ASIO Latency Compensation Problems

General discussions on songwriting, mixing, music business and other music related topics.
User avatar
TEEF
Member
Posts: 322
Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 2:38 pm
Contact:

Re: ASIO Latency Compensation Problems

Post by TEEF » Mon Apr 10, 2017 10:49 pm

There really aren't that many people contributing to your thread. That's just a lot of people reading and eating popcorn
TEEF

Amack
Junior Member
Posts: 71
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2017 4:54 pm
Contact:

Re: ASIO Latency Compensation Problems

Post by Amack » Tue Apr 11, 2017 1:14 am

Novikthewise. You were quite successful in demonstrating why system developers don't put people in the feedback loop when analyzing system performance. But, you weren't very successful in demonstrating the point you were trying to make. See my markups and images imbedded in red in the following from your March 16 post viewtopic.php?f=198&t=111073#p626103 ;)
Novikthewise wrote:Now here is the scenario that this function is specifically made for.!!!
[attachment=2]Latency 4.jpg[/attachment]Here you see me tapping in Midi Notes with my controller on the Cubase Click without any instrument as a destination so i could fully concentrate on tapping right to the cubase click. You see that even with an RTL that high i pretty much was in time with a natural variance (11.48ms) of course.

[attachment=1]Latency 5.jpg[/attachment] Here you see me trying desperatly to tap in midi with an instrument as audio source on time. I loop recorded it till i adjusted myself for the latency so that the audio was on the click. Of course I had to tap the pad earlier due to the high latency setting. Earlier by 44.4ms to 103ms (58.6ms variance)
Latency 6.jpg
(158.6 KiB) Not downloaded yet
Here i did the same as above with ALC turned on. Due to the diffucult nature of playing with high latency i also have a higher variance of course (60.2ms). With ALC on the Notes werent perfect but still much better placed than without ALC. Earlier by 46.3ms (approximately the reported input latency of your audio interface)
Attachments
Latency 5.jpg
(132.68 KiB) Not downloaded yet
Latency 4.jpg
(115.01 KiB) Not downloaded yet

User avatar
Novikthewise
Member
Posts: 313
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2011 1:17 pm
Contact:

Re: ASIO Latency Compensation Problems

Post by Novikthewise » Tue Apr 11, 2017 6:37 am

what is your point?.
You don't even understand your own test results because you created an error in your test you now base your judgment on. You still don't understand that Cubase doesn't compensate for Live Monitored tracks what you did in your test. No wonder the result is wrong. Could you please make a picture of your very first post and manually change the positions to those you say would be correct? than i will explain to you why the looped back audio of the instrument will be earlier than that of the first audio track.
StudioPC: Core i7 2600, 16GB DDR-1333 RAM, Asus P8H67 m-Evo REV.3, Win 7 64Bit Home Premium, Cubase 8.5.20 64bit, Halion 5.1.1, Halion Sonic 2, Wavelab 9.0.25,

Mobile: HP Elitebook 8460p I5 2540m 8GB RAM Win 7 Pro 64bit, Cubase Elements 8.0.40

Amack
Junior Member
Posts: 71
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2017 4:54 pm
Contact:

Re: ASIO Latency Compensation Problems

Post by Amack » Tue Apr 11, 2017 6:37 pm

Novikthewise wrote:Could you please make a picture of your very first post and manually change the positions to those you say would be correct? than i will explain to you why the looped back audio of the instrument will be earlier than that of the first audio track.
IMO it would be better for me to step through my reasoning to enable a determination of points of agreement and disagreement. Any points of disagreement can then be stepped through in a similar manner. Since we're discussing the operation of an essentially deterministic system, we should ultimately be able to reach agreement. Does that seem reasonable?

Here's the 1st two steps in my reasoning. Please let me know if you agree or disagree on each of them:

The assumptions are for recordings in new projects with no plugins except VSTi on instrument tracks. Timing claims are based on the time events are recorded to tracks in Cubase.

