The relevancy of my suggestion regarding MIDI ASIO Latency Compensation was explained in my March 22nd post:
Although you apparently believe that would not be worthwhile, others may feel otherwise. http://forum.coockos.com/showpost.php?p=1803053&postcount=5 (You need to remove the first “o” in “coockos” to un-censor the URL) Many are apparently even seeking out relatively expensive audio interfaces in their attempts to minimize their monitoring latency. https://www.gearslutz.com/board/music-computers/618474-audio-interface-low-latency-performance-data-base.html Note that the audio interface latency now always added to MIDI inputs by Cubase can contribute quite significantly to overall monitoring latency.
That’s irrelevant. Again, as explained in the March 22, 2017 post:
Note that your use of it also quite effectively demonstrated the VSTi timing problem with Cubase 9 documented at: Serious Cubase 9 VSTi Timing Problem (Bug Report!) - Steinberg Lounge - Steinberg Forums Apparently you were (still are?!) unaware of this problem!
I’m getting there! But please note that my primary goal is to help Cubase’s developers understand and fix the software problems as well as (hopefully) improve Cubase’s performance and utility for its real users (including my son). That’s why I took the time to submit these bug reports and plan to do so with other bugs which I’ve discovered in that process. I’ve had over 40 years of experience doing this type of thing.
From my March 17, 2017 post:
Back to the current post
Thanks for catching the error in that sentence – I fixed it. If you (or anyone else) have noticed other errors and/or inconsistencies, please point them out to and I’ll fix and/or clarify as necessary.
I’m posting things that should be helpful to the software developers for product debugging and improvement. My understanding that doing so through the forum is the correct way to do that. https://www.steinberg.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=253&t=107133 Do you think otherwise?