|
|
Post by popmann on May 9, 2014 19:34:54 GMT -6
You should hear more difference in the pitch printed to disk than timing. Any discernible difference there? Yup, but even so, for me, i feel wholly different as a player with latency present in my cue vs 0 latency, i can still pull it off, but the former pins an un natural disconnect to the vibe that is palpable and disconcerting to me.. in addition to the pitch swirling. I just want to point out again...to clarify...if you "hear latency"--even in a digital cue, you've got things misconfigured, IMO/E--and while this solution will ALSO take care of that, properly using Maestro(or any other hardware 56bit DSP mixer-ie Totalmix, etc) should result in what is effectively converter round trip....this is not something that at least I can "hear". I just have visions of JK going "check check"....then replugging stuff "check check"....thinking he's going to literally hear an echo or lack therefof...wanted to chime in that he won't. |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on May 9, 2014 19:59:46 GMT -6
OK, then I didn't "feel" any advantage.
|
|
|
|
Post by popmann on May 10, 2014 16:17:28 GMT -6
I'm trying to clarify...you will have to actually do a project if you want to know if it matters to you. It's not something you hear or "feel"-at least I don't. It's something that yields better tracks than without.
|
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on May 10, 2014 18:08:58 GMT -6
I'm trying to clarify...you will have to actually do a project if you want to know if it matters to you. It's not something you hear or "feel"-at least I don't. It's something that yields better tracks than without. I should state that as a drummer, latency, even in small degrees really sucks, so yes i guess i can feel it. It's really noticeably uncomfortable in over dub sessions, and once you start nudging and pushing wave forms along, the feel of the project falls apart in my experience. There is a reason why a great band that tracks the core of their music together almost always grooves harder than any overdubbed session IMO, Stevie Wonder may be an exception to this, besides being an absolute monster, he was using tape at 30 ips probably...? |
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on May 10, 2014 19:28:39 GMT -6
Analog recorders have no latency while monitoring input. Stevie could emulate the feel of any musician he chose and tell you who it is.
The gotcha with analog tape was gap scatter between the tracks. In sync mode on the same machine it was negligible but not play mode or on a different machine. This is an area where digital is better provided you aren't monitoring through the converters.
|
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on May 10, 2014 19:59:45 GMT -6
Analog recorders have no latency while monitoring input. Stevie could emulate the feel of any musician he chose and tell you who it is. The gotcha with analog tape was gap scatter between the tracks. In sync mode on the same machine it was negligible but not play mode or on a different machine. This is an area where digital is better provided you aren't monitoring through the converters. Hi Bob, Mr. Wonder is an all time hero of mine 8) Could you please explain what "gap scatter" is, i've never heard of that before... thanx T |
|
|
|
Post by winetree on May 10, 2014 23:07:05 GMT -6
I've recorded over 30 years to 2"-24 analog tape and never heard any latency or noticed any "gap scatter"
(do you mean track cross talk?) I'm wiring the new tracking room with 6-Cat6 cables from both control rooms for a new 16 track digital personal monitoring system. With all this talk of headphone latency, I gonna also wire in some analog runs for the old analog cue off the Harrison console.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on May 11, 2014 11:20:44 GMT -6
If you record the same signal to two tracks and then mix them together on playback you can hear gap scatter pretty clearly. A drum mix recorded to mono vs. recorded on separate tracks was the most obvious issue that came up because it created a frustrating loss of balls.
|
|
