Subject:Recording Latency Question

Posted by: lofreequency

Date:3/26/2009 8:16:10 AM

On a couple of my larger projects (recording a band) I'm finding I'm having to offset the latency setting manually (uncheck the auto setting and move the latency slider up) so real time overdubbing will be in sync with the already laid down tracks. However, once the new clip is played back it's not in sync. It shouldn't be right? Am I missing something?

Is there a way to have the new clip be in sync automatically without having to manually readjust/realign it?

Subject:RE: Recording Latency Question

Reply by: pwppch

Date:3/26/2009 8:58:39 PM

Are you using ASIO drivers?

Peter

Subject:RE: Recording Latency Question

Reply by: lofreequency

Date:3/27/2009 8:08:48 AM

Yes, using a Tascam us1641 (usb) as my audio interface. It's tech specs says it uses ASIO drivers.


Should I not be having to readjust the new clip if I manually set the "user latency offset"?

Thanks, Peter.

Subject:RE: Recording Latency Question

Reply by: pwppch

Date:3/27/2009 8:49:37 AM

Yes, using a Tascam us1641 (usb) as my audio interface. It's tech specs says it uses ASIO drivers

Have you set ACID to use ASIO drivers?

Peter

Subject:RE: Recording Latency Question

Reply by: lofreequency

Date:3/27/2009 9:06:39 AM

I think so.

In the Audio Device preferences>Audio Device type> (select from Microsoft Sound mapper, Direct Sound Surround Mapper, Windows Classic Wave Drive, or US-1641). US-1641 is selected.

When I go to the Advanced button.

Driver Name: US-1641 v16909312
Buffer settings: 11ms (512 samples) [highest latency setting]
ASIO clock Source: Hardware: (44.100kHz) is listed.

Device Name: US-1641.


I'm using the latest US-1641 driver versions.

Question: In the advanced audio configuration for the Tascam under Sample Clock Source is it better to choose "Automatic" or "Internal"? "Internal" is chosen at the moment.

Subject:RE: Recording Latency Question

Reply by: pwppch

Date:3/27/2009 8:33:47 PM

ASIO drivers should automatically communicate the input to output latency delay.

I don't understand why you are having to set a manual adjustment. If you adjust that you are telling ACID to introduce a delay in addition to what the ASIO drivers report.

How far off are your recorded parts from the existing parts?
What setting did you make for the manual offset?

Please describe exactly what your project looks like:

FX on busses
Routing of mixer
FX on tracks.
etc,

We do not have your hardware in house.

Do you know what a loop back test is? Do you know how to set one up in ACID?

Peter

Subject:RE: Recording Latency Question

Reply by: lofreequency

Date:3/30/2009 7:48:57 AM

"Do you know what a loop back test is? Do you know how to set one up in ACID?"

Nope.


Sorry, I haven't had a chance to compile answers to the other questions...hopefully in the next couple days I'll have a chance. :)

Thanks, Peter

Subject:RE: Recording Latency Question

Reply by: lofreequency

Date:4/22/2009 8:48:36 AM

OK, i haven't revisited this project in a while but did last night so here it goes. Sorry if this sounds scattered.

I may be going crazy here and wonder if anyone thinks it's possible after the 7b update certain settings, besides the bus routing issues, may not have been saved correctly? Or open incorrectly may be better put. (or maybe its operator error. lol )

Here's why I ask. Weeks prior, in this project I swear I deleted all the FX on individual tracks and busses and master since this particular version of this project is our "working" one where we record to. I specifically saved it like this to help the CPU usage issue. So, after the 7b upgrade I opened this project and didn't realize at the time of laying down tracks there was a bunch of FX still on the tracks, even though they were turned off (they still utilize the CPU right? )

So, with these fx on tracks (none on busses), plus I had the latency on manual at +51, not auto, is why our recorded bits were off as described in my original post upon playback I believe. (but should they be off upon playback? )


More weirdness in this project after opening after the 7b update:

One of our recorded bits is missing, but the track is still there, but the recorded file is gone from the project.

Some of the track names did not appear as saved...well the names were gone completely.


Last night, with no FX on tracks, the 7c update we had no latency issues as all, things worked normally. I used the "auto latency detect". Yay!

This project has over 30 tracks so I'm sure there' quite a CPU load at times.


Btw, FX/vsts generally used: Waves Renaissance EQs and Compressors, Blue Tubes Track Box, Tone2 Warmverb, Ozone 4 on master just for limiting mostly.

It seems to be safe every time I open a project I have to go to the preferences and check to see if all the audio device settings are retained before I proceed. Anyone else?

I want to say I've done a handful of smaller projects with no latency issues at all and have been happy for the most part with Acid Pro 7.

Subject:RE: Recording Latency Question

Reply by: lofreequency

Date:4/23/2009 11:34:50 AM

I'll condense the questions. Hoping to get answers.

-With manual latency turned on during recording/overdubbing and ASIO driver used, should a recorded bit playback in the correct spot or will it be shifted?

-Have there been problems with 7b in regards to projects not opening as saved in 7a or 7? (not counting the bus issues)

-Would the VST's I had on tracks perhaps create latency problems even though there weren't turned on, especially in a project running 30 some tracks? (I'm guess there were about half a dozen or more of the FX listed above on individual tracks)

-Do muted tracks still tax the CPU usage? (about a third of the project's tracks are muted during overdubbing)

Thanks. :)