Prev: Midi Latency -Recording only
Next: Print Staff View
From: Ricky Hunt on 16 Mar 2007 01:30 "kitekrazy" <kitekrazy(a)sbcglobal.net.nospam> wrote in message news:esiKh.7867$M65.714(a)newssvr21.news.prodigy.net... > Isn't the Monitor Mixer used for duplex recording? I have a AP2496. > I also have a FW410 and it's control panel doesn't look near as confusing. It works just like the monitor section on any inline mixer.
From: Tobiah on 15 Mar 2007 15:58 Laurence Payne wrote: > On Wed, 14 Mar 2007 18:47:20 -0700, Tobiah <toby(a)tobiah.org> wrote: > >> I have the Delta 44, but I assume that the mixer is equivalent. >> The "Monitor Mixer" tab allows you to control a simple software >> mixer that allows sending any input or output signal to a >> 'control room' type stereo bus. If you select monitor mixer >> as the output source for channel one and two, then you will >> hear the output of this mixer on those channels, provided that >> you have raised some of the monitor mixer sliders corresponding >> to active input or output channels. This is your gateway to >> 'zero latency' monitoring of your input signals combined with >> your output signals (i.e. previous tracks). > > > And very useful that can be. Except that mostly people use a similar > "zero latency" loop-back function in their DAW software, or monitor > inputs directly through an external mixing board. This is much more > flexible, and makes the Delta monitor mixer redundant. Software can't provide a way to bypass the audio buffer, so it will always be slower to return the audio then the Delta. It's true that the Delta mixer is not really needed when an external mixer is available. I think they were thinking of the low budget hobbyist that just wants to hook up his guitar and a mic right into the sound card. -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
From: Laurence Payne on 16 Mar 2007 15:22 >Software can't provide a way to bypass the audio buffer, so it >will always be slower to return the audio then the Delta. True. But users seem quite happy with a few ms delay, routinely choosing to monitor via the DAW audio engine, not even through "Direct monitoring". Most of the problems I hear with soundcard monitor mixers stem from a mistaken idea that you need to use them for something :-)
From: Tobiah on 20 Mar 2007 22:15
Laurence Payne wrote: >> Software can't provide a way to bypass the audio buffer, so it >> will always be slower to return the audio then the Delta. > > True. But users seem quite happy with a few ms delay, Few achieve flawless operation with a 'few' ms delay. With the Delta Monitor Mixer, you could set the buffer size to equal several seconds, and still play with flawless sync monitoring. -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |