a bit of overkill for what I need.  Let me know if you receive a bang on the head and drop the price a lot but I wouldn't blame you if you don't haha!

Might be open to dropping a bit, but they are well over £500 new and it's pretty much good as new.  You could also look out for a TAC-2, the Thunderbolt version of the UAC-2, but you lose a lot compared to the 8 (ADAT in and outs for a start)  I personally like more inputs than I 'need' I might not record 8 at once but it saves plugging and un-plugging stuff, I leave my helix in 2 inputs, synth in another 2, permanently micd amp in one etc

octatonic

PolarityMan said:

I cant get the RTL utility to give reliable results at lower buffer sizes, it can go anything from 7ms to 300ms at 128 (which is what im currently running) and often doesnt detect the signal properly

I don't bother with RLT apps.
It is simple to set up a loopback.
Send something out of an output and back into an input and record it.
Then measure/count the number of samples difference which you can put over the sample rate.

A 64 sample delay at 48khz would be 64/48 = 1.33ms of latency.

LooseMoose

John_A said:

LooseMoose said:

John_A said:

LooseMoose said:

Sorry all, learning a lot from this but some of it is still flying a million miles over my head.  Am I right in saying that as Macs (like I use) use 'Core Audio' that the discussion around drivers doesn't matter?  Or does it?

Am hovering over buying a Zoom UAC 2 as suggested but don't want to spend the money out if it's not going to improve on the latency from my Presonus 24c on Catalina

In Summary 

Although a high power computer helps you run smaller buffer sizes to get lower latency the main bottleneck is the interface (USB in particular).  If you have a Mac, thunderbolt is a much better interface to use than USB.  To confuse things a bit the new USB-C interface supports very high speed transfer, but quite a few USB-C interfaces are actually USB-2 with a USB-C socket.

So for low latency on a mac choose Thunderbolt 2 or 3 every time over USB

On another note I'm selling a Zoom TAC-8 (8 channel thunderbolt version of the UAC-2)  sub 5ms latency

https://www.thefretboard.co.uk/discussion/191842/couple-of-thunderbolt-audio-interfaces-zoom-focusrite-usb-interface-steinberg#latest

Oooh that Zoom looks lovely but a bit of overkill for what I need.  Let me know if you receive a bang on the head and drop the price a lot but I wouldn't blame you if you don't haha!

Might be open to dropping a bit, but they are well over £500 new and it's pretty much good as new.  You could also look out for a TAC-2, the Thunderbolt version of the UAC-2, but you lose a lot compared to the 8 (ADAT in and outs for a start)  I personally like more inputs than I 'need' I might not record 8 at once but it saves plugging and un-plugging stuff, I leave my helix in 2 inputs, synth in another 2, permanently micd amp in one etc

Yeah, my requirements are super simple - it's only for running amp sims with the lowest possible latency - we do all our recording with different gear so my requirements are meagre, but latency-free!

John_A

@LooseMoose Fair enough   What mac do you have?  For simple/low latency I'd suggest Focuserite 2-pre (thunderbolt) or a Zoom TAC-2, should be able to pick up either for about £200

LooseMoose

John_A said:

@LooseMoose Fair enough   What mac do you have?  For simple/low latency I'd suggest Focuserite 2-pre (thunderbolt) or a Zoom TAC-2, should be able to pick up either for about £200

iMac (Slim) 2012, i7 Quad Core CPU, 8Gb RAM and 240Gb SSD - not the fastest/most up to date, but should be fine for my needs by the sounds of it - with the right interface!

John_A

So it's thunderbolt 1 rather than 2, still a lot faster than USB

Stuckfast

John_A said:

Although a high power computer helps you run smaller buffer sizes to get lower latency the main bottleneck is the interface (USB in particular).  If you have a Mac, thunderbolt is a much better interface to use than USB.  To confuse things a bit the new USB-C interface supports very high speed transfer, but quite a few USB-C interfaces are actually USB-2 with a USB-C socket.

So for low latency on a mac choose Thunderbolt 2 or 3 every time over USB

It's a tiny bit more complicated than that.

As you say there are almost no interfaces that use the SuperSpeed protocol in USB3, even if they have the Type C connector. But even if they did, it wouldn't make a difference to latency. What SuperSpeed gives you is higher data bandwidth, not lower latency.

And although in general it's true that Thunderbolt interfaces give you better low-latency performance, RME's USB drivers are so good that they match Thunderbolt (on USB2 or USB3).

But yes, in general, if you have the option, definitely go for Thunderbolt as it has other advantages too (you can daisy-chain Thunderbolt devices for example).

Still costs 40 quid for a bloody cable though.

thegummy

stratman3142 said:

thegummy said:

stratman3142 said:

thegummy said:

LooseMoose said:

Which Zoom interface do people recommend?

There are only really two - the UAC-2 with 2 inputs and the UAC-8 which I'd assume has 8 so it depends how many inputs you need.

I'm using a Zoom UAC-2. The reported specs for a Focusrite Scarlett gen 2 or 3 seem similar but I haven't got one to try. 

With my Zoom, I get 5.4ms at 44.1kHz at 64 spls without any issues.

It's a Scarlett I'm using and at 64 buffer is where I get the 8.4ms so the Zoom is literally the difference between unnoticeable and noticeable.

It's a shame it's only got 2 inputs though, that's the main reason I'm going for an RME rather than a Zoom if I need to get a new interface.

Btw. I'm using my Zoom with USB 3 interfaces on my PC and laptop. I've not tried my UAC 2 with USB 2, so I don't know if that would make a difference.

It doesn't have an effect on latency but some people have problems running it on USB3 - for them switching to USB 2 fixes it.

But since you don't have the issues, either is fine.

thegummy

LooseMoose said:

Sorry all, learning a lot from this but some of it is still flying a million miles over my head.  Am I right in saying that as Macs (like I use) use 'Core Audio' that the discussion around drivers doesn't matter?  Or does it?

Am hovering over buying a Zoom UAC 2 as suggested but don't want to spend the money out if it's not going to improve on the latency from my Presonus 24c on Catalina

It's honestly as simple as my initial post to you - WiresDreamdisaster's posts are overly technical and nothing he mentions is necessary to know.

Getting the Zoom UAC 2 will give you lower latency at the same performance level as your current interface. You don't need Thunderbolt or anything, literally every USB interface you can currently buy gives unnoticeable latency.

The computer always has to be fast enough to keep up regardless of what interface you use but since you're able to get 8ms on your current interface and your computer keeps up with that, the Zoom will get you to unnoticeable levels (which is <= 6ms) with the same performance, I'm quite confident about that.

PolarityMan

I steered away from thunderbolt recently jsut because of the issue with firewire

John_A

@thugummy Cant say I agree with the statement 'literally every USB interface you can currently buy gives unnoticeable latency.'  

That may be the case with a high powered machine, but I know I have an i7 laptop and Steinberg UR44 which is great, but If I set sample sizes down far enough to get latency acceptable for tracking through something like Helix Native my CPU usage goes through the roof and get more pops and crackles than a bowl of rice crispies.  With my mac and a TB interface it's no problem at all

For playback the laptop will happily cope with multiple instances of Native