From: Ricky Hunt on
"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
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
>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
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

First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: Midi Latency -Recording only
Next: Print Staff View