1 Topic by undertone (edited by undertone 2013-04-07 18:14:17)

  • Registered: 2007-05-02
  • Posts: 316

Topic: UFX + Softsynth users: are you happy with your latency?

There's no question that if I was just doing audio, the UFX would be on the top of my list. But I'm mainly a composer and I work with a lot of ITB synths; I'm still on the fence with regards to USB or Firewire interfaces. I've enjoyed the low latency of the HDSPe systems but I like the integration and features of the UFX.

So I'd like to get some feedback from people working with the UFX and softsynths: are you satisfied with the latency you get on your systems? How low are the latencies you can functionally work with when playing synths live within an arrangement?

Thanks for any feedback!

PC1 = HDSPe PCIe: DF-ADI-8 DS / HDSPe PCIe: MF2
MBP = HDSPe Expresscard: MF1
  • From: Detroit
  • Registered: 2011-04-15
  • Posts: 67

Re: UFX + Softsynth users: are you happy with your latency?

Nothing but praise from here on my UFX.

Don't think it's possible to get any lower latencies from any company using external interfaces.

I run my UFX at 64 over firewire without issue

  • From: Brooklyn, NY
  • Registered: 2011-11-02
  • Posts: 21

Re: UFX + Softsynth users: are you happy with your latency?

The UFX is great. It can go down to 48 on my machine, but I mostly use it at 64/128/256 for writing depending on DAW.
-Reason: 64 without any hiccups
-ProTools10: 128 or 256 for VI intensive projects
-Studio One: 64, 128, or 256 for complex projects
256 is very stable across all DAWs, but this probably because my machine is an aging Intel Quad.
I imagine leaving the UFX set to 64 on an i7.

If you don't care about FX in TotalmixFX, you'll probably want to keep the HDSPe card.
I was undecided between keeping the HDSPe Madi or UFX, but eventually sold the HDSPe card.
The deciding factors were reliable low latency using my UFX - not much different from the HDSPe card; effects in TotalmixFX for tracking and overall better workflow using TotalMixFX.

Studio: RME UFX PT11, Studio One 2.5, Waves, UAD..
Live: RME UFX, Octopre, Rodes, Shure

krazylain's Website

  • Registered: 2007-05-02
  • Posts: 316

Re: UFX + Softsynth users: are you happy with your latency?

Thanks guys! I really appreciate the feedback.

@ianhind: are you talking generally or using lots of VI's and processing? It makes a big difference if you're using lots of VI's compared to just processing audio tracks. 

@krazylain: what sampling rates are you running at? And is it realistic to expect improvements in latency at higher sampling rates when using lots of VI's?

My system that has lots of horsepower but not so great latencies; with PCIe HDSPe I've found working at 256 @ 44.1 comfortable with a loaded project using lots of VI's and plugins. It sounds like I won't do any worse with the UFX.

PC1 = HDSPe PCIe: DF-ADI-8 DS / HDSPe PCIe: MF2
MBP = HDSPe Expresscard: MF1
  • From: Dirty Jersey
  • Registered: 2013-04-17
  • Posts: 16

Re: UFX + Softsynth users: are you happy with your latency?

I just recently grabbed a UCX. I was using an Echo Audiofire 4 previously.

I don't think you can get any better than RME's performance. My setup is an i7 3820 OC to 4.6GHz, 32GB ram, Sampsung Pro SSD

I use Studio One. I'm heavy on softsynths. Maybe 6-12 soft synths per song on average? I can run a 64 samples with no problems when producing. On the Echo, I'd have to be at 128 samples to produce. If I were recording only audio I could easily be at 48 samples to track.

For a light mix, I can stay at 64 samples. For a moderate mod, I bump to 128. For an insanely CPU intensive mix, I might have to go to 256... maybe. If I decided to use 6 Amplitubes, 4 Valhallah Reverbs, and 20 Kramer Tape instances lol.... totally unnecessary.

The main issue with my setup is I have some key plugins Jbridged.... so my CPU stability gets compromised when those plugins are loaded up. That and Kontakt is still a very finicky plugin, but it has some many great instruments that I still use it a lot. The UCX drivers aren't some mythological set of drivers that can operate at 64 samples no matter how crazy your project gets like I imagined they'd be.... but they're still better than anything I have used to date. I use firewire right now... going to try USB also to see if it tames my Jbridged plugs a little more.

CPhoenix's Website

  • From: Brooklyn, NY
  • Registered: 2011-11-02
  • Posts: 21

Re: UFX + Softsynth users: are you happy with your latency?

undertone wrote:

Thanks guys! I really appreciate the feedback.
@krazylain: what sampling rates are you running at? And is it realistic to expect improvements in latency at higher sampling rates when using lots of VI's?

My system that has lots of horsepower but not so great latencies; with PCIe HDSPe I've found working at 256 @ 44.1 comfortable with a loaded project using lots of VI's and plugins. It sounds like I won't do any worse with the UFX.

I mainly work at 44.1, but I believe working at higher sample rates leads to much lower latency, but at higher CPU usage.
So yes, you should expect improvements in latency.
someone else can confirm this.

Studio: RME UFX PT11, Studio One 2.5, Waves, UAD..
Live: RME UFX, Octopre, Rodes, Shure

krazylain's Website

  • Registered: 2008-01-01
  • Posts: 3,025

Re: UFX + Softsynth users: are you happy with your latency?

The latency of the already very fast AD/DA converters is halved with every doubling of the sample-rate. The audio buffers you set up for ASIO drivers do not get much faster, because RME already allows to set up the lowest possible buffer size of 48 samples at 44.1/48 kHz. This would automatically double to 96 samples when you use higher 88.2/96 kHz.