Use ASIO Reported Latency Comparison

Author
davec69
Max Output Level: -87 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 178
  • Joined: 2014/11/15 03:43:21
  • Status: offline
2016/08/16 22:56:00 (permalink)

Use ASIO Reported Latency Comparison

Hello All.  Just wanted to get a point of comparison from others regarding you Reported Latency in Sonar Platinum.  I've noticed that my Reported Latency hovers at 1750 when I first open Sonar.  This, with no project open.  I'd like to hear some Reported Latencies from others.
 
To check, open Sonar and go directly to "Preferences " without opening a project.  In preferences, click "Sync & Caching" under the Audio menu.  On the right, bottom, you will see a checkbox and "Use Reported Latency"  post your number.
 
Not sure if this has anything to do with anything, just wanted some numbers for comparison.  Maybe you could also post your default Sample, Bit Rate, and Interface type as well.
 
Here are my 96k Sample Rate details:
Interface:  Roland Quad Capture
Default Sample Rate: 96k
Default Bit Rate: 24bit
ASIO Buffer Size: 512 samples
ASIO Reported Latencies
In = 7.7ms
Out = 10.6ms
Roundtrip = 18.2ms
Sync & Caching
Playback I/O Buffer Size = 256
Record I/O Buffer Size = 256
Use ASIO Reported Latency = 1750
 
Here are my details when I switch to 44.1K Sample Rate

Interface:  Roland Quad Capture
Default Sample Rate: 44.1k
Default Bit Rate: 24bit
ASIO Buffer Size: 256 samples
ASIO Reported Latencies
In = 4.2ms
Out = 5.3ms
Roundtrip = 9.5ms
Sync & Caching
Playback I/O Buffer Size = 256
Record I/O Buffer Size = 256
Use ASIO Reported Latency = 914
 
post edited by davec69 - 2016/08/17 17:24:32

Toshiba P75-A7200 Laptop
Intel i7-4700MQ
16GB RAM
2 x 1TB Hybrid Drives
Windows 10
Sonar Platinum (Last Update)
Cakewalk Bandlab (Latest Update)
Roland Quad Capture (Bios 1.04 / 1.52 drivers)

#1

14 Replies Related Threads

    RSMCGUITAR
    Max Output Level: -64 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 1318
    • Joined: 2014/12/27 02:33:15
    • Location: Toronto
    • Status: offline
    Re: Use ASIO Reported Latency Comparison 2016/08/16 23:01:20 (permalink)
    Interface:  Focusrite Scarlett 2i4
    Default Sample Rate: 44.1
    Default Bit Rate: 24bit
    Reported Latency (no project open) = 616
    #2
    pinguinotuerto
    Max Output Level: -71 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 976
    • Joined: 2009/12/01 18:46:41
    • Status: offline
    Re: Use ASIO Reported Latency Comparison 2016/08/16 23:05:03 (permalink)
    I don't think a project being opened or closed has anything to do with this. It should be the same number as your reported Total Roundtrip ASIO Latency under Driver Settings. It depends on your buffer size, sampling rate and bit depth.

    HP DV7-3085 Laptop (Intel Core i7 720 1.6 GHZ, 6 GB RAM, 1333 MHZ FSB, 2 500GB 7200 RPM Internal HDs, 17" screen), HP 2009m Monitor, 2TB Ext Drive
    Line 6 UX8 with PodFarm 2 Platinum

    2 Joe Meek VC6Q British Channels
    Sonar Platinum & X3e Producer (64 Bit)

    AD2 w Roland V-Drums (TD4KX2)
    Windows 7 Home Premium (64 bit)

    KRK VXT 8 Monitors
    Frontier Alphatrack, Razer Naga Mouse, nanoKontrol2
     

    #3
    Rob[at]Sound-Rehab
    Max Output Level: -47 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 2819
    • Joined: 2011/02/03 04:31:35
    • Location: Sound-Rehab, Austria
    • Status: offline
    Re: Use ASIO Reported Latency Comparison 2016/08/17 01:06:33 (permalink)
    if you want to compare latency, you should post numbers in ms (not buffer size) ... and it only makes sense to compare it at the "lowest playable buffer setting" i.e. either use a VST you all have and check that you can play it without dropouts or use the Sonar demo project ...  otherwise you could set it to virtually anything and its meaningless

