Looking to upgrade my interface.

[YYR123]

Originally Posted by amagras

high quality noise I guess...

Hah yep, noice!!!

Cheers mate

[amagras]

Well, I must say that my onboard sound has the Waves logo on it but I never worried enough to find out what exactly this means. Actually I should do it...

[Amack]

Sorry, apparently I didn't make it clear enough that I was referring to hardware audio CODECs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_codec) - like those used in the Eleven Rack and likely all PCs (and MACS?) Since these devices are connected directly to the computer, they don't require nearly as much data buffering as those with lower data rate connections (USB, Firewire, etc.).

I did some tests today using ASIO4ALL with the computer's audio device as well as my AUDIOFIRE4 to measure latency. At 192 kHz sample rate with ASIO4ALL and a buffer of 128 samples, the waveform recorded on the mic input was (usually) ~ 28 samples ahead of that played back from the speakers driving the recording channel. The results achieved with the AUDIOFIRE at 96 kHz and 64 sample buffer were so inconsistent that I suspect that the latency in ProTools software is the dominant effect at these low latencies. Also increasing the buffer sizes didn't have the effect I had expected with either audio device. I need to research that some more.

Originally Posted by mesaone

There are quite a few things that are incorrect or inaccurate in your comment, I'd urge you to do some research. And maybe do a real world comparison by picking up an audio interface and comparing its performance to built-in soundcards.

First and foremost, the CODECs involved with the built-in soundcards are software that convert one format of digital audio into another format of digital audio. Converters are hardware that convert analog audio to digital audio, and vice-versa. You simply cannot compare the two on paper or in real life, they are apples and oranges. Latency is also a huge factor when weighing one device against another, and it's something that most spec sheets for built-in cards don't include - for good reason, Realtek and others have embarrassingly-high latency. I suggest you start your research with these things in mind.

[Craig F]

Wikipedia is off on this, the only time hardware is referred to as a Codec is with an ISDN patch interface
ADC and DAC are referred to as Interfaces not Codecs, call Sweetwater and ask about hardware Codec and you'll hear crickets

[Amack]

Sweetwater doesn't sell them, Digikey ( http://www.digikey.com/product-searc...556343?k=CODEC ) does[/url].

Originally Posted by Craig F

Wikipedia is off on this, the only time hardware is referred to as a Codec is with an ISDN patch interface
ADC and DAC are referred to as Interfaces not Codecs, call Sweetwater and ask about hardware Codec and you'll hear crickets

[Craig F]

then ask Digikey how to use Pro Tools

[Amack]

Mesaone

I made performance comparison measurements before I posted. What specifically are you interested in - and in what format? Since I hadn't looked at latency (likely primarily driven by Pro Tools software/computer limitations), I did that so after receiving your feedback. It seemed more appropriate to post my results at http://duc.avid.com/showthread.php?t=365403&page=2.

Amack

Originally Posted by mesaone

There are quite a few things that are incorrect or inaccurate in your comment, I'd urge you to do some research. And maybe do a real world comparison by picking up an audio interface and comparing its performance to built-in soundcards.

First and foremost, the CODECs involved with the built-in soundcards are software that convert one format of digital audio into another format of digital audio. Converters are hardware that convert analog audio to digital audio, and vice-versa. You simply cannot compare the two on paper or in real life, they are apples and oranges. Latency is also a huge factor when weighing one device against another, and it's something that most spec sheets for built-in cards don't include - for good reason, Realtek and others have embarrassingly-high latency. I suggest you start your research with these things in mind.

[mesaone]

I'm not sure what you're referring to when you say "session delay". How exactly did you measure round-trip latency?

Did you record a loopback through the realtek card and measure the offset in samples? I don't see anything that indicates you did.

[amagras]

Guys...

[Amack]

mesaone

Yes and sorry - I should have said "System Delay" (from "Session Setup"). At 192 kHz samples rates and 24 bit depths, Pro Tools can work with ASIO4ALL buffer sizes of 256 samples. Assuming that "System Delay" is what Pro Tools uses to correct for latency (is it?), the 3ms "Analog to Analog Throughput Latency" demonstrated with the native Windows audio device (see attachment) matches what Avid claims is possible with the Apogee Symphony 64 (PCIe) and better than the best FireWire and USB 2.0 devices (http://www.avid.com/US/products/Pro-Tools-HD-Native).

June 2, 2015 Update: I'm not sure the 3ms number is correct for ASIO4ALL and have other serious doubts about Avid's claims in that link.

Amack

Originally Posted by mesaone

I'm not sure what you're referring to when you say "session delay". How exactly did you measure round-trip latency?

Did you record a loopback through the realtek card and measure the offset in samples? I don't see anything that indicates you did.