Goddard

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).

in the 20-odd years i've been using cakewalk stuff they've never backed up any of their claims with data
 
but, true whatever, the higher your sample rate the faster **** reacts, so long as your hardware can cope

Who knows, we may live long enough to see the hype on 128-bit/384KHz recording... "So precise only a cat can hear the difference!"

This is a very old thread.

John
This is a very old thread.

 
True, but brings up a valid point: there are no "spec police" who say "Low latency monitoring means that it's under 7 ms, using ASIO drivers certified by the spec police, in a project with 18 plug-ins that each draw 4% of CPU power, with 46 tracks, running at 44.1 kHz on a system with a 3.2 GHz eight-core processor"...because every one of the numbers mentioned will affect latency.
 
I lead a simpler life...here are my specs.
 
ASIO = low latency
ASIO on really fast computer = lower latency
I'm happy monitoring through amp sims in real time = good enough latency
MME = high latency
WDM = who knows what latency?
WASAPI = hey, really good latency for a laptop!