What will be aimed at just mixing?

exactly

If you knew how to read the post you quoted, the one I posted above it, and use Google, you would first of all understand that I was saying that 1 ms is not noticeable. Secondly, you would know from that Google search that it has been scientifically proven that the average delay from when the sound waves hit the ear to the moment you "hear" it is 5.85 ms. Hence a DELAY. A DELAY that we do not notice. THAT WAS THE POINT I was making. If the brain compensates for 5.85 ms, it'll be ok with another 1 ms... 1 ms is NO BIG DEAL.

Here Phase Crazy and TheHightenor: http://www.measurepolis.fi/alma/ALMA...%20Systems.pdf

That particular paper is actually showing a LONGER delay than 5.85 ms. 8-10 ms. If you guys would like to continue arguing with science, please do. Nothing like a couple of geniuses who know more than science.

As for this stupid argument, I am done. I'll let the scientific paper do the talking.

At least a new Mac Pro will be announced within a few weeks. Maybe Logic shortly afterwards.

?Says Who? Just, another of the so many rumors since long time...

RGH

From the same sources that said Pro Tools 11 will be out in April. Just a little hope in a thread of....

i hope thats true, atleast this tread will be kept alive forever and ever!

Logic as it is works great, what i want is no highlighted windows and then all is well. I have cubase 7, don't go there if you hate pop'ups. it's something most cubase users hate.

Hmmm let's see...what you are saying is that you can't perceive a delay when the delayed sound is actually the original sound...??





Please try and get over googling unimportant information and get to the part where we are in the studio recording music. Thanks.


When you sing you are hearing your own voice - original source. When you introduce playback with latency you will perceive it - especially at 1 ms and over.

This is just ONE example where tight playback is super important. There are many.

This is not and argument. This is reality in the studio. If you can't see a benefit to this approach or do not understand how this can make for a more comfortable and efficient session, maybe consider that you should look into it further - or just carry on being uninformed - your choice.

It has been almost 26,000,000 milliseconds since PhaseCrazy's last post.

You would think that latency alone could drive him crazy heh

Can anybody do a null test on his posts?

KA

Impossible...
Can't think with that much latency heh heh heh

LMAO! What a self righteous individual you are! You really take the freaking cake, don't you?

If he could get the time between each post down to 1millisecond then maybe his thoughts would feel just right - they would make sense...

Did I read that right, that someone is saying (essentially) that direct hardware monitoring latency like with any ASIO card is noticable an unacceptable in the studio?

Even though it's literally as good (as low a latency) as it ever gets in digital?

Uh.. ok.

If you mic a snare (or snare sample), run it thru a mixer (any mixer) into a headphone amp into headphones you're already adding at least 1ms of delay to monitoring or playback.

I think someone is mixing up the time it takes for a signal to reach the brain with the time it takes for a signal to reach the ear here.

A theory based on "if x milliseconds is OK; then 1 ms more is OK too" has to fail at some point, because one can always add one millisecond, and it won't always be OK.

But if a drummer plays on a kick drum, or on a cymbal with a stick, and the distance between the ear and the sound source is circa 3 feet, the 'latency' is already circa three milliseconds.

8-10 ms is clearly perceivable though, not OK, and even if a player won't identify what happens as 'latency', it will affect his performance.

yes. If they null completely, then it is safe to assume that I am saying the exact same thing every time in every post.

Nope you didn't read that right, and I'm sure you know that. i said that anything 30 SAMPLES and under is quite good. - AND that 1 ms and up is not.

Also using a console to monitor input and playback is best as it is zero digital latency.



No. You are not. Where on earth did that info come from...wait...no...please don't answer that...please...just tell us you are joking. Thanks.

LOL ....

This is the internet, I'm happy to share idea's and a little heated debate is healthy.

The only time I would get upset is if someone came around to my place and removed my analog mixer, the one I use for monitoring when I'm tracking and forced me to use so called "zero latency" digital SW monitoring, for example the RME Total Mix. The difference in performance is important to me.

