Where is my Full post ?

Thank you ramses
I wrote everything in my post, but only the first few lines appeared i don't know why! tried to edit my post but again the first few lines appeared

Hi

Here is my PC specs

CPU: AMD 1950x
M.B: ASUS ROG STRIX X399-E GAMING
RAM: CORSAIR VENGEANCE RGB 32GB (4x8GB) DDR4 3333MHz C16
SSD for Os: SAMSUNG 980 PRO 1TB PCIe NVMe Gen4 Internal Gaming SSD M.2
P.S : RMi Series™ RM1000i — 1000 Watt 80 PLUS® Gold Certified Fully Modular PSU
+
Steinberg UR-22 audio interface

Strange, maybe cause you are new. Could be spam protection. Just thel us what you need in short

Best you can get is IMHO currently UCX II, but this is a little over budget, but IMHO worth it.

Check this blog article and the excel that I provide in the article.
https://www.tonstudio-forum.de/blog/ind … B-MADIfac/

Direct link to Excel: https://www.tonstudio-forum.de/index.ph … -04b-xlsx/

Here a posting about the features: https://forum.rme-audio.de/viewtopic.php?id=33222

Thank you so much ramses
Do you think I really have a problem with the audio interface? I'm afraid to pay $1, 500, and don't get a performance like I was hoping for.

There could be other problems with the pc even though it is powerful. Is it optimised for audio? I think you are expecting too much to get buffers at 32 samples and have lots of vst instruments playing. I have a fast pc and run my Babyface pro fs at 64 which I find is great for low latency ( I play my Roland td30 edrums to trigger SD3 ) I can run lower but I find I can have large projects at 64 without having to change.

RME drivers are efficient but as mkok says the question is, how good the pc hw/drivers are.
If they block cpu cores for too long then they can block audio to be processed in time (-> high dpc latencies).
No ASIO driver can be so good and compensate badly written driver blocking CPU cores.
For this to understand you need to know how a computer works and that Windows / Apple are no realtime OS.
There are many threads in this forum where I explained that.
Use extended search and search for my name and LatencyMon.

I only wanted to mention that RME drivers are superb, but can't solve every deficite of PC/mainboard/HW/drivers.

4 Analog inputs? How did you connect your devices to the UR22 you now have?

The Babyface has 4 inputs, 2 XLR, 2TSR - if that works it would be a good alternative. Super low latency and has MIDI if that matters.

Hi NoisyNarrowBandDevice

Yes it has. I have one and also a PCI rme interface (which has the best latency in theory), but they are equally good. RME interfaces are realy playable up to a 256 buffer. 512 starts to feel sluggish.

Really? Do you really talk about playing a VSTi and listening back the sound while playing, which needs full RTL ?

That makes me wonder.
Why ? I tried it with Kuassa virtual guitar amps.

With 256 buffer I get 13.2 ms RTL, that feels sluggish already.
With 512 (24.8ms) you slow down immediately while playing, not possible.

From my experience you need to stay below 10ms and then you need to use 128 samples (see table above).

Good point. In my case I have definitively the full RTL as I have A/D conversion of guitar on top through INSTR input.

So for you 128 would be ok playing guitar if we have the same perception of latency.(if the moddeling you use is latency free that is)

Anafree, one of the benefits of the RME recording interfaces is the perceived zero latency recording.

Its one reason among many that drew me to RME as opposed many other lesser, more poorly supported manufacturers products.

The quality of assistance and guidance you have already received from the great people here, is a direct mirror reflection of the quality of support provided by this excellent manufacturer.

If my experience is anything to go by, provided you read the manuals, watch the video tutorials and ask for help if you get stuck, as we all do at times, you should do well with RME. It is a step up to a complete higher level. Altogether beyond what you are presently accustomed to.

If I may say so. There is a lot to be said for purchasing the best possible RME product from their range that you can afford, even if at this moment it might feel like a stretch. The thing is, doing so often saves money in the long run, because over time, our requirements inevitably grow along with our interest and then, extra features which we suddenly find needful, are already there.

That is just my opinion, but any of the superb RME interfaces will serve you well.

Despite the excellence of the RME systems with TotalMixFX.

It may be, that any difficulties, such as you experienced in regard to VST instruments lays with the configuration and implementation of your computing system.

Whilst such matters are not strictly the remit of a forum dedicated to RME equipment, I am continually astonished at the heart-warming generosity of the excellent people here, who regularly hand hold other RME users, through their non RME problems.

One thing you can do to help yourself right now despite the difficulties, is to record and print your VST instruments, immediately after you have tracked them. In other words, commit to the sound you want recorded, provided you are hearing that sound in the live room.

