Question regarding both HDX and Carbon

[nst7]

I had been looking at the Carbon, or possibly an HDX card. I had some questions about the Carbon, but realized that possibly the same question would apply about HDX.

I have never used an HDX or TDM system, always native. I went from a 003 to a USB interface, to HD Native/Omni. I have always been fine with a buffer of 64 for recording, regardless of what interface it was.

I was hoping to find out more specifically how bad native latency is for Carbon, being AVB. I guess my main concern is for using native amp sims, and also using a native reverb on an aux track. I know they mention you just have a little naturally occuring pre-delay that way, but does that still work ok? Has anyone tried it that way? Or have you tried using a native amp sim?

The reason I also mention HDX, is I realized that some of these issues could also be the case with HDX. I've never bothered to find out how HDX handles trying to record with a native amp sim, or using a native reverb on an aux. Is that doable on HDX?

The last question is along the same lines, regarding virtual instruments. Again, is that doable on HDX or Carbon?

I guess I'm trying to find out how much of any of these issues has to do with these being DSP systems in general, vs. specifically Carbon being AVB.

[Matt Hepworth]

Originally Posted by nst7

I had been looking at the Carbon, or possibly an HDX card. I had some questions about the Carbon, but realized that possibly the same question would apply about HDX.

I have never used an HDX or TDM system, always native. I went from a 003 to a USB interface, to HD Native/Omni. I have always been fine with a buffer of 64 for recording, regardless of what interface it was.

I was hoping to find out more specifically how bad native latency is for Carbon, being AVB. I guess my main concern is for using native amp sims, and also using a native reverb on an aux track. I know they mention you just have a little naturally occuring pre-delay that way, but does that still work ok? Has anyone tried it that way? Or have you tried using a native amp sim?

The reason I also mention HDX, is I realized that some of these issues could also be the case with HDX. I've never bothered to find out how HDX handles trying to record with a native amp sim, or using a native reverb on an aux. Is that doable on HDX?

The last question is along the same lines, regarding virtual instruments. Again, is that doable on HDX or Carbon?

I guess I'm trying to find out how much of any of these issues has to do with these being DSP systems in general, vs. specifically Carbon being AVB.

For natively monitired audio the latency is about 17ms at 48kHz with buffer of 256. Virtual Instruments are around 9ms at that same buffer.

If you've always been happy with 64 buffer with various interfaces, then you've always been using 6-10ms round trip latency for audio and about 5ms for VIs.

If that's the case, you'll be thrilled with the low latency performance for audio with HDX or Carbon. HDX will provide HIGHER latency for audio, but lower for virtual instruments than Carbon.

If VI latency is your focus go with something different.

[nst7]

Thank you Matt.

So if Carbon is 17ms at a buffer of 256, what would it be for 64? Not sure exactly how the math works. Or does Carbon actually go down to 64, or even 32?

[albee1952]

Can't answer the question re latency at 64, but the both products have tons of info available on the internet(starting with the main avid.com site). But you skipped over what is likely the most important detail and that is the fact that Native plugins will never be able to run in the "near zero" latency format as DSP plugins(meaning that neither product is likely to make things better for tracking with amp sim plugins, unless you can find a DSP version). Also, since either product represents a fairly serious investment(around $4K), your money might be better-spent on a Kemper or Helix to go with your current setup The same applies to Virtual Instruments unless some companies start adding DSP versions to their products...

[dominicperry]

All of these product pages and the Avid video on the Hybrid Engine suffer from the same guff that UA did with LUNA - lots of talking about 'no latency' or 'zero latency' or 'near-zero latency' or 'imperceptible latency' but no actual figures.

[nst7]

Albee, I'm aware that native plugins will not run at the near zero latency.

What I'm trying to determine is if I'd be no worse off, latency wise, with native plugins, with Carbon vs. the typical interface at a low buffer. Some things people have mentioned about Carbon lead me to believe it may actually be worse, latency wise, in native mode. That's what I'm trying to ascertain. I think someone also mentioned that the MTRX Studio was also not great for native latency.

[Matt Hepworth]

Originally Posted by nst7

Thank you Matt.

So if Carbon is 17ms at a buffer of 256, what would it be for 64? Not sure exactly how the math works. Or does Carbon actually go down to 64, or even 32?

I've not tested 64. Others have stated 8ms.
The math is simply 128 samples for buffers in (64) and out (64), plus ~20 samples for conversion, plus protocol and driver (which I haven't tried to test). Take whatever that sum is and divide it by the samplerate (48) and you get your latency in ms. For the 8ms to be correct that last number (protocol and driver) needs to be 4-5ms alone.

~5ms would seem to be correct according to what I know of 256 (256+256+20+250=782 divide by 48=16.3ms, so pretty close).

[simonator]

The low latency talked about with Carbon and HDX is solely based on using DSP plugins, then you get to the sub 1ms they talk about. That’s great for live instruments / vocals etc….

There are some DSP amp sims out there - I think Eleven Mk2 is an example - that will absolutely benefit from the Carbon Hybrid engine, but again, only while you’re recording and have the live track in DSP mode.
Sending an aux to a reverb or delay in DSP safe mode will bring back the system latency to those plugins, so if you’re at 64 samples that adds another couple of milliseconds.
With any other non-DSP mode plugins, you’re still at the system latency.
I never get near 64 samples, the benefit of Carbon is that I can have loads of things running, and still be able to overdub a cowbell at sub-ms latency in the middle of a complex session.

I had an HD Native card, I got Carbon. What I can recommend in addition to the low latency performance is (a) the sound. It sounds really excellent, and the instrument input is great. (b) the dual engines which allow me to run core audio in parallel (c) Carbon’s performance for me with VI’s has been (guesstimate) 15-20% better. YMMV.

[Matt Hepworth]

Just confirming Carbon's latency for output alone is ~6ms at 32 buffer 48kHz. About 7ms output with 64 buffer. That's what you'd be up against for VIs.

[K Roche]

Originally Posted by Matt Hepworth

Just confirming Carbon's latency for output alone is ~6ms at 32 buffer 48kHz. About 7ms output with 64 buffer. That's what you'd be up against for VIs.

While it could be as I have not measured. BUT I am curious "confirming" according to what data or who exactly ? And any idea as to how it was actually measured ? I would be interested in confirming that on my system, thanks K....