    GOOD TUNES LAST FOREVER
      +++   Visit the Rehab   +++
     
    DAW: Platinum/X3e, win10 64 bit, i7-3930K (6x3.2GHz), Asus Sabertooth X79, 32 GB DDR3 1600MHz, ATI HD 5450, 120 GB SSD OCZ Agility3, 2x 1TB WD HDD SATA 600
    Audio-Interface: 2x MOTU 1248 AVB, Focusrite OctoPre, (Roland Octa-Capture)   Control-Surface: VS-700C 
    VSTi: WAVES, NI K10u, FabFilter, IK, ... (too many really) 
    #4
    pwalpwal
    Max Output Level: -43 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 3249
    • Joined: 2015/01/17 03:52:50
    • Status: offline
    Re: Use ASIO Reported Latency Comparison 2016/08/17 10:15:59 (permalink)
    Rob[atSound-Rehab]
    if you want to compare latency, you should post numbers in ms (not buffer size) ... and it only makes sense to compare it at the "lowest playable buffer setting" i.e. either use a VST you all have and check that you can play it without dropouts or use the Sonar demo project ...  otherwise you could set it to virtually anything and its meaningless


    ^^^this
     
    i can set asio4all to 64 samples for my onboard realtek but it won't play ****

    just a sec

    #5
    davec69
    Max Output Level: -87 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 178
    • Joined: 2014/11/15 03:43:21
    • Status: offline
    Re: Use ASIO Reported Latency Comparison 2016/08/17 13:43:49 (permalink)
    Added more information for comparison
     
    Here are my details:
    Interface:  Roland Quad Capture
    Default Sample Rate: 96k
    Default Bit Rate: 24bit
    ASIO Buffer Size: 512 samples
    ASIO Reported Latencies
    In = 7.7ms
    Out = 10.6ms
    Roundtrip = 18.2ms
    Sync & Caching
    Playback I/O Buffer Size = 256
    Record I/O Buffer Size = 256
    Use ASIO Reported Latency = 1750
     
    Copy the template below, and add your data 
     
    Here are my details:
    Interface:  
    Default Sample Rate: 
    Default Bit Rate: 
    ASIO Buffer Size: 
    ASIO Reported Latencies
    In = 
    Out = 
    Roundtrip = 
    Sync & Caching
    Playback I/O Buffer Size = 
    Record I/O Buffer Size = 
    Use ASIO Reported Latency = 
    post edited by davec69 - 2016/08/17 14:05:22

    Toshiba P75-A7200 Laptop
    Intel i7-4700MQ
    16GB RAM
    2 x 1TB Hybrid Drives
    Windows 10
    Sonar Platinum (Last Update)
    Cakewalk Bandlab (Latest Update)
    Roland Quad Capture (Bios 1.04 / 1.52 drivers)

    #6
    fireberd
    Max Output Level: -38 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 3704
    • Joined: 2008/02/25 14:14:28
    • Location: Inverness, FL
    • Status: offline
    Re: Use ASIO Reported Latency Comparison 2016/08/17 14:24:00 (permalink)
    My new MOTU 896mk3 Hybrid:
    Buffer 64 Samples
    As reported by Sonar:
    Input 2.1msec 121 Samples
    Output 3.3msec 146samples
    Total Roundtrip 6.1msec 267 samples

    "GCSG Productions"
    Franklin D-10 Pedal Steel Guitar (primary instrument). Nashville Telecaster, Bass, etc. 
    ASUS ROG Maximus VIII Hero M/B, i7 6700K CPU, 16GB Ram, SSD and conventional hard drives, Win 10 Pro and Win 10 Pro Insider Pre-Release
    Sonar Platinum/CbB. MOTU 896MK3 Hybrid, Tranzport, X-Touch, JBL LSR308 Monitors,  
    Ozone 5,  Studio One 4.1
    ISRC Registered
    Member of Nashville based R.O.P.E. Assn.
    #7
    BobF
    Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 8124
    • Joined: 2003/11/05 18:43:11
    • Location: Missouri - USA
    • Status: offline
    Re: Use ASIO Reported Latency Comparison 2016/08/17 14:30:37 (permalink)
    Tascam US-16x08
     


    Bob  --
    Angels are crying because truth has died ...
    Illegitimi non carborundum
    --
    Studio One Pro / i7-6700@3.80GHZ, 32GB Win 10 Pro x64
    Roland FA06, LX61+, Fishman Tripleplay, FaderPort, US-16x08 + ARC2.5/Event PS8s 
    Waves Gold/IKM Max/Nomad Factory IS3/K11U

    #8
    vdd
    Max Output Level: -89 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 92
    • Joined: 2014/12/22 17:26:14
    • Status: offline
    Re: Use ASIO Reported Latency Comparison 2016/08/17 14:43:19 (permalink)
    Here are my details:
    Interface:  Focusrite Solo 1st Gen
    Default Sample Rate: 44.1
    Default Bit Rate: 24
    ASIO Buffer Size: 64
    ASIO Reported Latencies
    In = 5.8 ms
    Out = 5.8 ms
    Roundtrip = 11.5 ms
    Sync & Caching
    Playback I/O Buffer Size = 254
    Record I/O Buffer Size = 254
    Use ASIO Reported Latency = 508
     

