Interface upgrade

Heartfeltdawn

IMC1980 said:

This is really useful, I do record demos and ideas using amp sims in the first instance, so low latency is quite important for me. How is the latency on the Crimson? Does it have a Hi-Z input or would I need a DI for amp sim work?

The DI is pretty good. I haven't used the Orchid or any other DI box but it's a notable jump above my previous soundcards. 

Latency: it's low enough for me to do guitar stuff on the DAW. I don't own any amps and haven't for at least two years now. I won't quote figures as the relentless chasing of latency figures is really daft. I prefer real world experience reports over numbers in that department, and I can say that there's no latency issues at all. For those who do like numbers, I keep my Crimson on Fast performance mode 44.1kHz, 128 buffer size. 

guitarfishbay

Heartfeltdawn said:

Latency: it's low enough for me to do guitar stuff on the DAW. I don't own any amps and haven't for at least two years now. I won't quote figures as the relentless chasing of latency figures is really daft. I prefer real world experience reports over numbers in that department, and I can say that there's no latency issues at all. For those who do like numbers, I keep my Crimson on Fast performance mode 44.1kHz, 128 buffer size. 

I really don't understand this line of thinking, but I don't know what stuff you're recording or how.  

If you're recording a chain that you can monitor direct (zero latency) then it won't matter.  

However, a lot of people are relying on plugins in the DAW these days as the core part of sounds, so latency does matter and figures are facts at the end of the day.  I do understand that the achievable stable top speeds will depend on a lot of factors, but latency does make a difference.  

If we're talking within 1ms then yes I agree I wouldn't buy one interface over the other for that.  But I've found it possible to feel the difference when there's a 3ms or greater difference between settings, providing they're already sub 10ms round trip anyway.  I personally haven't been happy with over 10ms, I don't feel like I'm connected to the instrument at that point for recording tight takes, YMMV.  FWIW I also find I always prefer to record while wearing headphones even if it isn't necessary, as I find it helps me play tighter. 

IMC1980

I have become used to the 11.4ms RTL I currently get out of my 2i4, I can monitor through my DAW so I can hear the amp sim as I track demos or ideas. As long as latency is >10ms, I'll get by.

wave100

IMC1980 said:

I have become used to the 11.4ms RTL I currently get out of my 2i4, I can monitor through my DAW so I can hear the amp sim as I track demos or ideas. As long as latency is >10ms, I'll get by.

+ 1

Heartfeltdawn

guitarfishbay said:

Heartfeltdawn said:

Latency: it's low enough for me to do guitar stuff on the DAW. I don't own any amps and haven't for at least two years now. I won't quote figures as the relentless chasing of latency figures is really daft. I prefer real world experience reports over numbers in that department, and I can say that there's no latency issues at all. For those who do like numbers, I keep my Crimson on Fast performance mode 44.1kHz, 128 buffer size. 

I really don't understand this line of thinking, but I don't know what stuff you're recording or how.  

If you're recording a chain that you can monitor direct (zero latency) then it won't matter.  

However, a lot of people are relying on plugins in the DAW these days as the core part of sounds, so latency does matter and figures are facts at the end of the day.  I do understand that the achievable stable top speeds will depend on a lot of factors, but latency does make a difference.  

If we're talking within 1ms then yes I agree I wouldn't buy one interface over the other for that.  But I've found it possible to feel the difference when there's a 3ms or greater difference between settings, providing they're already sub 10ms round trip anyway.  I personally haven't been happy with over 10ms, I don't feel like I'm connected to the instrument at that point for recording tight takes, YMMV.  FWIW I also find I always prefer to record while wearing headphones even if it isn't necessary, as I find it helps me play tighter. 

I'm talking about the 1ms crowd, those people who claim that 1ms makes the world of difference between playable and unplayable. That's when things get anal

Quite agree, over 10ms is pants. 

Maybe I'l try Dawbenching the Crimson next week. 

Drew_TNBD

When you play drums, 1ms does make a difference to the feel and response of VST plugins.

guitarfishbay

I can believe that.

Really zero added latency is the ideal but I do feel sub 10ms round trip is likely workable for most people recording guitar at home, the faster the better. 

Drew_TNBD

Sub 4-ms roundtrip is what I aim for. I used to get sub 10ms with my Audiophile 24/96 back in 2000 - you'd expect a bit of a performance increase in 17 years!!

Heartfeltdawn

M-Audio wrote pretty decent drivers really. The Delta 44 was always pretty good with reliability and latency, 

Think I will get me an Orchid box

Drew_TNBD

Heartfeltdawn said:

M-Audio wrote pretty decent drivers really. The Delta 44 was always pretty good with reliability and latency, 

Think I will get me an Orchid box

Was saying to Randomhandclaps recently that the M-Audio 2626 was one of the best cards I ever had. They had a period of time when they were doing good stuff.

IMC1980

Thanks for all the comments and insight on this thread guys; going to buy the Audient ID22 tomorrow and start looking at outboand gear to plug in to those send and returns. Very excited!

Winny_Pooh

Good call

Jalapeno

I think good, low latency audo i/f on the PC died with Windows XT - I had a great low-latency PCI interface that worked well with video recording. Never achieved anything close since.

You have to go to DSP and USB/Firewire/Thunderbolt to get similarly low sub 10ms roundtrip latency IMVHO. YMMV etc

thomasross20

I need to upgrade.

I'm immensely happy with Tracktion but I've been using the same toneport ux2 and unsupported Gearbox software since time began..! I like to stick to what I know.. not into a million options etc

guitarfishbay

What are your requirements @thomasross20 ?

How many inputs/outputs, does it need to be USB or is thunderbolt ok? Budget?

thomasross20

TBH I'm still ok using it, I'm just thinking  because the software is so old, as well as the box itself. I'd get a discount on an upgraded one, being an existing member... But I'd check around first. 
I got a new Dell XPS but I don't think that has a thunderbolt port. USB3 , though! 
Phantom power is handy for when I used a condenser mic (though I'm now under a flight path lol..). 

Not gonna get anything too soon (until the album is done...). Gearbox clean tones are great but crunch/distortion I found tough to dial in. Not into massively complicated interfaces, either. That's why I like tracktion as a DAW - absolutely love that software.

Legionreturns

@IMC1980  cheeky I know, but I'm currently using the focusrite scarlet solo...and if you're upgrading and planning to ship your old unit on I'd potentially be interested. 

IMC1980

AquaLegionreturns said:

@IMC1980  cheeky I know, but I'm currently using the focusrite scarlet solo...and if you're upgrading and planning to ship your old unit on I'd potentially be interested. 

I will be shifting the 2i4 at some point, the audient id22 is a very nice interface!