pharohoknaughty
I know this thread is getting old, but so am I.
 
I was wondering what would happen if I put my VST instrument in a minimalist VST Host, like VSTHost or SAVIhost.
 
Then use Sonar as normal with my usual high latency plugs.
 
This would seemingly separate the latency of the audio processing from the synth response, getting best of both worlds.
 
Anyone figured out how to use a small VST host with low latency that then runs into Sonar and works as a virtual instrument?
 
Thanks

Which high-latency plugs?  High latency shouldn't be an issue during mixing or mastering, only during tracking (and you can substitute other plugins for that).  Can you describe your workflow?

I like to hear things the way they will be, and not have to concentrate too much on technical details like changing to low latency plugs or bypassing the effects before recording. So this proposal would let you leave any FX plug in Sonar and it would not affect the VST synth.
 
For example , I use JJP Vocal which has a latency of 473, and I like to leave it in place at all times.
 
And today, I had a keyboard player over that was using a B3 Clone VST. I wanted to change projects and show him some of my work in process to play around with, but then I would have had to re-install the B3 clone in each project. This has less to do with latency than convenience.
 
I suppose it would be kind of like the old days when I put my soft synth like giga sampler on a separate computer with very little latency, and then ran it into the audio inputs of Sonar on the DAW configured with plenty of ASIO buffers. So the soft synth was independent of Sonar. I would like to achieve the same thing only just using the one computer and have the output from the VST host go internally to a Sonar input.
 
Not a big deal, just wondering if anyone figured this out.

robert_e_bone
I'm just glad it's all sorted out for you.
 
This issue is QUITE common, but can gray you up faster than being President, and almost as fast as being married.  :)
 
Bob Bone
 

I am pretty sure you've got that graying up part backwards.

dwardzala

robert_e_bone
I'm just glad it's all sorted out for you.
 
This issue is QUITE common, but can gray you up faster than being President, and almost as fast as being married.  :)
 
Bob Bone
 

I am pretty sure you've got that graying up part backwards.

Though Bob is still here and posting, you are aware you're responding to a post almost two years old? 

I didn't dig up the thread, I just reacted to it.

pharohoknaughty
I like to hear things the way they will be, and not have to concentrate too much on technical details like changing to low latency plugs or bypassing the effects before recording. So this proposal would let you leave any FX plug in Sonar and it would not affect the VST synth.
 
For example , I use JJP Vocal which has a latency of 473, and I like to leave it in place at all times.

This is the source of all your latency issues while tracking. You just can't do that and expect mo latency. Even moving your instruments to another computer won't change anything because the latency is in your FX chain.
 
Record your parts first, completely naked except for any FX in the instrument itself that you may want to print. Once you've assembled all your tracks you can start the mixing process and start adding FX. I usually take it a sterp further and render all of my tracks as audio just to simplify the project. If I discover that I really need to add another instrument, it is no big deal to temporarily add a VST, enable the global FX bypass, record the new part, render, dump the VST then disable global FX bypass.
 
Regards,
Dan
 

It would be great if Sonar would expose the latency times on each plugin. Then we could make informed decisions about which ones to use.

Kylotan
It would be great if Sonar would expose the latency times on each plugin. Then we could make informed decisions about which ones to use.

I think there is a FR for this. Go vote!
 
Dan
 

Kylotan
It would be great if Sonar would expose the latency times on each plugin. Then we could make informed decisions about which ones to use.

Waves seem to be the only major plugin developer that tells you what the latency is for each plugin at various sample rates. It's really useful information. Pity others don't follow Wave's example.
 
(edited to correct pre-emptive text inserting the wrong words).

Documenting it is fine but the DAW could show us the actual values, which is especially important for plugins where the latency can vary. They must have this information, for latency compensation, so it would be helpful to expose the value to users.