Faster CPU or more RAM???

  • Thread starter Thread starter solo2racr
  • Start date Start date
solo2racr said:
I got the card BEFORE I decided to try recording. For the intended purpose at the time, it works fine ( I loaded all my CD's onto my harddrive). They don't market it as a recording card anyway. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Then why are you bitching about latency? For 2 years I used an 800 mhz PIII machine with 1 GB of RAM for my DAW and got around 2ms latency without a problem. This is because I wasn't using a piece of crap soundcard. You've got more than enough power to get low latency but won't accept that it's your soundcard at fault, so what do you expect to get out of a different computer?

PS: On that setup, I was using Windows XP and Cubase SX2. Not exactly what I'd call non-resource hogs. And this was way before nLite made it simple to tune XP.
 
solo2racr said:
Best way I know of to show you.

304138450.jpg
Click to expand...

ok when I seen this with 2 inputs and 8 outputs I took it to be a 2in/8out like a Delta 410 or something. My mistake

You're up at 1024 samples there with your ASIO buffer size. Drop that to 512, even try it at 256 and if you're not getting audio dropouts try it as low as 128, if that fails bring it back to 256 if it was stable there.

Secondly, are you recording at 44.1KHz? if you are try recording at 48Khz, that will shave some time off your latency too.


Thirdly, have a look around http://www.musicxp.net/index.php for further tuning tips.

Another tip is to drop the AISO right down as far as you can at the start of a project, get all your tracks recorded. If it starts dropping out audio mute some tracks untill you have everything down. THEN bump your ASIO buffer size up through the roof for mixdown where latency isn't going to take a part in it...might just get you the extra few miles you need.


You know there's a LOT of people on this board been at the exact place you are right now, me being one of them. With help and advice over the past 5 years on this board I've built up a studio that's actualy making me money rather than just being a hobby I had years ago. Myself and many others included are more than happy to pass on tried and trusted advice that we know works because we've been there and found out the hard way. Whether you take the good free advice is a complete different story.

After edit: DISCLAIMER: When I said tried and trusted advice I DID NOT mean like you telling that guy 5 days ago that as long as his guitar leads were coaxial cable he was good to go. From what I took from his post he wasn't trying to wire up a television antena

{mini rant over}
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the answer. Definitely better than most the others on here. I have decided to get a Soundcraft Compact4 to treat the symptom (as opposed to curing the problem). If you monitor what is being recorded AFTER it has been tracked, there will always be some latency. It doesn't really matter if you have to move the track so compensate for 4ms or 40ms of delay. With the Soundcraft Compact4, I can patch the output back into the mixer for 0ms latency and only send back to the DAW the new track. Once there, just move the track up to where it needs to be.



LemonTree said:
After edit: DISCLAIMER: When I said tried and trusted advice I DID NOT mean like you telling that guy 5 days ago that as long as his guitar leads were coaxial cable he was good to go. From what I took from his post he wasn't trying to wire up a television antena

{mini rant over}
Click to expand...

I seriously doubt that the interconnects he was asking about were made from RG6 cable. Quality aside, T/S interconnects use the same coaxial cable as a guitar would.

FYI....I have mixed live bands, on and off, for over 16 years. I think that qualifies as "tried and trusted" I'm just new to this DAW recording thing.
 
Last edited:
warlock110 said:
new CPU. grab an intel dual core or the AMD X2, they're super cheap, change the mobo and you can get it up and running. Run atleast 2GB if not 4GB of ram, those things are cheap right now, take advantage of it.
Click to expand...

I agree with this.
 
solo2racr said:
Thanks for the answer. Definitely better than most the others on here. I have decided to get a Soundcraft Compact4 to treat the symptom (as opposed to curing the problem). If you monitor what is being recorded AFTER it has been tracked, there will always be some latency. It doesn't really matter if you have to move the track so compensate for 4ms or 40ms of delay. With the Soundcraft Compact4, I can patch the output back into the mixer for 0ms latency and only send back to the DAW the new track. Once there, just move the track up to where it needs to be.
Click to expand...

Or you could... uh... get an interface for the same price and have monitoring that has no audible latency. But, if you want to stay in an ass-backwards setup that causes more work for yourself, by all means feel free.
 
timthetortoise said:
Or you could... uh... get an interface for the same price and have monitoring that has no audible latency. But, if you want to stay in an ass-backwards setup that causes more work for yourself, by all means feel free.
Click to expand...


Uh.....That wasn't the SOLE reason for the choice. Just the one that is applicable here. THINK BEFORE YOU TYPE.
 
solo2racr said:
the cards you mentioned before that offer "zero latency monitoring" ONLY monitor the signal going INTO the card. NOT what is being recorded.
Click to expand...


This is my favorite statement on here since that guy asked how to get his wav files to look square at the top like the pro's :D

Seriously, if you're geting anything more than exactly what you put into your soundcard recorded you are doing something very wrong. What's being recorded should be "exactly what's going into the card" :eek:

I'm starting to think you could be doing with a lot more RAM......in your head
 
Outside of a handful of answers, the rest of them have NOT answered the question (reread the original post) or have been derogatory in nature. It was really a pretty simple question, a faster CPU or more RAM to lower latency. One word answers would have sufficed ("RAM" or "faster CPU"). Out of all the message boards that I have been to and posted on, this one HAS to have the rudest people on it (with a noted handful of exceptions). Hence the responses from my end. People get on message boards like this and knowing that they don't actually have to FACE the people they exchange posts with, tend to be more brazen than if they were in the same room, talking to the person. The fact that someone has managed to give me 12185 NEGATIVE rep points is a good example of the childish nature of some on here(LEMONTREE) Conversely, Thank you wreckd504 for the POSITIVE points. As I stated before, I have mixed a number of live bands over 16 years so I DO know a bit about musicians. As a whole, with, of course, exceptions, they LOVE to hear themselves. This is clearly carrying over onto here. I think some of the posts here solely are for that purpose. Contrary to what they may say. By the same token, a musician should NEVER be allowed near a mixing console. Almost ALL of them seem to think they know EXACTLY what the song should sound like. Funny thing is, everyone in the band has a different idea. None of which (probably) are right. I can say this because it's been only the last few years that I have started to play and not just mix other bands. When people posting to message boards have the ability to post in a civil manner and when musicians are able to check their egos at the door, I may post another question.

