PT 5.1 / plug-in latency compensation?

[Felix]

Is there automatic delay compensation for TDM latency with Version 5.1?

[Last]

Neat idea
We have often wondered why,if PT knows EXACTLY,down to the sample,what delay is caused by inserting a plug in,why cant it automatically compensate.There are tree possible answers:
1)Digi recons MOST users will like the creative possibilities of the delay,phasing ect and will provide time delay and delay indication for those VERY FEW who wants their stuff IN TIME..
2)It is another case-in-point of software being released prematurely for some marketing reason.
3)It is a simple case of programmers trying to make their work over-complicated...something many PT users are also guilty of.(KISS:Keep It Simple Stupid)

I think it is one of the last two,in which case automatic compensation will be a reality soon enough,maby even at this upcoming show...If it is the first,then God help us all....(Lots of laughter)

Peter Last

[PBerolz]

I've said it before; I'll say it again:This is the single biggest Flaw with protools as a serious mixing environment. Digi please fix this, I'm tired of having to explain to my clients why I have to manually shift a track every time I apply an EQ or whatever.not to mention the many accumulated hours spent doing that. as Last pointed out, if PT already knows how much delay is happening, why can't it just read ahead off the drives by that amount? And no, I didn't hear anythiung about this issue being addressed in 5.1 at the AES show.

[bullyboy]

jeez guys,......relax,.....

it's actually a complicated issue,....

dsp, by virtue, is a delay inducing format,...

one solution might be to have time-adjuster macro'd to command track content to shift forward,.....

or, more complicated still, have a scanning function built in to protools to determine and effect the proper changes,.....

any other ideas,......(instead of complaints)

[Felix]

well you did some digging for this thread! it's over a year old! [img]images/icons/shocked.gif[/img]

[bullyboy]

digi,......any info,....???

[Zeus]

I guess it would be a trivial thing to code automatic compensation for the disk tracks. (Just play them earlier from the disk by the amount of plug-in delay...)Things however, get more complicated when busses and aux inputs are involved.

Perhaps Digidesign wants to think up a complete solution to the problem and not release only a partial one that covers just the disk tracks...

Z

[Last]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:<HR>Originally posted by bullyboy:
jeez guys,......relax,.....

it's actually a complicated issue,....

dsp, by virtue, is a delay inducing format,...

one solution might be to have time-adjuster macro'd to command track content to shift forward,.....

or, more complicated still, have a scanning function built in to protools to determine and effect the proper changes,.....

any other ideas,......(instead of complaints)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


If our complaints upset you so,why dig them up?Its not a complicated issue at all.PT already calculates the induced ;atency,and you can see the results of this by alt clicking the volume indicator on each track.Digi also has on the TDM system a plug in(called...you guessed it:the TIME ADJUSTER!!!) to offset the effect of this.So why make it difficult,just incorporate it into the system already.At well over 10K for a TDM system,one expects better than this.
Also you said that we should make suggestions and not complaints.As I am not a computer programmer,I cannot make any technical suggestions.Whould you like me to shut up then?If I had the knowledge to solve programming problems like this,I would not be posting here,I'd be solving them.
But what still baffels me is why this thread was dug up.Talk about waking the dead.I forgot about this problem when I sold my last TDM system.I use a simple 001 setup on a PC in my kitchen now,that works wonders when I feel like working.Having used the 001 for almost a year now,there is nothing anyone cann tell me about combatting latency that I dont already know,but it being so cost effective(read:cheap)it does not bother me in the least.The TDM system I was working on when I answered this thread cost in the region of $100k , and things like manual latency removal was unacceptable.

Just for the record,I didnt walk away from the TDM studio because of protools.I love PT .I left to have a simple life without clients who think they are producers and record making for idiot record companies.
I now have a succesfull songwriting career that is growning everyday,and one of these days I'll be able to get back into TDM again,without having to deal with clients to be able to pay for it.But in my honest opinion,when that day comes(in 2 or 3 years) TDM will be no more.

Have a nice day
[img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img]

[bullyboy]

good luck on your songwriting career,.....
i assume you haven't mixed much rock/roll
on a pro tools rig,.....
it's a pain in the ass to deal with assigning
sample delays to compensate,......
if you change a plugin to try it,....
you have to take into account it's delay,....
and so on,......
their are many techniques with drums,...
and other multi mic setups,....
with parallel feeds to compressors and the like,........that, still is effortless in the analog consoles,......

multing is not so easily done,.....

i love pt,....but,.....
latency needs to be dealt with more invisibly,......

doesn't everyone without a songwriting career agree,.!!!!!!! [img]images/icons/wink.gif[/img]

[Measuring Man]

Plug-in delay compensation is a nasty little thorn. You'd think it would be simple... but imagine a complex mix where your routing to auxilliaries and sending to external gear. doing both of these things alone causes delay, up to 80 samples. And this is with no plug-ins what so ever. I've tried to truly get around the problem but what you end up having to do is route tracks to sub-busses just so you can delay them more to match there audio that was send to an auxilary because you can't use the plug-in delay compensator after the post-sends. It make the whole process unweildy.

I do hoowever think it makes a difference and is what separates the boys from the men, audio-wise. All large format digital systems have delay, and all large consoles use multiplexing to handle multiple streams. However it take more processing power to do functions fast enough that no delay is incurred and makes the system ultimately too expensive to make or just downright impossible with todays technology.

So the end result is that I only compensate on real tweak-head mixes, I really think pop music doesn't care in the end, and I tend to bounce FX and nudge the tracks. I then only use enough real-tie stuff to keep the delay compensations accurate, and easy.

My two cents worth...
Measuring Man