    S-Plat x64 / i7-4790-3.60GHZ, 32GB RAM, Win 7 x64, Akai MPC Studio, Arturia Microbrute, Doepfer A-100, VTB-1, RME HDSPe
    #9
    davec69
    Max Output Level: -87 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 178
    • Joined: 2014/11/15 03:43:21
    • Status: offline
    Re: Use ASIO Reported Latency Comparison 2016/08/17 17:02:04 (permalink)
    Here are my details when I switch to 44.1K Sample Rate
     
    Here are my details:
    Interface:  Roland Quad Capture
    Default Sample Rate: 44k
    Default Bit Rate: 24bit
    ASIO Buffer Size: 256 samples
    ASIO Reported Latencies
    In = 4.2ms
    Out = 5.3ms
    Roundtrip = 9.5ms
    Sync & Caching
    Playback I/O Buffer Size = 256
    Record I/O Buffer Size = 256
    Use ASIO Reported Latency = 914
     

    Toshiba P75-A7200 Laptop
    Intel i7-4700MQ
    16GB RAM
    2 x 1TB Hybrid Drives
    Windows 10
    Sonar Platinum (Last Update)
    Cakewalk Bandlab (Latest Update)
    Roland Quad Capture (Bios 1.04 / 1.52 drivers)

    #10
    chuckebaby
    Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 13146
    • Joined: 2011/01/04 14:55:28
    • Status: offline
    Re: Use ASIO Reported Latency Comparison 2016/08/17 17:33:40 (permalink)
    Focusrite 18I8

     
    post edited by chuckebaby - 2016/08/17 17:58:13

    Windows 8.1 X64 Sonar Platinum x64
    Custom built: Asrock z97 1150 - Intel I7 4790k - 16GB corsair DDR3 1600 - PNY SSD 220GB
    Focusrite Saffire 18I8 - Mackie Control
       
    #11
    PeterMc
    Max Output Level: -80 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 504
    • Joined: 2003/11/12 23:46:34
    • Location: Tasmania
    • Status: offline
    Re: Use ASIO Reported Latency Comparison 2016/08/17 20:41:59 (permalink)
    Focusrite Scarlett 8i6 - I wonder why the slight difference to Chuck's numbers?
     


    i5 6500, H170M, Intel HD 530, 16GB, Focusrite Scarlett 8i6, Win 10 Pro (1803) (64 bit), Cakewalk by Bandlab

    #12
    chuckebaby
    Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 13146
    • Joined: 2011/01/04 14:55:28
    • Status: offline
    Re: Use ASIO Reported Latency Comparison 2016/08/17 20:53:28 (permalink)
    PeterMc
    Focusrite Scarlett 8i6 - I wonder why the slight difference to Chuck's numbers?
     



    could be the CPU's.
    I have an Intel I7, you have an Intel I5. though are differences are not significant.
    I used an AMD bulldozer for a long time with great results, just load times were slower and projects would fill up faster with CPU's.
    with this custom PC I build 5 months ago, I can load projects like lightening and VST count is endless.
    post edited by chuckebaby - 2016/08/17 21:14:41

    Windows 8.1 X64 Sonar Platinum x64
    Custom built: Asrock z97 1150 - Intel I7 4790k - 16GB corsair DDR3 1600 - PNY SSD 220GB
    Focusrite Saffire 18I8 - Mackie Control
       
    #13
    PeterMc
    Max Output Level: -80 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 504
    • Joined: 2003/11/12 23:46:34
    • Location: Tasmania
    • Status: offline
    Re: Use ASIO Reported Latency Comparison 2016/08/17 20:55:00 (permalink)
    Might be the OS too. I'm Win10, you're 8.1.

    i5 6500, H170M, Intel HD 530, 16GB, Focusrite Scarlett 8i6, Win 10 Pro (1803) (64 bit), Cakewalk by Bandlab

    #14
    chuckebaby
    Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 13146
    • Joined: 2011/01/04 14:55:28
    • Status: offline
    Re: Use ASIO Reported Latency Comparison 2016/08/17 20:55:28 (permalink)
    PeterMc
    Might be the OS too. I'm Win10, you're 8.1.


    good point

    Windows 8.1 X64 Sonar Platinum x64
    Custom built: Asrock z97 1150 - Intel I7 4790k - 16GB corsair DDR3 1600 - PNY SSD 220GB
    Focusrite Saffire 18I8 - Mackie Control
       
    #15
    Jump to:
    © 2025 APG vNext Commercial Version 5.1