Zero - the audio engine doesn't impose any latency.
The audio interface buffer size and potentially any plugins in the project that require delay compensation are the only elements that typically induce latency.

Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk]
Zero - the audio engine doesn't impose any latency.
The audio interface buffer size and potentially any plugins in the project that require delay compensation are the only elements that typically induce latency.

I see.
 
You're probably right, that I was reading too much into the X3 marketing blurb which I'd quoted.
 
Now, when X2 was announced (http://www.cakewalk.com/Press/release.aspx/Cakewalk-Annouces-SONAR-X2-Now-Shipping) it was stated:

• SONAR X2 Producer includes unlimited audio and MIDI tracks with up to 384kHz audio fidelity powered by the acclaimed SONAR 64-bit double precision mix engine.
• Automatic Plugin Delay Compensation (PDC), 64-bit OS support, WDM & ASIO driver modes coupled with the extreme low latency audio engine allow for better than hardware performance of softsynths and input monitoring on effects.

384kHz?
 
Better than hardware performance?
 
So forgive my skepticism, but where's the performance data?
 
 
 
 

When you are dealing with software only you can have any bit depth and sample rate. Hardware  can only do what the hardware allows. To date I know of no a/d converter that has a bit depth greater than 24 bits.

Goddard

Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk]
Zero - the audio engine doesn't impose any latency.
The audio interface buffer size and potentially any plugins in the project that require delay compensation are the only elements that typically induce latency.

I see.
 
You're probably right, that I was reading too much into the X3 marketing blurb which I'd quoted.
 
Now, when X2 was announced (http://www.cakewalk.com/Press/release.aspx/Cakewalk-Annouces-SONAR-X2-Now-Shipping) it was stated:

• SONAR X2 Producer includes unlimited audio and MIDI tracks with up to 384kHz audio fidelity powered by the acclaimed SONAR 64-bit double precision mix engine.
• Automatic Plugin Delay Compensation (PDC), 64-bit OS support, WDM & ASIO driver modes coupled with the extreme low latency audio engine allow for better than hardware performance of softsynths and input monitoring on effects.

384kHz?
 
Better than hardware performance?
 
So forgive my skepticism, but where's the performance data?
 
 
 
 

 
Can't you run some tests yourself?  It wouldn't be difficult.
 
I feel there is a hidden agenda in this thread.

ESS tech has 32 bit converters. I don't know anybody using them. I'd have to
look again, but I don't think the specs are that different from the 24 bit
converters I'm using now.

32-bit converters interest me for two reasons:

1. 24-bit is already able to capture signals down to the level of noise that atoms moving in electronic components make. So 32-bit seems kind of a gimmick.
2. I think 32-bit could theoretically be used to enable more flexible dynamic range, essentially making it harder to clip the converters. Whether or not the end result would truly be a file with greater dynamic range, I doubt, but maybe?

Anyone with engineering (circuits, math, etc.) chops care to clarify?

Peace,
 
Tunes

jb101

Goddard

Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk]
Zero - the audio engine doesn't impose any latency.
The audio interface buffer size and potentially any plugins in the project that require delay compensation are the only elements that typically induce latency.

I see.
 
You're probably right, that I was reading too much into the X3 marketing blurb which I'd quoted.
 
Now, when X2 was announced (http://www.cakewalk.com/Press/release.aspx/Cakewalk-Annouces-SONAR-X2-Now-Shipping) it was stated:

• SONAR X2 Producer includes unlimited audio and MIDI tracks with up to 384kHz audio fidelity powered by the acclaimed SONAR 64-bit double precision mix engine.
• Automatic Plugin Delay Compensation (PDC), 64-bit OS support, WDM & ASIO driver modes coupled with the extreme low latency audio engine allow for better than hardware performance of softsynths and input monitoring on effects.

384kHz?
 
Better than hardware performance?
 
So forgive my skepticism, but where's the performance data?
 
 
 
 

 
Can't you run some tests yourself?  It wouldn't be difficult.
 
I feel there is a hidden agenda in this thread.

Yikes, I've been found out!
 
Yes, secret agenda, for sure, eliciting test results backing up touted performance claims. How underhanded of me, not to accept the marketing hype at face value before parting with any more cash.
 
I'd be quite happy to run some benchmark tests myself. Just as soon as CW disclose their testing regimen and make available verifiable test results.
 
As for those bringing bit depth into this thread, wrong topic, this isn't about bit depth (even if it might somehow relate to conversion overhead affecting latency).

Well which ever way this debate ends...  Im chuffed to bits With X3.
Well done to all of the bakers.

Bullshirt!  No one can hear the diff better than 44.1/16.  Stop lying.
 

Haha