I feel like im clogging this forum with bad q's

[RAK]

so bit depth here is how many discrete slices of that voltage can we create...hence the idea of resolution.... remember every time you ad a single bit you double the available resolution... so 8 bits more data ads 2-8th power or 256 x's the resolution....

This is what I was trying to say.

 

[OhSh1rt]

There are two ways to avoid the latency mess: external monitoring and ASIO 2. ASIO 2 is a software driver specification for sound cards, which allows them the pass the incoming signal directly to the outputs (without entering the recording software). Your Delta must support that if you're getting zero latency with a 96KHz sample rate.

I'll look into that some more, thanks


-jeffrey

 

[NYMorningstar]

How does a high sample rate get you a lower latency?

For a buffer size of 256, if you use 96kHz instead of 44.1khz, the latency drops. e.g.(256/96000 = 0.00266 vs. 256/44100 = 0.00580)

 

[RAK]

There are two ways to avoid the latency mess: external monitoring and ASIO 2. ASIO 2 is a software driver specification for sound cards, which allows them the pass the incoming signal directly to the outputs (without entering the recording software). Your Delta must support that if you're getting zero latency with a 96KHz sample rate.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the answer to zero latency direct hardware monitoring, is the in the name: HARDWARE monitoring. This type of monitoring exists in the all analog domain and has nothing to do with software or drivers, because you are monitoring before the signal goes through the A/D process, making the latency negligible. This why on boxes that also have their own power supply, you can use them independant of the computer.

ASIO 2.0 is certianly lower latency than ASIO 1 or WDM drivers, but it doesn't affect direct hardware monitoring. ASIO 2 also allows "sample accurate sync," but that's another story. Your software must also support ASIO 2.0. I believe that Cubase does, but Sonar does not.

 

[Farview]

For a buffer size of 256, if you use 96kHz instead of 44.1khz, the latency drops. e.g.(256/96000 = 0.00266 vs. 256/44100 = 0.00580)

Yea, but wouldn't you need to double the buffer size because the samples are going by twice as fast? If your computer could keep up with 256/9600, wouldn't it be able to keep up with 128/44.1?

 

[NYMorningstar]

Yea, but wouldn't you need to double the buffer size because the samples are going by twice as fast?

Yes, as you decrease the latency the CPU/application has less time to process the audio so you need to increase the buffer size or reduce the load another way.

If your computer could keep up with 256/9600, wouldn't it be able to keep up with 128/44.1?

Sure should but when using the direct monitoring it becomes a mute point because you hear what you are recording without delays regardless of the buffer size or CPU load.

 

[NYMorningstar]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the answer to zero latency direct hardware monitoring, is the in the name: HARDWARE monitoring. This type of monitoring exists in the all analog domain and has nothing to do with software or drivers, because you are monitoring before the signal goes through the A/D process, making the latency negligible. This why on boxes that also have their own power supply, you can use them independant of the computer.

ASIO 2.0 is certianly lower latency than ASIO 1 or WDM drivers, but it doesn't affect direct hardware monitoring. ASIO 2 also allows "sample accurate sync," but that's another story. Your software must also support ASIO 2.0. I believe that Cubase does, but Sonar does not.

What I was referring to as direct is monitoring through your soundcard without going through your recording software. You hear what you are recording without delays regardless of the buffer size or CPU load and I believe Asio 2 supports that.

 

[RAK]

What I was referring to as direct is monitoring through your soundcard without going through your recording software. You hear what you are recording without delays regardless of the buffer size or CPU load and I believe Asio 2 supports that.

That's the only kind of direct monitoring there is. That's what I said, right? Hardware monitoring occurs in the hardware, before going to the the USB/FW cable. There's no latency because the signal isn't traveling through the computer and back. That's what I said before, and what you started to say here. My point before is that software drivers don't affect hardware monitoring. Hardware monitoring is not a feature of ASIO 2 (or any other kind) of drivers.

My comment about software supporting ASIO 2 was just a side comment about ASIO 2, not related to the zero-latency direct hardware monitoring.

