PTMP 8 << lower hardware buffer settings.. hooray!

[Skyflash]

Yes they need to break it down if it's only for certain interfaces otherwise
I do hope this is fixed with a CS patch.

[DigiTechSupt]

We had intended to implement a 64 buffer size for M-Powered devices, however some serious issues were occurring and, after investigation, it's apparent that a lot more work needed to be done to get it working properly.

At this time it's unclear exactly when this may happen. For now, there are no M-Audio devices that will have a 64 buffer.

[stoox]

Originally Posted by DigiTechSupt

We had intended to implement a 64 buffer size for M-Powered devices, however some serious issues were occurring and, after investigation, it's apparent that a lot more work needed to be done to get it working properly.

At this time it's unclear exactly when this may happen. For now, there are no M-Audio devices that will have a 64 buffer.

thats completely understandable.

i have no problem waiting.

[JrummerJ]

Originally Posted by DigiTechSupt

We had intended to implement a 64 buffer size for M-Powered devices, however some serious issues were occurring and, after investigation, it's apparent that a lot more work needed to be done to get it working properly.

At this time it's unclear exactly when this may happen. For now, there are no M-Audio devices that will have a 64 buffer.

Thanks for the input. Is this definitely on the To Do List? Hopefully!

J

[edgarbc1]

Originally Posted by DigiTechSupt

We had intended to implement a 64 buffer size for M-Powered devices, however some serious issues were occurring and, after investigation, it's apparent that a lot more work needed to be done to get it working properly.

At this time it's unclear exactly when this may happen. For now, there are no M-Audio devices that will have a 64 buffer.

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/new-p...2626-a-19.html

from a profire 2626 thread on gearslutz regarding the 64 buffer for PTMP8:
M-audio's Ray T says
"Our ETS (Engineering Test Services) department informed me that it was working ok on a Mac but not on a PC. Because of the performance issues the new functionality was removed before release. I'm not sure how/why it made it into the "What's New" PDF.
If I am able to dig up any more info I'll let you know.
RayT"

[theo.posthumus]

Waiting anxiously, this will be a big bump for PTMP

[Siegfried Meier]

So, assuming this hasn't changed yet?

It's funny, in Logic you can get latency with an M-Audio (Digi) device down to 32 samples, using CoreAudio. With Mpowered 8 we still can't get down under 128?

Sig

[DigiTechSupt]

Originally Posted by Siegfried Meier

So, assuming this hasn't changed yet?

It's funny, in Logic you can get latency with an M-Audio (Digi) device down to 32 samples, using CoreAudio. With Mpowered 8 we still can't get down under 128?

Sig

No, it hasn't changed yet and there's no specific date for implementation since there is quite a bit of work/testing that needs to be done to overcome some problems seen during the last cycle.

[lorenzzz]

Hi there,

I upgraded all my system: OS, bought PT 8, spent 2 days installing everything just because i read on "what's new Pdf" about 64 samples latency with maudio devices (i own a profire)

Now i see that nothing has changed and tha latency is 128. Money and time wasted.

Thanks a lot.

I'm going to use logic for evrything.

Lorenzo

[paulmitch]

I don't so much mind 128. Probably wouldn't purchase a brand new system and spend thousands of dollars to get down to 64.