1 Topic by hellrazr (edited by hellrazr 2022-08-31 21:05:56)

  • Registered: 2022-08-31
  • Posts: 4

Topic: Monitoring Latency

The RME product manuals state that direct hardware monitoring (configured via TotalMix) is really low and list some values.  It appears the signals still go through AD/DA converters.       What is the actual delay time when enabling direct hardware monitoring?  Is it noticeable to anyone in any scenarios like recording vocals, direct guitar, etc?

I've been using an external mixer in front of my audio interface, and so there is no latency.   When I tried the original Babyface, I noticed a little bit of latency in monitoring mode and sent it back.   Perhaps I didn't set it up correctly (it was years ago), but I'm looking for a setup that has no detectable latency such as I had when using an external mixer.   Do the RME products like the latest Babyface achieve this?  What are your experiences?  What is the actual latency time in milliseconds when monitoring direct through the converters?

2 Reply by vinark (edited by vinark 2022-08-31 09:21:16)

  • vinark
  • DAW Mastermind
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2009-06-05
  • Posts: 2,786

Re: Monitoring Latency

This is what MC from RME wrote

At 48 Khz, analog in to out via TotalMix FX, input and output channel have EQ, LC, Dynamics and AutoLevel active. Rev/Echo do not change these values:

48 kHz: 0.7 ms
96 kHz: 0.33 ms
192 kHz: 0.16 ms

The manual says at 48 kHz AD 13 samples, DA 7 samples. One has to add some samples for the internal routing FPGA to/from DSP plus one sample TM FX, which  results in about 33 samples at 48 kHz. Half and another half at 96 and 192. Please note that at 192 kHz the number of available FX channels is significanty reduced due to limited DSP power.

Vincent, Amsterdam
https://soundcloud.com/thesecretworld
BFpro fs, 2X HDSP9652 ADI-8AE, 2X HDSP9632
  • Registered: 2022-08-31
  • Posts: 4

Re: Monitoring Latency

Ok, not quite zero latency of course, but that seems like imperceivable latency. One could argue that effectively makes it zero.

https://www.rme-audio.de/downloads/bface_pro_fs_e.pdf

Section 28.2 of the Babyface Pro FS manual has a pretty good overall explanation, but I don't have solid understanding of the technical terms and some of it reads like a German-English translation smile.  It appears that the latest Babyface has better specs than what MC wrote (or the device he was referring to).

4 Reply by vinark (edited by vinark 2022-08-31 20:06:08)

  • vinark
  • DAW Mastermind
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2009-06-05
  • Posts: 2,786

Re: Monitoring Latency

Yes AD is 5 instead of 13 samples, but that is something like 0,2 ms difference at 44k so little difference or 25% less latency, that sounds like a lot, lol
Near zero latency
Even nearer zero....

Vincent, Amsterdam
https://soundcloud.com/thesecretworld
BFpro fs, 2X HDSP9652 ADI-8AE, 2X HDSP9632
  • mkok
  • DAW Mastermind
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2020-11-04
  • Posts: 633

Re: Monitoring Latency

So I use a Babyface pro fs and I use it to sing and can not perceive latency at all even if using the effects. Now if you use the effects in a DAW while doing this then that’s a different matter as they will have latency. This is nothing to do with the interface.

Babyface Pro Fs, Behringer ADA8200, win 10/11 PCs, Cubase/Wavelab, Adam A7X monitors.