Too much latency with HDN at 44.1

[Matt Hepworth]

Originally Posted by propower

As I reflect on this thread I am left with this conclusion (again) --



With respect to sub 4.8ms latency (and even 7.7ms in most cases) most folks fall into 3 camps - and in my view there is absolutely no Right or Wrong assigned.



- Those that hear it and lower sounds better enough that they care (for some all the way to analog is the only way to go)

- Those that hear it but neither sounds better or worse enough to care

- Those that don't hear it



Near as I can tell the last two categories are the most common opinions. For me I find this very surprising and shall at some point put up a poll to see if it bears this out (just fascinated). Again, for me the difference between 1.7ms and 4.8ms is 10X the difference between an Avalon 737 and An A Designs MP2 preamp - or an Aurora GTQ2 vs Great River MP2NV - or the new A/D converters on the AVID I/O's vs the 192's... but so be it I also think my Maingard 00012C Acoustic Guitar is worth what I paid for it... LOL...



Best to all!!!!! I am signing off of this for now but wish you all a Happy New Year filled with Health, Happiness and wonderful music.....

Ditto.

[CygnusX-1Bk2]

Why is there no spec for 48k? I haven't seen one in this thread or in the reference doc. Just 44.1 and 96. 48 is an even subdivision of 96 if it matters.

I work in games and post and we mostly work in 48k. 16 bit for games and 24 bit for post.

I went from an HD 3 to HDN and with LLM even at larger buffer sizes I have no issue tracking upwards of 20 channels. Haven't needed to go for more but I am set up for 32 in 24 out. Haven't done any tests because I haven't needed to. Years ago I did some tracking on a 003 and it was unacceptable but nothing like that with HDN.

[propower]

Originally Posted by CygnusX-1Bk2

I went from an HD 3 to HDN and with LLM even at larger buffer sizes I have no issue tracking upwards of 20 channels.

At all buffer sizes...
44.1/48K LLM path 1.9ms --
96k LLM path 0.47ms --

Both of these are very low latency (to me)

[LoZion]

Originally Posted by Matt Hepworth

Ditto.

Matt, you still havent answered my question as to why LLM doesnt work for you if you process the signal going to cans post DA. Is it because you need multiple discrete feeds? If not, you can slam an outboard comp/EQ on the way to cans...

[Matt Hepworth]

Originally Posted by LoZion

Matt, you still havent answered my question as to why LLM doesnt work for you if you process the signal going to cans post DA. Is it because you need multiple discrete feeds? If not, you can slam an outboard comp/EQ on the way to cans...

I do use multiple mixes. LLM would be fine for mix time vocal punches, but why should I degrade performance below what I already have (HD3 Accel)?

[Matt Hepworth]

Originally Posted by CygnusX-1Bk2

48 is an even subdivision of 96 if it matters.

It does not. Synchronous vs Asynchronous conversion.

44.1 being referenced vs 48 is primarily because of using audio for CD rather than video in this thread.

[propower]

For fun... Latency poll

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/music...-software.html