Avid Pro Audio Community

Avid Pro Audio Community

How to Join & Post  •  Community Terms of Use  •  Help Us Help You

Knowledge Base Search  •  Community Search  •  Learn & Support


Avid Home Page

Go Back   Avid Pro Audio Community > Pro Tools Software > Pro Tools

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-27-2023, 02:57 AM
Carsi Carsi is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Location: Germany
Posts: 11
Default Tracking with Buffersize 32?

Hello PT User,

i am currently using a Mac Mini 2018 i5 16GB Ram with an Antelope Orion 32 Gen3. I do the monitoring via the Orion. I would like to do this entirely in the PT. But I can only record with a buffer size of 64. Now I have 2 options. Either I stick with Antelope and buy a Mac Mini M2 and hope I can record with a buffer size of 32 or I trade the Antelope for a Pro Tools Carbon. Can someone tell me whether recording with an M2 with 32 is possible? I only need the channel strip in the tracks. I do not need more. At 64, the latency is too high.

Thaks Carsi
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 03-27-2023, 03:04 AM
JFreak's Avatar
JFreak JFreak is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Tampere, Finland
Posts: 24,849
Default Re: Tracking with Buffersize 32?

Yes it is possible, should you want to. But threshold of human hearing goes between 256 and 512 buffers (48k session).
__________________
Janne
What we do in life, echoes in eternity.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-27-2023, 03:13 AM
JFreak's Avatar
JFreak JFreak is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Tampere, Finland
Posts: 24,849
Default Re: Tracking with Buffersize 32?

32 sample buffer (at 48k) means your session plays back 32/48000*1100ft away, or in metric values 22 centimeters. About the distance from your left ear to right ear. How has anyone managed to monitor with analog zero-latency systems with a floor wedge 2 meters away from the ears?

The amazingly fast TDM systems had a real life round-trip latency of about 350 samples (with a full mixer) and nobody complained.
__________________
Janne
What we do in life, echoes in eternity.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-27-2023, 03:15 AM
Carsi Carsi is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Location: Germany
Posts: 11
Default Re: Tracking with Buffersize 32?

I also record instruments at 64. That works without any problems. But on vocals, the latency at 64 feels weird. You notice a big difference to the direct monitoring of the Antelope. I think 32 is fine.
But nice to know that the M2 works at 32. I'm actually very happy with Antelope. When I read about the sync problems from the Carbon, I prefer to stay with Antelope.

Thanks Carsi
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-27-2023, 03:22 AM
Sardi Sardi is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Perth
Posts: 2,986
Default Re: Tracking with Buffersize 32?

Quote:
Originally Posted by JFreak View Post
32 sample buffer (at 48k) means your session plays back 32/48000*1100ft away, or in metric values 22 centimeters. About the distance from your left ear to right ear. How has anyone managed to monitor with analog zero-latency systems with a floor wedge 2 meters away from the ears?

The amazingly fast TDM systems had a real life round-trip latency of about 350 samples (with a full mixer) and nobody complained.

Oh here we go again. Can you just stop with this? Seriously.

Every time someone talks about latency you trot out these same facts over an over again. Are you monitoring your vocal recordings in the studio via a floor wedge? No, you’re not.

Go and put on a pair of cans, arm a track, talk into the microphone and tell me if you think a 256 sample buffer sounds normal to you?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 03-27-2023, 03:28 AM
JFreak's Avatar
JFreak JFreak is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Tampere, Finland
Posts: 24,849
Default Re: Tracking with Buffersize 32?

Monitoring does not need to have a sound. It is used to control your voice when you are singing. Feelgood is not necessary, if you know how to sing.

With that said, the really good singers with a classical singing technique almost always require one ear left open for own voice and only one ear for the guide track.

Yes, been there and done that. I can say for certainity -- with cans -- that I am okay with 256 but not okay with 512.

Again, default buffer of those amazingly fast systems is/was 128.
__________________
Janne
What we do in life, echoes in eternity.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 03-27-2023, 03:45 AM
Sardi Sardi is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Perth
Posts: 2,986
Default Re: Tracking with Buffersize 32?

I give up.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 03-27-2023, 03:46 AM
JFreak's Avatar
JFreak JFreak is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Tampere, Finland
Posts: 24,849
Default Re: Tracking with Buffersize 32?

With that said, I know that this threshold is personal and there are some singers that just cannot perform at 256. I however have had this blind tested for me and for me 256@48k is fine, TDM session with 375@48k is fine, but 512@48k makes me hear echoes. So my personal threshold lies somewhere between 375-512 samples at 48k.
__________________
Janne
What we do in life, echoes in eternity.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 03-27-2023, 03:46 AM
Carsi Carsi is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Location: Germany
Posts: 11
Default Re: Tracking with Buffersize 32?

I think everyone feels latency differently. One doesn't notice it at all, the other asks to switch off the delay. I'm probably very sensitive to that, because until recently I was still recording with an analog mixer. I only knew the topic of latency from the forums and the DAW (at that time still Logic) was set to a maximum buffer. Now I have exchanged my desk for S1's and Dock Controller, I have 1000 more options but also latency. But 32/64 is fine with me.

Carsi
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 03-27-2023, 03:53 AM
Sardi Sardi is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Perth
Posts: 2,986
Default Re: Tracking with Buffersize 32?

Quote:
Originally Posted by JFreak View Post
With that said, I know that this threshold is personal and there are some singers that just cannot perform at 256. I however have had this blind tested for me and for me 256@48k is fine, TDM session with 375@48k is fine, but 512@48k makes me hear echoes. So my personal threshold lies somewhere between 375-512 samples at 48k.

If I had someone in a VO booth and fed them a 256 sample buffer for their monitoring, they’d walk out.

I honestly don’t know what to say if you can not hear the comb filtering when speaking into a microphone at that buffer setting. Heck, it’s there at a 64 sample buffer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How to get the low H/W buffersize of 32 Dutchmountain 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Win) 7 12-18-2009 10:34 AM
How do i change the I/O Buffersize? One-i 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Win) 1 01-15-2006 09:26 AM
Buffersize vs RAM soebx 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac) 0 06-01-2005 02:27 PM
H/W Buffersize and Rewire am.syn 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac) 2 09-23-2004 03:03 AM
buffersize PT 6.4 ?? hoijandee 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac) 0 05-05-2004 01:01 AM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:57 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited. Forum Hosted By: URLJet.com