Quote:
Originally Posted by TNM
why do you need the buffer at 64 if you are using apollo? 1,1 ms at 96khz is if you use apollo console only, not monitoring through pro tools itself..
So why not say 128 buffer? The output latency of the apollo firewire at 128 is low enough to play VI's,and if you are monitoring external signal through the console.. i just see no reason to work at 64 samples.
128 buffer in pro tools makes all the difference to 64.
But yes, the 8700k will scream if put together correctly.. you can even overclock it easily, disable all power saving from intel.. it will be very steady and may in fact be just fine with 64 samples.
What your sig doesn't say is your current processor, the one that isn't cutting it..
|
I'm currently using an i3 3240.
As for Apollo, I am not satisfied with the workflow for punching in, nor for creating headphone mixes. So if I use Apollo as my A/D/A, there's a 1.1ms round trip latency, plus the latency of monitoring through PT at 64 samples (at 96k that's 0.7ms) equals a total latency of 1.8ms. This is acceptable.
I tried 128 samples (2.5ms total latency) - it is workable, but sounds a little funny, and isn't stable on my current rig. 256 is stable but the total latency (3.9ms) is too much. It no longer feels natural in the headphones for the musicians.
I don't want to use LLM because I need a few effects and buses on while tracking.
So, is anyone currently doing this with PT Native at 64 samples of buffer?