1. MIDI note recording will be delayed by the sum of the reported input latency of the audio interface, the MIDI player's delay, the MIDI source (keyboard/controller,etc.)+communications delay, and Cubase's MIDI note detection+recognition+recording delay. Do you agree or disagree? :?:

2. Audio recording will be delayed by the sum of the audio source delay, the input latency of the audio interface, and Cubase's audio recording delay. Do you agree or disagree? :?:

User avatar
Novikthewise
Member
Posts: 313
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2011 1:17 pm
Contact:

Re: ASIO Latency Compensation Problems

Post by Novikthewise » Tue Apr 11, 2017 10:48 pm

Amack wrote:
Novikthewise wrote:Could you please make a picture of your very first post and manually change the positions to those you say would be correct? than i will explain to you why the looped back audio of the instrument will be earlier than that of the first audio track.
IMO it would be better for me to step through my reasoning to enable a determination of points of agreement and disagreement. Any points of disagreement can then be stepped through in a similar manner. Since we're discussing the operation of an essentially deterministic system, we should ultimately be able to reach agreement. Does that seem reasonable?

Here's the 1st two steps in my reasoning. Please let me know if you agree or disagree on each of them:

The assumptions are for recordings in new projects with no plugins except VSTi on instrument tracks. Timing claims are based on the time events are recorded to tracks in Cubase.

1. MIDI note recording will be delayed by the sum of the reported input latency of the audio interface, the MIDI player's delay, the MIDI source (keyboard/controller,etc.)+communications delay, and Cubase's MIDI note detection+recognition+recording delay. Do you agree or disagree? :?:

2. Audio recording will be delayed by the sum of the audio source delay, the input latency of the audio interface, and Cubase's audio recording delay. Do you agree or disagree? :?:
To 1.
I partly disagree. Midi recording is not delayed by the input latency of the Asio Driver. I gets delayed or imprecise due to midi communication latency and wrong timestamps. I am pretty sure the cubase recognition of midi is neglectable
I am not exactly sure what you mean by players delay.

To 2. Agreed if you mean with Cubase Audio recording delay the plugins that might be inserted in the inputs


To your Test: Lets have a look what initially happens before cubase compensates all recorded events. Like you said earlier if i had recorded enough tracks the instruments looped back recording would be earlier by the input latency than the looped back microphone recording.
The reason why this happens is that the Audio of the microphone had to go through the input of the interface and was delayed by the input latency. the midi note that had been recorded was record immediately and therefore earlier recorded than the audio by the input latency of the interface. Also the Instrument was triggered immediately but the audio of that instrument is than delayed by the output latency and not also by the input latency like the microphones audio was.
The loop back recorded instrument audio lacks one input stage why it is earlier recorded than the microphone loop back by the input latency.
Now Cubase moved both loop back recorded audio events by a full RTL. It moves the midi recording by the output latency
If the instruments Audio supposed to be in sync with the microphones loop back recording the audiotrack with the Instruments audio would have needed to be compensated by only the output latency...

Cubase can not know that the audio it recorded on the instruments audio track was actually the Instruments audio it triggert and couldn't have known that it lacks one input stage. Thats what i meant with using cubase the wrong way. You expected Cubase to do something it couldn't have known to compensate correctly

I think your problem in your thoughts is that you look at it completey from a technical perspective and leave the musician out of it
What you actually wanted to happen is that the instruments triggering is delayed by the input latency aswell so the the monitoring of the microphone and instrument is in sync. Purely technical speaking this makes sense.
But this is not the way to work as this makes no sense for the musicians and is undesireable . Its generally not a good idea to use the software monitoring signal as the timing reference. Especially not at high latencies.

The correct way to work is to minimise latency alltoghether by using hardware monitoring on Audio and lowest possible latencies on software monitoring for Instruments and as a timing reference the Click in Cubase. Even if you don't use the Click its mendatory that the musicians that play together have near zero latency monitoring to actually be able to play together. I quess you can imagine that musician who hear themselfs 100 ms later after they played will not be able to perfom well.

