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 > Legacy Products > 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #11  
Old 01-26-2009, 04:26 PM
barstool719 barstool719 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 625
Default Re: low latency recording vs low hardware buffer size recording

Quote:
Originally Posted by therecordinghouse View Post
you should probably read up on LLM. this information is incorrect.


i would say that it does work. ^^

guitar on input 1 on the aux, eleven on the aux, bussed to 7, audio track input to buss 7. audio recorded most definitely sounds like the plugin is active. no sample delay on any track.
__________________
i7-860 / 12GB Kingston / Intel DP55WB / 500GB Barracuda / 1TB Deskstar W7x64
Focusrite Saffire Pro 40 / Pro Tools 9.0.3
Mics, Guitars, Amps, Basses, Drums, Keys


http://overtheeffect.bandcamp.com
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 01-26-2009, 05:00 PM
chrisdee's Avatar
chrisdee chrisdee is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Trondheim, Norway
Posts: 3,030
Default Re: low latency recording vs low hardware buffer size recording

Reguarding the delay I experienced it was mostly caused by the master fader track (with no plugin on). When I disabled the master fader track the delay dissapared.
__________________
Christian D Hagen | I7 Builds | PT/OS Compability Chart
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 01-27-2009, 02:41 AM
chrisdee's Avatar
chrisdee chrisdee is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Trondheim, Norway
Posts: 3,030
Default Re: low latency recording vs low hardware buffer size recording

Any input on my UA LA-610. Am I using it wrong or maby connecting it the wrong way ?
__________________
Christian D Hagen | I7 Builds | PT/OS Compability Chart
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 01-27-2009, 06:49 AM
manyrains manyrains is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 344
Default Re: low latency recording vs low hardware buffer size recording

I'm not very good at talking about this, others here are much better, but until someone smarter comes along- I would think you want to make sure you're bypassing the Mbox pre- perhaps making sure going line in as opposed to mic? I got an expensive pre a while back into my 002r and it definitely makes a difference. Is there some way to switch between mic and line?
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
H/W Buffer size stopping recording ? JamesUdesky macOS 0 02-17-2012 03:12 PM
Buffer Size Recording Error link197 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Win) 1 12-13-2009 08:39 PM
Buffer size problems(too little then too much) during recording nathanh26 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Win) 2 06-02-2009 09:19 AM
Recording at 256 hw buffer size now causes error deanguidry 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Win) 5 06-14-2006 02:17 PM
Recording Latency, Buffer Size, Plug Ins JDL 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac) 4 08-11-2003 08:26 PM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:20 PM.


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