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 > Pro Tools Software > Pro Tools 2019

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #81  
Old 12-11-2019, 11:11 AM
TNM TNM is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 1,523
Default Re: Horrible VI performance when recording in 2019.10!

Quote:
Originally Posted by JFreak View Post
Earliest digital pianos had +10ms roundtrip and artists could use them. If someone says monitoring must be well below 5ms I must ask her what brand perfume she would prefer to get the show going on
we have gone beyond VI's now.. I said already, *multiple* times, that even If i was to get used to that sort of playing latency, when the time came for the sessions vocalist to come in I'd have to drop the buffer and the performance issue would be back..Someone quickly confirmed they had to bounce their song to a stereo track so they could arm tracks at low buffer for vocals, etc.
__________________
-iMac Pro 3.2ghz 8 Core, 64GB Ram, Vega 56, OS 10.14.6/Win10 Pro, TB3 Dock & 4xSSD, UA Apollo x3 + Octopre x3, Microlite x2, Midi Synths galore, PT 2020.3
-Aorus X5 V8, 6 core Intel 8850H, 32GB ram, GTX 1070, Win 10 Pro, PT 2020.3/Nuendo 10, Apollo Twin TBolt
-Whenever I launch Pro Tools, I get wet.(™)
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 12-11-2019, 11:16 AM
TNM TNM is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 1,523
Default Re: Horrible VI performance when recording in 2019.10!

Quote:
Originally Posted by JFreak View Post
Just sayin' since 2002 I have had success with DigiDesign/Avid/Apogee interfaces using 256 buffering. How hard it is to understand that does not mean USB interface with 22ms roundtrip?
Did I say that those exact interfaces were 22ms roundtrip? I said the tascam didn't have good drivers but for USB it was close. That means the others are faster.. but not as much as you think.

You'd be surprised what the real RTL of those at 256 would be..incl the duet and avid stuff.

I am pretty sure apogee USB is around 10ms at 128 buffer, that's what my duet was.. so... double that for 256.. and that was in Logic.. PT adds an input safety buffer (which is so ironic considering it doesn't help it with performance).. I think it's around half a millisecond from memory vs other DAWs. Just curious, seriously.. are you trying to get me to escalate/react to ban me? Just be honest.. You are giving nonsensical answers that are all over the place and constantly telling the other person they don't understand.. when they understand *precisely* what you are saying. It's just that you are simply incorrect in almost everything you are harping on about.

Good for you, you had success. I don't believe any vocalist would be happy with 256 buffer in ANY usb interface, even RME. So there. RME have the fastest usb drivers and at 256 even they are too slow.. one would use totalmix to circumvent this.

Why are you so stubborn about it? You have your forum mod colleagues telling you that they need to go to 64 for vocalists.. and they might not even mean with USB but with a good, fast, thunderbolt interface! You are the only one since I have been at the forums that always argues black and blue that 512 is the breaking point and 256 is ok for all tasks and with usb interfaces to boot.
it's getting tiresome.

You will never, ever get me to change my mind.. and I am trying to move on from the discussion multiple times, addressing the performance vs other DAWs, etc.. and you just harp back to this one point like a broken record.. What do you hope to achieve? I will *never* agree with what you are saying.
__________________
-iMac Pro 3.2ghz 8 Core, 64GB Ram, Vega 56, OS 10.14.6/Win10 Pro, TB3 Dock & 4xSSD, UA Apollo x3 + Octopre x3, Microlite x2, Midi Synths galore, PT 2020.3
-Aorus X5 V8, 6 core Intel 8850H, 32GB ram, GTX 1070, Win 10 Pro, PT 2020.3/Nuendo 10, Apollo Twin TBolt
-Whenever I launch Pro Tools, I get wet.(™)
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 12-11-2019, 11:22 AM
TNM TNM is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 1,523
Default Re: Horrible VI performance when recording in 2019.10!

Quote:
Originally Posted by JFreak View Post
USB interface with 22ms roundtrip is useless for monitoring
yet you were probably very close to it if you were at 48K with an apogge or avid USB interface.

Avid mbox 3 is I think 11 roundtrip at 128 from memory (at 44k). I have one right here. Yep, at 128.
__________________
-iMac Pro 3.2ghz 8 Core, 64GB Ram, Vega 56, OS 10.14.6/Win10 Pro, TB3 Dock & 4xSSD, UA Apollo x3 + Octopre x3, Microlite x2, Midi Synths galore, PT 2020.3
-Aorus X5 V8, 6 core Intel 8850H, 32GB ram, GTX 1070, Win 10 Pro, PT 2020.3/Nuendo 10, Apollo Twin TBolt
-Whenever I launch Pro Tools, I get wet.(™)
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 12-11-2019, 11:44 AM
Sardi Sardi is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Perth
Posts: 1,933
Default Re: Horrible VI performance when recording in 2019.10!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben Jenssen View Post
I used to be a singer. When I had my own studio (and still had a voice) I had the opportunity to experiment thoroughly with different latencies and direct monitoring. Long story short, I found anything but no-latency direct-monitoring to be unacceptable. That's when singing with headphones.