 

[NYMorningstar]

I think I'm confused by what you are saying. Hardware monitoring for me is monitoring directly out of my mixer before entering my computer. Direct monitoring is coming from the computer but in a bypass mode available with Asio 2.

 

[RAK]

Hardware monitoring, Direct Monitoring, Zero latency monitoring, no-latency monitoring. They all mean the same thing and I would guess it's the manufacturer determines how they want to call it. It's ususally some combination fo those terms. It is all contained within the box, pre-A/D

Again, ASIO 2 is lower latency than ASIO 1 of WDM, but it's not involved with Direct monitoring (meaning directly analog in to out, no A/D/A conversion)

And even direct monitoring isn't really zero-latency, there is some, but not really noticeable (a few ms maybe).

 

[NYMorningstar]

Again, ASIO 2 is lower latency than ASIO 1 of WDM, but it's not involved with Direct monitoring (meaning directly analog in to out, no A/D/A conversion)

I believe we are saying the same thing.

 

[RAK]

I believe we are saying the same thing.

You seemed to make a differentiation between "hardware" monitoring and "direct" monitoring. They are the same thing and do not involve the computer or drivers in anyway. It is a purley "in the interface" analog process.

 

[NYMorningstar]

So it's a distinction without a difference. Sorry that bothers you.

 

[RAK]

It's not the language that bothers me. It's saying there is not a distinction/difference between the two at all. I'm not trying to be a jerk, I just want to get everyone on the same page, that's what these forums are for.

You said this:

Hardware monitoring for me is monitoring directly out of my mixer before entering my computer. Direct monitoring is coming from the computer but in a bypass mode available with Asio 2.

In what you're saying here you create two states, but there is only one type of direct/hardware monitoring, and it is not dependant on ASIO 2 or any software drivers. What you call "Direct Monitoring" does not come from the computer. There is no "bypass mode." What you call "Hardware monitoring" is all there is.

I'm trying to be clear with how I understand the situation.

 

[NYMorningstar]

It's not the language that bothers me. It's saying there is not a distinction/difference between the two at all. I'm not trying to be a jerk, I just want to get everyone on the same page, that's what these forums are for.

You said this:

Hardware monitoring for me is monitoring directly out of my mixer before entering my computer. Direct monitoring is coming from the computer but in a bypass mode available with Asio 2.

In what you're saying here you create two states, but there is only one type of direct/hardware monitoring, and it is not dependant on ASIO 2 or any software drivers. What you call "Direct Monitoring" does not come from the computer. There is no "bypass mode." What you call "Hardware monitoring" is all there is.

I'm trying to be clear with how I understand the situation.

This came from Creative Labs:

LIGHTNING FAST RESPONSES
Included in every Sound Blaster Audigy 2 ZS is a rock solid ASIO 2 (Audio Stream In/Out) driver. This driver allows music creation applications like Sequencers and Digital Audio Workstations (DAW's) to link directly with ASIO compliant hardware, bypassing the slowdown caused by an operating system's audio support. What this means is your Sound Blaster Audigy 2 ZS delivers ultra low latency (down to 2 milliseconds) when recording and playing back audio. ASIO 2 gives you direct monitoring of audio inputs, so there's no audible delay when everyone jams together. You'll also immediately notice the faster response time when performing live with software synthesizers & samplers such as Steinberg's Halion and Propellerheads' Reason.

This came from a Cubase product review:
ASIO 2 has a feature called Direct Monitoring which routes incoming data directly to an output. It doesn't run through the software, thereby virtually eliminating the latency. Your audio hardware must support this feature, however, and will require an ASIO 2 driver.
Another VST 2 feature is the ability for plug-ins to receive information via MIDI and so be controlled in real-time. Plug-ins have to be written specifically to take advantage of this. VST Instruments provide built-in support for programs like soft synths which are selected the same way as effects. Some already run alongside VST but this generally involves fiddling about with Opcode's OMS (a sophisticated alternative to MIDI Manager).


