|
Avid Pro Audio CommunityHow to Join & Post • Community Terms of Use • Help Us Help YouKnowledge Base Search • Community Search • Learn & Support |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Low Latency Monitoring question
Quote:
Except you can hear comb filtering even at 64 samples. Has pretty much annoyed every VO artist I’ve worked with. It annoys me too. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
#12
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Low Latency Monitoring question
Only if you are listening to both input(pre-converter)AND the sound from Pro Tools. I would never do that
__________________
HP Z4 workstation, Mbox Studio https://www.facebook.com/search/top/...0sound%20works The better I drink, the more I mix BTW, my name is Dave, but most people call me.........................Dave |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Low Latency Monitoring question
Quote:
This is an argument neither side is likely to win in a debate. Folks who don't hear a problem... great. Folks who do and have issues well they are going to want lower latency. You can put me more in the skeptical corner about ultra-low latency needs and I'm all for doing some blind testing to make sure people are not being swayed by what they think are issues. But if folks hear a difference... |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Low Latency Monitoring question
Quote:
No it’s not that. It’s hearing your voice resonating in your skull plus what your hearing in your cans. You don’t get this with an all analog path as there’s no latency due to no conversion. Like Daryl said, it’s pointless going back and forth about it. If you don’t hear it, great and keep on working. But it is frustrating when people dismiss it and say 256/128/64 is fine. It isn’t for many people, particularly those recording dry VO. I’m actually shocked people can’t hear it TBH. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
#15
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Low Latency Monitoring question
The problem is that comb filtering can affect a performance long before it becomes noticable to the listener. Only good if you are charging by the hour...
__________________
Bob's room 615 562-4346 Interview Artists are the gatekeepers of truth! - Paul Robeson |
#16
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Low Latency Monitoring question
64 works well enough for me.
__________________
Desktop build: PT 2020.5 / Win 11 / i9-11900K @ 5.1GHz / 64GB / 4TB NVMe PCIe 4 / Gigabyte Z590 Vision D / PreSonus 2626 Laptop: PT 2020.5 / Win 11 / i5-12500H / 16GB / 1TB NVMe / Lenovo IdeaPad 5i Pro / U-PHORIA UMC1820 Ancient/Legacy (still works!): PT 5 & 6 / OS9 & OSX / Mac G4 / DIGI 001 Click for audio/video demo Click for resume |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Monitoring through headphones with Apollo 8 - when selecting Low Latency Monitoring | Mick335 | Pro Tools 12 | 2 | 04-10-2018 08:34 AM |
Question low latency monitoring on 3rd party gear? | ChuckS | macOS | 5 | 11-23-2011 12:53 PM |
lowest latency without "low latency monitoring" ? | music project | 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Win) | 6 | 05-11-2010 08:40 AM |
Low latency monitoring question | tamasdragon | 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Win) | 2 | 09-12-2007 12:13 AM |
Mbox zero-latency monitoring - H/W Buffer question | jhays | 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac) | 1 | 03-04-2004 12:40 AM |