Each to their own :-)

This isn't about "always being ok." 1 ms on top of the tiny delay in your own brain's processing is totally fine. That's ALL. No confusion here. The only reason I brought up the human brain was to point out that we ALREADY compensate for latency. 1 ms isn't that big of a deal on top of 5-10 ms we already deal with. We simply compensate subconsciously.

Go ahead and do a test.

Make 1 click followed by 2 clicks. Duplicate the audio. Move the 2 clicks 1 ms forward. Compare the two clips in random sequence blindly. Which is which? 1 ms is not noticeable to a point that you can immediately notice it. But seriously... enough of this utter BS. Phase Crazy, start a new freaking thread for crying out loud.

The latency that most reasonable computer setups produce is negligable and even without direct monitoring I've never had a player complain that (minimal) computer lag is spoiling their performance. This idealist 'I can't get things done if it's not perfect' modus operandi is a real pain in the butt, and arguing about 1 millisecond (or whatever it is) seems moot when a million people are making great music recording in the box.

Where's Logic 10?

Trey. I'm responding to you man. Perhaps you should start a new thread. this idea that your brain somehow adjusts to a delay that it doesn't know exists is pretty interesting.


Again, you fail to understand that delay is about relationships you can't have a delay unless you have an original source that the delay is related to.

You perceive the original source when you perceive it. Not before - not after.

In recording we have these things called playback and monitoring. What happens is a musician sings a part - this would be the source - while listening to playback - at the same time monitoring the source through headphones (for example). If the monitored performance is late, then that means there is a delayed version of that performance that is being perceived by the musician along with the source of the performance which is ALSO being perceived by the musician.

Comprende? That would be two sources of the SAME performance interacting with each other.

NOT ONE SOURCE AND ONE BRAIN - it's two sources being perceived by one brain.

JUST LIKE THE SNARE DRUM ILLUSTRATION even 1 sample of delay is perceivable.

Have fun!

So the next time I'm in the studio how would I test whether the click I'm playing to is delayed or not?

Next time you have a chance, put on some acoustically sealed headphones and sing or talk into a mic with the complete signal delayed by 1 second.

The effect on your ability to even speak is disastrous, it is almost impossible.

For me, it is the extrapolation of this effect, even down to very small delays that I so dislike, when the delay is very small the detrimental effect on performance is very small, but it is real IMHO and experience.

I see no arbitrary figure at which this effect fails to make a difference, I respect the fact that others see the effect as irrelevant at very low delay figures, and clearly some people have no issue whatsoever, however for those that do, analog monitoring removes all delays created by digital signal/converter paths, and offers a true zero latency monitoring option.

Analogue monitoring of my drum set might have zero latency but the click would be coming from a daw so if the click is delayed I'll be playing behind the beat although consistently behind the beat. Can analogue monitoring fix the click delay issue?

FWIW I've recorded many great (read. fussy) singers and many have complained about latency but never when it's set less than 3-4ms or so (with well isolated cans)

The key is headphone isolation - if they isolate well then there can be minimal comb filtering & distraction.

IMO if you could isolate 100% then a small delay(<4ms) wouldn't be a problem, it's only when the original (ie. live) signal is present in a significant amount (resulting in distracting comb filtering etc)

Phases 1ms snare example isn't really valid - it would be like having zero latency monitoring plus a 1ms delayed version at identical volumes which would indeed be horrible & comb filtered all over the place (like a static flange)

However in practice I find the original signal can be attenuated enough (using cans) for it not to be a problem.

I respectfully disagree with your extrapolation.

If I do a 24db boost at 2k on my drums they sound horrible
At what point does it start to sound ok?
Should I never boost drums at 2k in any amount because it sounded horrible at 24db?


There are many grey areas in audio & I think the effect of latency is one of them - there are however ranges for most things that work for most people.

This is not to say that it's wrong to be at the extremes if it works for you.

Just as a reminder, the thread is about "logic X rumours"...latency is a worthy topic, but possibly not for those who wanted to read random guesses about Logic and where it might go!

So please stay on topic

Lol! Indeed, apologies.

Hey is Logic 10 out yet?