Tracking with Buffersize 32?

[JFreak]

It also depends on the AD/DA hardware. Sample buffer is just what is happening within the computer. MIX era round-trip latency was about twice the playback buffer, which is why HD systems' default was set to 128.

I am just curious why HD systems with 128 latency were super fast and current native systems with 64 latency are too slow.

[Rich Breen]

Originally Posted by JFreak

...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.

Sorry, but no. Sub-two millisecond latencies are required for most experienced session musicians to work with headphone cue; anything above 5msec *always* gets immediately flagged from the players. Just had a remote call yesterday from a session where the artist was complaining of something odd in the cue; logged into their system and the engineer had forgotten to disable delay reporting from a plug elsewhere in the session that was creating 300sample latency on the buses - as soon as that was fixed client was happy.

This notion of trying to equate latency in headphone cue systems with floor monitors, musicians across the room, etc etc just doesn't hold up in real-world work. They are completely different scenarios and our brains have all kinds of ways to compensate for natural acoustic phenomenon that don't apply to the headphone world. Put on a pair of headphones, add a 5 or 6msec delay to the cue and snap your fingers - see if it doesn't immediately drive you crazy - it certainly does me and the artists I work with.

[JFreak]

Maybe I am oldskool then, who knows.

But yes, monitoring via wedge and cans is differentg. With that said, I have been using in-ears and I can hear the change in stereo image if other plug is pushed a millimeter too deep compared to the other. Still, I have no problem with 256 setting.

Neither has people, with one exception, who have first complained and after a minute of doing nothing other than saying try again now, everything has been fine.

It is psychological, mostly.

[albee1952]

Was all this testing done with zero plugin latency? I ask because I recorded countless times at a 64 buffer with anywhere from a single singer/player, up to 7 piece bands and in over 8 years, the ONLY time anyone ever mentioned perceived latency was when there was a problem(caused by a send that went nowhere). Other than that one time, a 64 buffer and no big plugin latency was not an issue. The worst plugin latency I ever allowed while tracking was 11 samples. Just wondering if there is/are other things contributing?

[Sardi]

Originally Posted by JFreak

It is psychological, mostly.

No. It isn’t.

And it sure as ***** has nothing to do with being ‘oldskool’. Issues like this didn’t exist when tracking entirely in the analogue domain.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[marsian]

Hi,

we record VO/OFF day by day on HDN systems.
When we are on 128 buffers, it is not comfortable for the talent. 64 buffers are all right.


Best
Maik

[Rich Breen]

Originally Posted by JFreak

Maybe I am oldskool then...

?? Been dealing with throughput latency since the first 3M digital multitracks in the late 70's/early 80's. And that's the point of the sync head on an analog machine - zero latency.

Originally Posted by JFreak

...It is psychological, mostly.

Definitely not.

[JFreak]

Originally Posted by Rich Breen

sync head on an analog machine - zero latency

Nope. Write and Read heads are slightly misaligned, which makes even tape non-zero latency. This is the physical reason for the famous tape delay effect.

[Darryl Ramm]

You are confusing record and read heads with record/sync heads.

Give up now on this argument, I am running out of popcorn.

[JFreak]

Right, so be it.

Just sayin' I have successfully recorded/mixed live bands in front of audience providing monitor mixes w/256 buffer @48k since 2002 (back then with whopping 667MHz G4 horsepower and 1GB memory) and nothing anyone says is not going to change that.

If human hearing has evolved in two decades I apparently know nothing about it.