Question for PT LE (003) guys

[drBill]

I've got a question for those of you that are tracking with 003's. I've always had TDM systems and have a HD3 system right now, so I don't know the answer to this question.

A buddy of mine is putting together a studio and can't quite swing a HD system right now, so he was thinking about going with an 003.

(Please no PT haters or Logic fanatics, this is a specific PT003/002 question.....thanks!)

Those of you with 003's - can you track drums, bass, guitars, etc. WHILE MONITORING THROUGH PRO TOOLS with a minimun amount of latency so that you don't annoy drummers, bass players, guitarists, etc.???

He's going to have pre's feeding straight into the converters - no mixer - and then out the DA to some sort of monitoring box. Is this a feasable setup? Or should he hold out for an HD system? Thx.

bp

[everyday]

Hi Bill?

Although I have the 003, I don't track much with it...

However, I can tell you that the latency goes down to 32 sample...


Not too bad for a FW device.


For tracking, HD is just 'set it and forget it.' (at least for me...)

You really can't do that with 003/LE system. You have to watch out

the system resource and dropout (spike and/or whatever)...


My $0.02...


T...

Originally Posted by drBill

I've got a question for those of you that are tracking with 003's. I've always had TDM systems and have a HD3 system right now, so I don't know the answer to this question.

A buddy of mine is putting together a studio and can't quite swing a HD system right now, so he was thinking about going with an 003.

(Please no PT haters or Logic fanatics, this is a specific PT003/002 question.....thanks!)

Those of you with 003's - can you track drums, bass, guitars, etc. WHILE MONITORING THROUGH PRO TOOLS with a minimun amount of latency so that you don't annoy drummers, bass players, guitarists, etc.???

He's going to have pre's feeding straight into the converters - no mixer - and then out the DA to some sort of monitoring box. Is this a feasable setup? Or should he hold out for an HD system? Thx.

bp

[tamasdragon]

Yes, you can do it with a 003. Most of the times the lowest buffer setting does it, but if not, than low latency monitoring option surely will do it.
I did it a few times already, no complains from musicians.
Tamas Dragon

[drBill]

Thanks to both of you guys for the info.

Tamas - can you explain the "low latency monitoring option"? Thanks!

Bill

[tamasdragon]

Originally Posted by drBill

Thanks to both of you guys for the info.

Tamas - can you explain the "low latency monitoring option"? Thanks!

Bill

You can switch it on from one of the menus (can't remember which menu).
And than regardless of the hardware buffer size it gives you very low latency.
Some compromise is that you cannot use plugins in that mode.
Tamas Dragon

[recall]

I find low latency mode to work, but it is simpler to just use a small monitor mixer like an allen and heath just to monitor and send band cue mixes from.

[peeder]

May I highly recommend an analog console (mackie 1640, toft atb, etc.) for people wanting to track whole bands at a time.

Whether you use LE or HD from that point on.

The aux sends on an analog console let you build many different custom cue mixes inexpensively which is an enormous help. Plus you have the fast interactivity required to work in that situation: see the knob, turn the knob.

The 003 latency bothers me at least, even cranked down. I'm not sure if low-latency monitoring mode limits you to one cue mix or can do several.

[PACHAMAMA]

Originally Posted by drBill

I've got a question for those of you that are tracking with 003's. I've always had TDM systems and have a HD3 system right now, so I don't know the answer to this question.

A buddy of mine is putting together a studio and can't quite swing a HD system right now, so he was thinking about going with an 003.

(Please no PT haters or Logic fanatics, this is a specific PT003/002 question.....thanks!)

Those of you with 003's - can you track drums, bass, guitars, etc. WHILE MONITORING THROUGH PRO TOOLS with a minimun amount of latency so that you don't annoy drummers, bass players, guitarists, etc.???

He's going to have pre's feeding straight into the converters - no mixer - and then out the DA to some sort of monitoring box. Is this a feasable setup? Or should he hold out for an HD system? Thx.

bp

I do this every week on a 002, no problem. With 128 buffer size.

[drBill]

For those suggesting a console, how are you implementing this? Are you using splitters? We are using external preamps patched directly into the converters.

If you ARE using splitters, do you not find them to degrade the signal?

Coming out the D/A's and going into a console isn't going to help with the latency issue - it's already latent. Using a mackie on the front end BEFORE the A/D conversion isn't going to get the sound we're looking for with high end pre's.

So........

thoughts?


It's interesting that some seem to find monitoring thru the AD/DA process perfectly acceptable. My question to you guys - are you doing rhythm sections where groove and "feel" is paramount and where live musicians have the opportunity to blame the machine instead of themselves for the groove not happening???

Still trying to work this out in my mind.

Peeder and Recall - I'm well aware of how to use a console. I've done it everyday for the last 20 years, but as far as I can tell, it doesn't solve the issue with this problem.

Thanks for EVERYONE's thoughts!!!!!!

[PACHAMAMA]

Originally Posted by drBill

It's interesting that some seem to find monitoring thru the AD/DA process perfectly acceptable. My question to you guys - are you doing rhythm sections where groove and "feel" is paramount and where live musicians have the opportunity to blame the machine instead of themselves for the groove not happening???

I always use 128 of buffer size and never received any complain from the musicians.
Anyway here is an article from the net:

The situations below all assume a 44.1 KHz or 48 KHz sampling rate.
 

• 1HWB=64: too small to matter much
• 2HWB=128: perfectly workable
• 3HWB=256: difficult but not impossible
• 4HWB=512+

[top]HWB=64: too small to matter much

If your HWB is 64, and you're monitoring through headphones, then the latency is the same as if you were monitoring a zero-latency mix through speakers and sitting with your ears 7 to 9 feet from the speaker cones. If you're monitoring through speakers, and sitting 3' away, HWB=64 increases latency to the equivalent of sitting 10-12' away. 7-12 feet is a pretty typical distance for musicians to sit from speakers in a control room. It's closer than they might be to each other on a large stage. It's much closer than the most distant members of a symphony orchestra are from each other.

[top]HWB=128: perfectly workable

A HWB of 128 doubles headphone latency to the equivalent of sitting about 12 or 13 feet from speakers -- still not far from normal for a situation where three or four studio musicians are packed into a medium-sized control room. Monitoring through speakers at 5' with HWB=128, the effective latency is like being 17-18' from the speakers instead of 5' - about the distance some band mates on a large stage might be from each other. 12 feet or so works OK for most musicians, if they know to expect it. 18' is beginning to be a stretch if a tight groove is required. It can be overcome, but it's a difficulty, no way around it. You definitely want headphones at this latency.

[top]HWB=256: difficult but not impossible

A HWB setting of 256, through headphones, is like sitting 19 or 20 feet from speakers, pretty far for a tight groove. Classical musicians should be used to such latencies, and jazz cats might be, but pop and rock musicians are going to need some time to get accustomed to that much delay. As long as they're hearing a good strong click that is not subject to the latency, they should be able to lock onto that with practice, and not be thrown too badly, very often. You definitely don't want anybody monitoring through speakers with this buffer setting if you can help it.

[top]HWB=512+

A HWB of 512 drives you up to the equivalent of sitting over 30 feet from speakers, which would make it difficult to stay in the pocket of almost any groove. It still wouldn't be a problem for someone playing glissed diamonds on a guitar or playing an instrument with a relatively soft attack, though. You don't want to track at 512 if you can help it unless the style or instrumentation is very timing-tolerant.
HWB=1024, of course, is extremely tough for tracking almost anything where instruments have to stay in time with each other if they're monitoring through PT

[drBill]

PACHAMAMA -

THANK YOU!!!! Extremely helpful.

Do you find that Pro Tools LE is stable in the 128 or 64 buffer size settings? What computer are you using and how much RAM do you have installed. Thanks much!

bp

[travisgarrison]

Originally Posted by peeder

I'm not sure if low-latency monitoring mode limits you to one cue mix or can do several.

This may have changed with the 003, but on a 002 low-latency monitoring is limited to the main stereo bus. Signals routed to outputs other than 1-2 are still delayed by the buffer size.

[drmmrboy]

Originally Posted by drBill

PACHAMAMA -

THANK YOU!!!! Extremely helpful.

Do you find that Pro Tools LE is stable in the 128 or 64 buffer size settings? What computer are you using and how much RAM do you have installed. Thanks much!

bp

I'm not pach, but, I'll record 16 tracks @ 64 or 128 w/ LE on an iMac core2-2.0.
The longest I've let it roll @ one time is about 30 minutes..

[peeder]

First of all, everyone needs to realize that latency in air is not the same psychoacoustically as latency electronically.

Latency in air is something the brain analyzes along with early reflections etc. to place a source at a distance in space. This is not the same as latency in electronics. This is part of the "unreality" of listening to cue mixes in headphones. All the timings are effed up.

So what works and what doesn't is something you have to see for yourself, and some musicians might have greater or lesser tolerances to playing with latency. I try to take a zero-tolerance policy and get everyone in the pocket, and in phase.

Originally Posted by drBill

For those suggesting a console, how are you implementing this? Are you using splitters? We are using external preamps patched directly into the converters.

If you ARE using splitters, do you not find them to degrade the signal?

Coming out the D/A's and going into a console isn't going to help with the latency issue - it's already latent. Using a mackie on the front end BEFORE the A/D conversion isn't going to get the sound we're looking for with high end pre's.

So........

thoughts?


It's interesting that some seem to find monitoring thru the AD/DA process perfectly acceptable. My question to you guys - are you doing rhythm sections where groove and "feel" is paramount and where live musicians have the opportunity to blame the machine instead of themselves for the groove not happening???

Still trying to work this out in my mind.

Peeder and Recall - I'm well aware of how to use a console. I've done it everyday for the last 20 years, but as far as I can tell, it doesn't solve the issue with this problem.

Thanks for EVERYONE's thoughts!!!!!!

There's no need for splitters when the console has direct outs, or if using external preamps, line ins. You take the external preamp into the line in or you use the internal ones. Then you use the direct outs/recording outs (on a 1640, these are pre-EQ and even pre-HPF, which is just flat wrong, and front end audio sells a "prefader mod" for $300 which fixes that) to go to your converters just as you would to go to a tape machine. Virtually every 16 channel+ console has these as a matter of course.

If you feel a need to avoid the console with your signal at all costs, you can just use Y-cables/mults on half-normalled patchbays etc to send the signal from the preamp to both the ADC and the console. Most modern preamps have bridging balanced outputs that can drive two inputs fine. Maybe a spec more distortion, but that's not a problem for a rock band.

For the cue mixes, you just build them with the aux sends on each channel, and go out into external headphone amps such as the ART HeadAmp. That way when the bassist wants more kick and the drummer wants less acoustic you can give everybody what they want with ease.

[drBill]

Originally Posted by peeder

First of all, everyone needs to realize that latency in air is not the same psychoacoustically as latency electronically.

Latency in air is something the brain analyzes along with early reflections etc. to place a source at a distance in space. This is not the same as latency in electronics. This is part of the "unreality" of listening to cue mixes in headphones. All the timings are effed up.

So what works and what doesn't is something you have to see for yourself, and some musicians might have greater or lesser tolerances to playing with latency. I try to take a zero-tolerance policy and get everyone in the pocket, and in phase.



There's no need for splitters when the console has direct outs, or if using external preamps, line ins. You take the external preamp into the line in or you use the internal ones. Then you use the direct outs/recording outs (on a 1640, these are pre-EQ and even pre-HPF, which is just flat wrong, and front end audio sells a "prefader mod" for $300 which fixes that) to go to your converters just as you would to go to a tape machine. Virtually every 16 channel+ console has these as a matter of course.

If you feel a need to avoid the console with your signal at all costs, you can just use Y-cables/mults on half-normalled patchbays etc to send the signal from the preamp to both the ADC and the console. Most modern preamps have bridging balanced outputs that can drive two inputs fine. Maybe a spec more distortion, but that's not a problem for a rock band.

For the cue mixes, you just build them with the aux sends on each channel, and go out into external headphone amps such as the ART HeadAmp. That way when the bassist wants more kick and the drummer wants less acoustic you can give everybody what they want with ease.

peeder - thanks, I understand the concept. Having a console is not really an option for this application. By the time the console was purchased, the wiring and patchbays wired, my buddy could have bought a small HD system. To add to it, going into ANY of the consoles you listed is not an option - quality wise. As for the half normal, I'd prefer not to introduce the grounding issues that that will invariably introduce. Certainly it can be worked thru, but this is more of a "musicians" studio than a "engineers studio". I doubt there will even be a bay. Again, the added cost offsets the price difference between LE and HD.

I think Pachamama pretty much nailed my concerns. Now, the only thing left to do is book some time in an 003 studio and put my buddy behind a set of drums and see how it "feels" to him with 128 or 64 buffer settings. I agree with you about the psychoacoustic affect of headphones vs. distance. One is natural, the other disconcerting. I think booking a studio is the only way to know if it will work for this person or not.

Thanks everyone!

bp

[jeep]

Originally Posted by drBill

I've got a question for those of you that are tracking with 003's. I've always had TDM systems and have a HD3 system right now, so I don't know the answer to this question.

A buddy of mine is putting together a studio and can't quite swing a HD system right now, so he was thinking about going with an 003.

(Please no PT haters or Logic fanatics, this is a specific PT003/002 question.....thanks!)

Those of you with 003's - can you track drums, bass, guitars, etc. WHILE MONITORING THROUGH PRO TOOLS with a minimun amount of latency so that you don't annoy drummers, bass players, guitarists, etc.???

He's going to have pre's feeding straight into the converters - no mixer - and then out the DA to some sort of monitoring box. Is this a feasable setup? Or should he hold out for an HD system? Thx.

bp

certainly

[peeder]

Well don't be afraid to go with no headphones. If the band doesn't need a click or a vocal cue then let the band play. Even if they need a vocal you can pipe it in on a monitor and it can sound pretty good with the bleed (like a doubling).