My theory goes like this; when singing you hear both the signal in headphones and your voice actually resonating inside your head! Any latency at all in hp's - and you get comb-filtering between the two. But this is of course especailly singing with headphones. The tolerable amount of latency depends on the situation.


Exactly.

I don’t know how many times I’ve said this, but it’s the same response from the same people.

Put a pair of headphones on, plug mic in, set buffer to 64 samples, record arm track, talk into microphone, listen to the comb filtering.

It is precisely the layering of the monitored signal and the voice resonance in your skull. If you can’t hear that, you should be in a different line of work.

Is this an issue when recording guitar, keys etc.? Of course not. But if you’re trying to record dialogue it’s very off putting. You just sound like you have a mild ring modulator on your voice.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 12-11-2019, 11:45 AM
Sardi Sardi is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Perth
Posts: 1,933
Default Horrible VI performance when recording in 2019.10!

Quote:
Originally Posted by JFreak View Post
With respect to all posts here, all of this is psychology not physiology. You can monitor yourself with 256 buffer if you are alright, but if you have a bad day you want to make it look the problem is something else not you. I said I have 99% success rate of fixing the delay problem by pressing a mute button for few seconds. It comes down to psychology; you tell the artist the problem is fixed and the brain thinks something has changed. I have done this since 2002 and very few times I have had to say "okay I reduce it a little more" in which case 128 has been the happy buffer.

You should do a blind test. Have your buddy set up an unknown buffer and monitor yourself. When you cannot sing/play you know what is too much. My experience is 256 fine 512 disaster.

It is a mind game.


Read the post directly above what you wrote.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 12-11-2019, 11:47 AM
Sardi Sardi is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Perth
Posts: 1,933
Default Horrible VI performance when recording in 2019.10!

-
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 12-11-2019, 03:43 PM
JFreak's Avatar
JFreak JFreak is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Tampere, Finland
Posts: 19,515
Default Re: Horrible VI performance when recording in 2019.10!

Quote:
Originally Posted by TNM View Post
yet you were probably very close to it if you were at 48K with an apogge or avid USB interface.

Avid mbox 3 is I think 11 roundtrip at 128 from memory (at 44k). I have one right here. Yep, at 128.
I have never been using USB audio interface. Poorest cheap thing was FW 002R and the rest being HD/TB
__________________
Janne
What we do in life, echoes in eternity.
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 12-12-2019, 07:35 AM
RyanC RyanC is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 656
Default Re: Horrible VI performance when recording in 2019.10!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sardi View Post
Exactly.

I don’t know how many times I’ve said this, but it’s the same response from the same people.

Put a pair of headphones on, plug mic in, set buffer to 64 samples, record arm track, talk into microphone, listen to the comb filtering.
You're using direct analog mix for the headphones?

One thing I don't get with this perspective on the headphone comb filter issue is the distance of the voice to the mic. Sound moves at a rather sluggish 1.1ms per foot. So unless the vocalist is eating the mic, you've already got ~1ms of delay right there. 1ms of delay causes comb filter from 500hz and up. 2ms 250hz and up. 4ms 125hz and up.

I am curious about all analog headphone solutions people are using though (other than LFAC).
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 12-12-2019, 07:39 AM
RyanC RyanC is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 656
Default Re: Horrible VI performance when recording in 2019.10!

Quote:
Originally Posted by JFreak View Post
Earliest digital pianos had +10ms roundtrip and artists could use them. If someone says monitoring must be well below 5ms I must ask her what brand perfume she would prefer to get the show going on
It's all cumulative though. I'm about 7ft from my speakers, so that's 7.7ms of latency in addition to the 10. Also is there some latency for USB midi? I'm doubtful it's instantaneous. And of course DACs are going to be about another 1ms.

IMO 10ms from the push of a key to the ears is fine, but if you add up other links in the chain, it's not too difficult to approach the haas window.
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 12-12-2019, 10:44 AM
daeron80 daeron80 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Orlando, Florida, USA
Posts: 3,660
Default Re: Horrible VI performance when recording in 2019.10!

Sorry to hear that. On Windows 10, I'm having excellent VI performance with 2019.10 - best ever. The only exception is when I activate Ozone 5 (which is pretty old, and that might be the problem) with a few instances of Arturia V Collection synths. No biggie. Freeze a couple tracks, and I'm rocking again. On orchestral tracks, I can run all the instances of Play and Spitfire stuff I could ever want, never a hitch.
__________________
David J. Finnamore

Nyquist was right.

PT 2020.3 Ultimate | Omni | macOS Sierra
PT 2020.3 | Saffire Pro 40 | Win10
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
PT 2019 Mojave performance improvements bartosz idzi Pro Tools 2019 8 05-17-2019 01:10 PM
Horrible Latency when recording in Pro Tools 11 FJ92 Pro Tools 11 4 04-22-2016 10:09 AM
Recording quality suddenly horrible? PT8 - files in here. masta1 Pro Tools M-Powered (Win) 7 04-03-2009 10:11 AM
Horrible noise on bass amp when recording! idledude Pro Tools M-Powered (Mac) 6 01-07-2009 12:57 PM
Horrible, Horrible, Skreeching Noise On Drum Track in Sampletank William.E.Lemuel 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac) 2 10-09-2002 06:54 AM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:47 AM.


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