Buffer/Delay & Nudge Question

[tha]-[acksaw]

It kinda blows my mind that I haven't thought of this before, but I guess like anything else, ProTools is a constant learning experience.

So, I have a groove loop that I'm using to play along with for keeping a session in time. My buffer is set at 128 samples. So I record acoustic guitar playing along with the groove track. Since my playback is being delayed by 128 samples, does that mean that I'm actually playing 128 samples behind the beat, since thats how I'm hearing playback. I'm not talking about playback on the acoustic guitar I'm recording, but rather the groove track I'm locking in to. If I'm hearing it 128 samples late and and playing along with that, should I be nudging the acoustic guitar track back by 128 samples so it sits in true time with the groove loop?

I realize that 128 samples is nothing, but when you have a bunch of nothings stacked on top of each other, i could see things getting messy.

Thoughts?

Feel free to call me stupid.

Thanks!

Nick

[tha]-[acksaw]

Anyone?

Is it that stupid of a question?

[danander11]

I have lots of stupid answers.. let's see if one fits...

I've been recording at 64 samples of buffer.. Not really noticable for most things.. I tend to tidy up with EA anyway.

When installing the WavesL3-16 on the master track however, it will not playback or anything other than give me error messages, so I have to close out and reset the playback buffer to 256, where it works fine.. Stinks for recording though. If I want to go back and track something else I either have to close back out and reset the buffer, or (what I usually do), is mute the track I am recording and record. Then I go to the edit window, in slip mode, zoom in really tight and place the playback puck at the start of the wave. Then I hit A to trim. Go back to Grid Mode and use the grabber tool to move the region to the start of the beat/note.

That way everything starts in time. I guess you could just use spot mode and move it earlier by 128 (or in my case 256), samples, but I've not tried that yet. ADC would certainly be welcome in PT Native.

[albee1952]

The Waves L3(and L2 and L1 as well) have tons of latency and should not be inserted anywhere until mixdown(and then I would only use on a master fader). In any case, I was under the impression that PT compensated for the buffer setting when recording. Maybe I'm off base on that. Ultimately, let your ears be your guide. If it sounds good, it IS good.

[tha]-[acksaw]

Thanks for the feedback fellas. I'm on page with not adding stuff to the Master Fader. I never do this until I'm ready for mixing/mastering.

[quote=albee1952;1408685]In any case, I was under the impression that PT compensated for the buffer setting when recording. Maybe I'm off base on that.[quote]

Any thoughts on how I could test this? At first I was thining that I could just send some audio out of ProTools and then bring it back in, and check the latency, but if I do that then I would be accounting for the D/A//A/D latency as well.

I mainly just want to find out if PT compensates for the buffer settings when recoring, or if I have to nudge by hand after I complete a pass.

Thanks!

[danander11]

Originally Posted by albee1952

The Waves L3(and L2 and L1 as well) have tons of latency and should not be inserted anywhere until mixdown(and then I would only use on a master fader). In any case, I was under the impression that PT compensated for the buffer setting when recording. Maybe I'm off base on that. Ultimately, let your ears be your guide. If it sounds good, it IS good.

I agree.. Although sometimes I'll stick something on just to get an idea of where I am in a song.. (whether or not I want to add anything to flesh it out).

It's a bit frustrating actually. I can use McDSP's ML4000 at 64 with no problems.. but I've fallen for the L3-16

I never seem to want to take the easy way..

As for compensating whilst recording... Nope. At least at 256. You can record, but then you have to move it into place. Distracting really.

[tha]-[acksaw]

Originally Posted by danander11

As for compensating whilst recording... Nope. At least at 256. You can record, but then you have to move it into place. Distracting really.

I'm not sure we're talking about the same thing. It seems as if you're speaking about the delay that occurs when you put a plug on the master fader track. This would cause all playback to delay by that amount and therefor you would be playing along with something thats delayed, therefor delaying your play along by the same amount. WOW!

I was talking about the playback buffer setting, not related to plugins. If I set the playback buffer at 256 samples, do I then need to nudge anything I record back by 256 samples, if I want it to be correctly where I played it, in sync with the session? I want the final result to be just like it was when monitoring the recording through my headphones during the take?

Thoughts?

[danander11]

LOL.. I should have been more clear. I was speaking to two different things..

1. Putting a mastering plug on the master fader. I sort of hijacked the thread a little. I was pointing out that I sometimes like to do this.. but when I do, I have to change from a BUFFER setting of 64 to 256, just to get the plug to work.

Doing that brings up...

2. At a BUFFER setting of 256, I find that it records the track behind everything else, and I have to manually adjust it after I have laid the track down.

It has nothing to do with the plug itself, only that I had changed the BUFFER setting from 64 to 256.

As far as I know, any plug on the track or on the master fader would not affect where the track was recorded as they come after the signal... (although you may HEAR it differently).

Which brings up something I never really considered before... Maybe because I am hearing things in a delayed state, (even with mastering plugs inactivated), and reacting (playing) to that, THAT is why it's behind. (I've some experimenting to do tonight).

Hope this clears things up...

Good topic!

[tha]-[acksaw]

I'm on board with what you are saying. I'm loading up the PC right now, and will run a few tests myself. See ya in the morning for an update on my findings.

[albee1952]

[quote='tha]-[acksaw;1408713']Thanks for the feedback fellas. I'm on page with not adding stuff to the Master Fader. I never do this until I'm ready for mixing/mastering.

[quote=albee1952;1408685]In any case, I was under the impression that PT compensated for the buffer setting when recording. Maybe I'm off base on that.

Any thoughts on how I could test this? At first I was thining that I could just send some audio out of ProTools and then bring it back in, and check the latency, but if I do that then I would be accounting for the D/A//A/D latency as well.

I mainly just want to find out if PT compensates for the buffer settings when recoring, or if I have to nudge by hand after I complete a pass.

Thanks!

How to test is a real good question. My first thought would be to record a click track as audio and make sure its dead on the grid markers. Then try to fly in an external source like a metronome. If you sync the 2 clicks by ear and then go into record(maybe use the quick punch feature) and get a few bars of the new click recorded. If it was in sync going in, is it still in sync on playback? Sounds like a lot of work so maybe we'll get lucky and DigiTechSupport can just tell us "yes' or "no'.