So if you play to the click with near zero latency for all musicians than compensation on audio by a whole roundtrip and compensation of the recorded midi notes by the output latency will ultimatly sync midi and audio. If you than playback the project midi and audio will only be delayed by the output and in sync
Last edited by Novikthewise on Wed Apr 12, 2017 9:28 am, edited 1 time in total.
StudioPC: Core i7 2600, 16GB DDR-1333 RAM, Asus P8H67 m-Evo REV.3, Win 7 64Bit Home Premium, Cubase 8.5.20 64bit, Halion 5.1.1, Halion Sonic 2, Wavelab 9.0.25,

Mobile: HP Elitebook 8460p I5 2540m 8GB RAM Win 7 Pro 64bit, Cubase Elements 8.0.40

Amack
Junior Member
Posts: 71
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2017 4:54 pm
Contact:

Re: ASIO Latency Compensation Problems

Post by Amack » Wed Apr 12, 2017 2:18 am

Here's a more direct approach. Surely someone there has an oscilloscope (scope). Connect a microphone to one scope channel and trigger the scope on that channel. Set Cubase's audio interface to its highest buffer size. Put a low/no latency VSTi on a Cubase track and route its output to one of the interface's audio outputs. Connect that interface audio output to another scope channel. Record the time delays between the two scope channels for multiple trials of the microphone tapping a key on the MIDI keyboard/controller that triggers the VSTi. Is the minimum delay approximately the output latency of the interface (which may differ from the reported latency)? :?: Is the maximum delay approximately the sum of that output latency and the interface's reported input latency? :?: What should it be? :?:

March 12 Update:
But, as I pointed out in my March 22nd post viewtopic.php?f=198&t=111073, any DAW can function as a highly capable oscilloscope.
Amack wrote:The test setup can provide relative timing information with sample period accuracy. It was used in this thread to help me (and hopefully some others) understand what MIDI ASIO Latency Compensation really does in Cubase. It can also be used to measure/compare the delay of tracks. With a slight modification (playing back tracks while recording the associated loopbacks), it can be used to determine the accuracy of the compensation that Cubase applies to adjust record timings to accommodate those delays. (viewtopic.php?f=253&t=111022 shows that procedure. (Note that this forum rather annoyingly opens URLs onto the source’s web page – so it’s best to right click on the link and open it in a new browser tab or window.)
The audio interface used determines that scope's number of channels as well as the resolution, distortion, and bandwidth of those channels. It's lower frequency limit is likely ~10Hz and its upper frequency limit is ~1/2 the sample rate of the audio interface. Although I can't figure out how to trigger DAWs like a regular scope, it's easy to scroll thru very long recordings to find the intended trigger event.

Cubase has a nice (seemingly unique!) feature that allows the recording of its output channels, so the loopbacks that apparently cause some considerable angst aren't necessary (if the interface's reported RTL is correct). Although it should be clear that the use of a second DAW (for use as an oscilloscope) isn't necessary to vet my claims, one could be used if you're more comfortable with that. Audacity (which is free) could also be used - likely on the same computer as the DAW. Audacity also provides quite capable signal analysis and manipulation capabilities. Try it - you'll like it! :)

User avatar
Felipe Garcia
Moderator
Posts: 227
Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 9:31 am
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Contact:

Re: ASIO Latency Compensation Problems

Post by Felipe Garcia » Wed Apr 19, 2017 4:48 pm

I am sorry but hereby I will decline and close this thread as a bug report. It shows a non existent bug and the use that differs of what the software has been originally intended and designed for.
Joaquin Felipe Garcia, Senior Support Representative
Steinberg Media Technologies GmbH
Hamburg, Germany

Connect with Steinberg on Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, Instagram, SoundCloud and Google+!

Locked

Return to “Steinberg Lounge”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests