View Single Post
#14
29th February 2012
Old 29th February 2012
  #14
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,166

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike P View Post
What's the point of running at less than 128 samples? I've been tracking live instruments for years at 128 samples (2.95 ms on my PC) and I've never had issues with timing. In all honesty, 256 samples is more than adequate.

This isn't an indictment, just a question.
Because I can.

But I don't get those numbers with an RME 96/52. 128 samples yields 6.4ms @ 96k, and 12.8ms @ 44.1k. This is actual round trip latency measured from a S/PDIF loop.
Quote:
Originally Posted by junior View Post
What if your interface (Metric Halo) doesn't do Windows?
Logic smokes Cubase performance wise on a Mac. I've also been using Protools 10HD on my Mac Pro w/ OS 10.6.8, and it is rock stable at 32 samples/96k.

The problem is Cubase with the Mac OS at low latencies. Obviously, the Cubase/OSX/MH combo isn't going to get you there. Cheapest solution would be to use a different DAW.