To those of you that have acted in a civil manner and have answered my question with a meaningful response....THANK YOU :)

To the rest of you that just like to start trouble and give answers that don't answer the question......:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:
 
Seems to me you were the first one to start being rude when someone gave you an answer that was actually correct (which was it's not your CPU or RAM at fault, it's your sound card). If you can't deal with getting a straight answer that you don't want to hear, don't ask the question.
 
timthetortoise said:
Seems to me you were the first one to start being rude when someone gave you an answer that was actually correct (which was it's not your CPU or RAM at fault, it's your sound card). If you can't deal with getting a straight answer that you don't want to hear, don't ask the question.
Click to expand...

The card may very well be the biggest problem(I'm sure it is) But the QUESTION asked was about CPU speed or more RAM, not the card. The card I have is the card I have(for now). When I build a dedicated DAW I'm sure it will have a better interface. But, at the moment, a faster CPU or more RAM will also help with other things I do on this PC. THAT was why the original question ONLY asked about CPU's or RAM. NOT cards.

I KNOW what I am working with now is crap and that is why I want to build a dedicated DAW. In the mean time, I am just trying to get the most out of what I have WITHOUT throwing a ton of money at it. That will be later on another DAW.:D
 
solo2racr said:
The card may very well be the biggest problem(I'm sure it is) But the QUESTION asked was about CPU speed or more RAM, not the card. The card I have is the card I have(for now). When I build a dedicated DAW I'm sure it will have a better interface. But, at the moment, a faster CPU or more RAM will also help with other things I do on this PC. THAT was why the original question ONLY asked about CPU's or RAM. NOT cards.

I KNOW what I am working with now is crap and that is why I want to build a dedicated DAW. In the mean time, I am just trying to get the most out of what I have WITHOUT throwing a ton of money at it. That will be later on another DAW.:D
Click to expand...

The original question was asking how to reduce your latency. It turns out neither of those was the biggest factor and people were trying to be helpful about that. It seems that 16 years of mixing live bands doesn't grant you more knowledge or politeness than "musicians trying to record," eh?
The fact is, a card that would be a vast improvement over what you have would be cheaper than a CPU/mobo combo, and the effect more RAM would have is negligible since the buffer size you can get to will usually depend on your CPU speed as opposed to how much RAM you have (though 512 is pretty low).
Why am I even telling you this? You'll probably just get that Prescott and, hopefully, find your tower on fire one day.
 
The title of this thread is "Faster CPU or more RAM???" That was in regard to lowering latency. I know a better card et/all is the way to go. Your last post,Tim, is actually very good, for when I build a dedicated DAW. In fact, MOST of the post in this thread will help alot when I get to that point. I'm just not there( budget wise) yet. That is why I was asking, in particular, about CPU's and RAM. BOTH are cheap for the PC I have now. In the future, I will use alot of the advice posted here on a new DAW. But, until the budget allows that, I'm just trying to get the most out of what I have. I can get more RAM and a faster CPU for just over half of what a cheap 2ch. card costs. The less $$$ I throw at the old PC means the sooner I can get a better one. Look at what I'm trying to do as a "quick fix" or a "stop gap" till I can do it right. Like I have said before, I KNOW what I'm working with here is CRAP. But, it's all I have at the moment. If throwing $50.00 or $60.00 at it in RAM and a faster CPU is a waste, SAY SO. Not that I need a better card or a duo core or 4gigs or ram. I know I need a better PC to use as a DAW. And that day will come.:D
 
OK.....MY INCREDIBLY STUPID ASS just realized that even though I don't want to throw alot of money into the current PC I am using, a new card CAN BE REMOVED AND PLACED INTO THE NEW DAW WHEN IT GETS BUILT:eek::eek::o:o

I was spending so much effort into thinking about the small details, I was failing to see the much simpler BIG picture. At least I'm not the first to do that.;)

Given that, I would like to apologize to any and all that I have given any lip to. I'm sure that ALL of you assumed that I was aware of the fact that I could use a new card in this PC AND in the new DAW when I get it built. GOD I feel stupid for missing something so obvious. :mad::mad::mad::mad::eek:

OK....Lets start over here.

Good cards for under $150.00? Sorry, budget still won't let me swing a Firewire interface. All I need are 2 ch. anyway.

Oh....THANK YOU IN ADVANCE:D
 
It's good of you to lay down like that when you realize whats up, thank you for that. Sometimes what you don't know you don't can be tricky, but thats why we're all here.


An MAudio Audiophile 24/96 is a fine card with fine converters and drivers. You can get one used for $50, and one new for $100 if you look hard.
 
I recently Bought a used Delta 1010LT on e-bay for $150 Can ,It has 8 Ins and 8 Outs ,Digital SPDIF and Midi in and out...The drivers are good (In XP) and it has a Pretty good sound for the price and latency is not an issue....
 
Personally, in that range (and non-Firewire/USB), I'd go with a Delta 44 assuming you have a preamp (or two) to use. M-Audio stuff is rock solid and you get a lot of bang for the buck.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top