Years ago, professional recording engineers with a strictly limited number of channels and tracks to record to, HAD to commit themselves as the recording developed, and as they bounced tracks around to get more over dubs on to the limited resource’s they had available.

Despite that limitation, perhaps even because of it as they HAD to get creative, they were able to record some of the most acclaimed albums created throughout the entire history of recording. For instance, The Beatles Sgt. Peppers album was recorded on a J-37 Studer four track tape machine.

Often when the four tracks were full, they were transferred to another four-track but just using one or two tracks, using a process called "reduction". Then more tracks were added and so on. Heck, I can remember when all the tracks were used, one time overdubbing a lead guitar part, straight from the mixing console, while the reduction was taking place to a two track Studer mastering machine, for a particular album.

Later Studer multi-tracks could be rewired internally from standard as supplied to allow bouncing tracks within the machine, avoiding "reductions", typically allowing sixteen tracks with a single eight track, like an A-80.

Funnily enough, a producer that had been working with the Beach Boys in California, recording here showed how to do this in the early seventies, and it worked well, better than reduction.

The point is, people then didn’t have the luxuries and limitless tracks that people incorrectly seem to regard as being necessary today.

But possessed the confidence to commit what they had recorded and print it.

Quote: “I used to use "Render in place" option for each instrument track, and then disable the instrument track but that's totally unprofessional” 

With respect, I trust the above comments will assist you to view the above statement in an altogether different light.

An RME interface will permit you to put your best foot forward regarding the issues that concern you.

A logical step towards enabling  implementation of your desired work methodology.

Keyboard or drumpads or kit? On a keyboard layering drums is doable at 256. Playing a full kit at once with feel impossible, I would guess. But I don't have the skills for that. Maybe first BD and snare in one go and the the hats. Or layering complex polyrythmic percussion, but also layer for layer.
I also prefer 128, but honestly don't feel better at 64. And I don't feel really handycapped at 256 (with zero latency from plugins).
For the original poster, with RME buffer sizes are true. With other manufacturers there is often double or even triple buffers and large hidden safety buffers which can even make 64 feel sluggish and 256 unplayable..

Hardware: Korg pa4x + Korg triton, I connect them using usb cable for Midi & Pa4x audio output L+R for audio
Software: Cubase pro 11 /Swam collection /Pianoteq /Kontakt /Ezbass

Yes I play in using my Roland td30.

So it seems like you only need 2 audio inputs and MIDI?

A Babyface Pro FS should suffice here. It has 4 audio inputs and MIDI. Can be expanded with 8 more audio inputs via ADAT. It's portable and super sturdy construction.

Without extras the AIO is 2 in 2 out.
But as I said before the babyface works just as good here as my PCI cards.
But these 2 together have 6 in 2 out plus headphones.
https://www.google.com/aclk?sa=l&ai … amp;adurl=

https://www.google.com/aclk?sa=l&ai … amp;adurl=

But the AIO might be dificult to find. And AIO is just as suitable is AIO pro.
Still my bet would be the Babyface pro FS.

Thank you Vinark , ramses
I found a Babyface pro fs "Open Box" on Facebook MarketPlace / 650$ and UCX II New/ 1500$ on Ebay + SweetWater
I only have two question to make a decision, Do all the RME audio interface "USB / Thunderbolt / Firewire / PCI / PCIE have the same latency time? can i buy a small digital mixer and link it through ADAT? if that possible i think I'm going to go about buying one of RME PCIE for some reasons.....
1: I can buy one now and ship it to my country without paying high customs because they won't know what it is and how much it costs
2: The Digital mixer will give me good capabilities to control better than Babyface + UCX II controllers
Please correct me If I am wrong.

ramses
I'm grateful to you and everyone who responded to my questions . I'll start shopping now to get UCX II at the best possible price.

UFX is a 30ch USB2 interface and uses a different driver, the older USB driver.
UFX+ is a 94ch USB3/Thunderbolt interface using MADIface USB driver.
Your UFX (USB2 interface) runs in USB2 mode, as every USB3 port is also backward compatible to USB2.

The UFX and UFX+ differ not only in terms of USB but also in terms of converter latency:
UFX     12 / 28 samples @44.1kHz AD/DA
UFX+   12 / 7   "

So your values for ASIO input latency of UFX with 128 samples ASIO buffersize @44.1 kHz differs a little to my values that I took years ago. Maybe RME adjusted something in the driver, either a small correction or fewer safety buffers, I can't tell exactly. I will keep my old values, as the table has also references to a certain driver and manual version and this is a legacy product anyway.

But thanks for notifying