There's another thread around here that goes on for 5+ pages about this very issue. Someone suggested doing this "loop back" test with an analog (i. e. tape) setup. However, there didn't seem to be any takers. Since A/D->D/A conversion seems to take more time, why not upgrade to firewire? The latency will be lower, right?

I'm planning on performing the test on my Korg D1600 (dedicated DAW) to see the results. You can't get more tuned than having a box that was specifically designed for recording. Unlike a PC that's designed to do everything.

-Dave.

<deleted by the poster>

Quasisemihemidemiquavers... the bane of our existence! I feel your pain...

Junski

Thanks a million for that info!

Twice I've tried to install the ASIO drivers for my MOTU 828mkII, but they haven't popped up (although the WDM and MDE drivers showed up fine). Maybe I'll just have to wrestle that to the ground.


j boy

Can you believe I had to look that one up? I knew it was hemi-demi-semi-something or other... and, actually, I was kind of shocked that 10 ms could be notated, myself.

It is a small amount of time, to be sure.

But I think a lot of us have sort of adopted the general societal view of a second as an almost atomic unit of time... but in terms of musical value, a second can be a very, very long time. It's two full beats at the relatively leisurely pace of 120 bpm. Or, to jump mindsets, here: one second equals about 103 feet on the freeway when travelling 70 miles per hour -- about 6 car lengths.


Anyhow, I've decided to talk about this in a different way. As I was about to jump into a thread on guitar amp simulators and plugs, I realized the best way to say what I wanted to say (to avoid trouble) would be to say: "I'm just not a good enough guitarist to play properly when the signal I'm listening to is noticeably delayed from what I'm actually playing at the moment." Or something like that. But you get the drift. Maybe that'll stop some of the "You think you can hear x ms of delay youre blinkin' nuts" sidebar issues... maybe. ;)

<deleted by the poster>

Thanks, man! The MOTU came with its own ASIO drivers which theoretically should have been installed by their install process, but apparently weren't (they've never shown up anywhere, anytime, anyhow.)


BTW... if anyone performs this 'test' on their machine, I'd be interested in finding out what the results were.

You know, this really is not some empty academic exercise. If your tracks don't line up right, that's a problem. By definition. If it's a big problem, you'll probably notice right away. But if it's a little problem you don't notice, it can still screw with you in subtle and not so subtle ways.

It's fine to say, oh, it's only 5 ms or 10 ms -- and if I use my initial drum track as a guide, none of my tracks should be more than that much 'behind' (which may or may not be acceptable to you).

But, say I put down a bass track, ref'ing my drums. It's aligned into the track 8.2 ms (366 samples at 44.1) 'behind' where it should be. Then I put on a clavinet part. Without realizing it, I key into my funky bass as my rhythmic guide. Now my keyboard part is 16+ ms behind the drums. Now, I lay down a funky fatbackin' rhythm guitar, trying to interact with clavinet part and using it as my rhythmic reference point. My guitar part is now a whopping 24 ms or so behind the drums... and that truly is a musically signifcant and noticeable amount of time.

Admittedly, this labored example probably wouldn't be reflected by real world experience, as the overdubber would be cueing himself off a matrix of those parts.

Still, since the parts don't line up, true rhythmic precision becomes impossible -- unless one manually adusts each new track to make up for the 366 sample misalignment (or whatever it is on a setup) of each new track.


Do folks see why this is a big deal?

____________

Now, if other people are not experiencing this track misalignment -- if newly recorded tracks align precisely with previous tracks and not x samples late -- it would be very helpful to me to know that, as it would indicate that there's something wrong with my system or set up.

BTW... several years ago there were a number of threads on the Digidesign boards about this very issue with their software/hardware set ups.

ORIGINAL: theblue1

You know, this really is not some empty academic exercise. If your tracks don't line up right, that's a problem. By definition. If it's a big problem, you'll probably notice right away. But if it's a little problem you don't notice, it can still screw with you in subtle and not so subtle ways.

Do folks see why this is a big deal?

Unless I missed it, you still haven't told us why you need to put your signal through a digital-to-analog conversion and then route it back through an analog-to-digital conversion, instead of simply bouncing internally in Sonar. This is not the recommended way to work.

still haven't told us why you need to put your signal through a digital-to-analog conversion and then route it back through an analog-to-digital conversion, instead of simply bouncing internally in Sonar. This is not the recommended

I figured out what he was saying, and it makes sense.
My loopback from Output to Input back into sonar is 5ms.
Doesn't matter if ASIO latency is 2ms or 100ms. This is the time spent IN the A/D converters.

So I was playing to a click track, I would hear it 2.5 ms late

Then suppose I play a note, it is 2.5ms A/D conversion time late getting back to Sonar.

But, This would be true for all tracks recorded, it would not be cumulative. So. If every track recorded is the same 5ms late, then it is all in sync.

hmmmmmmmmmmm...

Now my keyboard part is 16+ ms behind the drums. Now, I lay down a funky fatbackin' rhythm guitar, trying to interact with clavinet part and using it as my rhythmic reference point. My guitar part is now a whopping 24 ms or so behind the drums...

All this would only be true if you route each and every audio track - for whatever reason - out via a digital to analog conversion and back again through an analog to digital conversion. Unless you have some super-duper-ultramega-excellent and impossible-to-emulate outboard gear on every track (while tracking??!!) this whole scenario doesn't make very much sense to me.

ORIGINAL: LoopJunkie
All this would only be true if you route each and every audio track - for whatever reason - out via a digital to analog conversion and back again through an analog to digital conversion.

That's what I thought as well, initially, but upon thinking about it, I have to admit that the original poster is right. Doing this loopback test should have the same result as recording a new track:

If the tracks that are being bounced back into Sonar are 8ms delayed, so will be anything new that you play simulatenously to previously recorded tracks. Until now, I always thought this problem had been adressed by Cakewalk years ago, because when I was recording with my Soundblaster Live! (which had a very high latency, along the lines of 150-200ms) and Cakewalk Pro Audio, there never was a delay (or so I thought).

I would have to physically rewire my setup to test this myself right now, but I'm thinking that this may be a question whether you use WDM or ASIO drivers: If you use WDM-drivers, SONAR first runs the Wave Profiler, which can take care of this issue (and which would explain why there never were any problems with high-latency-audio cards). With ASIO drivers, on the other hand, there is no Wave Profiler - in that case SONAR relies on the ASIO drivers to address the problem of delay recording delay.

@theblue1: Have you tried comparing ASIO and WDM-drivers for your audio card?