If you're saying that hardware monitoring/direct monitoring are the same thing and "do not involve the computer or drivers in anyway", how do you explain the above references?

 

[jimmy2sticks]

It doesn't run through the software, thereby virtually eliminating the latency. Your audio hardware must support this feature, however, and will require an ASIO 2 driver.

If you're saying that hardware monitoring/direct monitoring are the same thing and "do not involve the computer or drivers in anyway", how do you explain the above references?

It says it right there dude. it doesn't run through the software. It is wiring the input directly to the output inside the box. It is all analog. The drivers allow you to enable it, but this is a feature of many boxes that don't require ASIO 2. Some boxes, like the mbox, are constantly running the direct monitor, no need to shut it off really.

 

[fraserhutch]

Um, I don't think so, it is still a driver after all, and the last time I checked, there was no such thing as an analog driver.

In fact, your sequencer CANNOT communicate to ANY hardware at all without going through some driver.

What they're saying here I believe is that asio 2 drivers bypass the OS wdm layers and hit the hardware directly. I.E.,

Sequencer -> ASIO2 Driver -> Hardware

instead of

Sequencer -> ASIO Driver -> WDM layer translation -> Hardware

It says it right there dude. it doesn't run through the software. It is wiring the input directly to the output inside the box. It is all analog. The drivers allow you to enable it, but this is a feature of many boxes that don't require ASIO 2. Some boxes, like the mbox, are constantly running the direct monitor, no need to shut it off really.

 

[Farview]

You guys are talking about two different things.

Some interfaces have hardwire, analog direct monitoring. Some soundcards have direct monitoring that still goes through the AD and DA of the soundcard. The latter is the one that needs the ASIO2 drivers. The first one works like an outboard mixer.

They both exist.

 

[RAK]

I know Jimmy2sticks knows more about this than me, but if the USB protocol allows for 24 bit operation, then you can have software control of the direct monitoring.

Also, I checked with my friend who works for Steinberg, since they developed ASIO 2, and their software seems to be the only one really using right now, as it's pretty new. I'll copy what he had to say. And then we can all agree this post has gone on long enoug, I think. HaHa.

Every
system is a little different with regard to direct monitoring. In Cubase,
if the hardware is capable of Direct Monitoring, it will be able to be
checked in the VST Audiobay. If it is checked, then the routing selected in
Cubase will still control the connections but there should be zero latency.
Its definitely not a hardware change, like with moving parts, but when my
RME card sets up its routing its all done either through Cubase or through
RME's own software for the 9652.

I don't know how it works in other programs but in ours Direct
Monitoring means that the sound card is capable of monitoring back the
outgoing signals along with the incoming signals, all before the incoming
signal enters and leaves Cubase. Therefore, you can use the plug-ins
because they are inside the software.

I think we've been arguing over a term that Steinberg came up with. So their "Direct" monitoring is still post A/D conversion, but I guess their new ASIO 2 drivers are lower latency (I've never measured ASIO 2) that they feel they can claim no-latency. Again, I've never used this system.

However, the more "traditional" all analog pre-A/D conversion hardware monitoring is also sometimes referred to as "Direct" monitoring as well. So it looks like it's not so simple as to say "Direct" is one thing, and "Hardware" is another.

But it is pretty cool if you really can get very low latency, post A/D with ASIO 2, and be able to monitor with plug-ins.

Whew!

 

[RAK]

Um, I don't think so, it is still a driver after all, and the last time I checked, there was no such thing as an analog driver.

In fact, your sequencer CANNOT communicate to ANY hardware at all without going through some driver.

What they're saying here I believe is that asio 2 drivers bypass the OS wdm layers and hit the hardware directly. I.E.,

Sequencer -> ASIO2 Driver -> Hardware

instead of

Sequencer -> ASIO Driver -> WDM layer translation -> Hardware

Jimmy2Sticks was talking about hardware zero latency monitoring that does not go through the A/D/A conversion. It's an all analog signal path for monitoring. The signal goes straight from an Input (say mic 1) to an output (say the headphone out)