|
Avid Pro Audio CommunityHow to Join & Post • Community Terms of Use • Help Us Help YouKnowledge Base Search • Community Search • Learn & Support |
#11
|
||||
|
||||
Too much latency with HDN at 44.1
Set to 15. I'll try 7, but it becomes pointless there, as it's a native system. |
#12
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Too much latency with HDN at 44.1
This is the same setup I run 100 track sessions on. Not an issue. |
#13
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Too much latency with HDN at 44.1
100 track sessions with card based DSP and with what buffers?
__________________
Daniel HDX - PT12.5.1 - HD I/O 16x8x8 Win10-Pro (v1709)- 6 Core i7-6850k - ASUS X99 Deluxe ii D-Command Main Unit - 'Ole Blue http://www.sknoteaudio.com/ plugins rock and are affordable. |
#14
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Too much latency with HDN at 44.1
Quote:
DA, headphone amp, cans. Blending. Really bothered me on even talking in a mic in the iso booth. Real vocalist said sounds "weird". "Not like normal." He's right. With LLM it sounds normal again (like TDM). |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Too much latency with HDN at 44.1
What do you mean by blending? IE Blending analog foldback with the foldback from going through native?
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Too much latency with HDN at 44.1
Quote:
You don't really have 16 cores. At NCPU=15 you have only the guarantee of one virtual core and zero physical cores available for Pro Tools itself. Which may mean Pro Tools is just starved of any CPU resource, not a good thing. At NCPU=7 you at least have the guarantee of availability of one physical core for Pro Tools. Start there, and experiment. No hyperthreading systems can deliver all the claimed virtual cores worth of performance, so just don't get hung up on these numbers, you need to find the sweet spot that delivers the maximum throughput at whatever latency you want. |
#17
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Too much latency with HDN at 44.1
1024, normally. You're thinking the CPU errors may be drive related due to the low input buffer? |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Too much latency with HDN at 44.1
You are on Pro Tools 10 right. That size is not just an "input buffer", it the IO buffer used through to disk etc. Making it smaller potentially makes your whole system more sensitive to everything, including disk IO performance, proper optimization/tuning etc.
|
#19
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Too much latency with HDN at 44.1
Darryl, perhaps I'll try 13.
The thing is, my CPU (in PT) is literally at 2-4% on the test session with 24 tracks and two plugins. |
#20
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Too much latency with HDN at 44.1
Quote:
Using HDN in PT11, actually. Buffer of 32 gave me errors, so I couldn't tell how the latency was. At 64 the latency is too much. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Automation latency when using plugins that have long latency | pyrodave | Pro Tools 11 | 2 | 01-27-2014 11:22 AM |
omni/native latency vs mbox pro latency | chrisdee | Pro Tools HDX & HD Native Systems (Win) | 34 | 03-30-2012 07:24 AM |
Latency Issues - changing latency has no effect | Kippa-Dee | Pro Tools M-Powered (Win) | 1 | 07-15-2010 08:39 PM |
Piano VI's- Latency Latency!! | MARVINBASS | Virtual Instruments | 5 | 04-27-2006 01:09 AM |
Unity DS-1 and Latency... Anyone else feel the latency makes the Plugin unusable? | Mt.Everest | Pro Tools TDM Systems (Mac) | 7 | 08-26-2001 04:53 PM |