Please help me with this little Cubase 4 Problem...

[BlueRadio]

I have been running Cubase 4 with a MOTU 828mk II for some time now, and quite happily I might add.

Recently, I have wanted to switch from using MOTU's CueMix monitoring system (via hardware) to using Cubase's internal monitoring for various reasons.

However, when I hit the 'monitor' switch in C4, the monitored source (vocals in this case) sounds doubled in the headphones...think heavy chorus.

I have monitored through Cubase before, and have not encountered this problem. It has just now popped up.

Keep in mind that I have shut down CueMix, so I am not hearing two separate delayed signals.

Helps?

[BlueRadio]

bump. really need a hand here guys...

[netrom]

If it sound doubled, it IS doubled. Do you use a (hardware) mixer? If I run both software monitoring in Logic AND monitoring through the digital mixer, I get the same problem.

[Kiwiburger]

It's just your soundcard latency. Internal monitoring of any sort means the sound is delayed - I refuse to use it. When tracking vocals, for example, you will be hearing your voice direct (via bone conduction if not leakage into your headphones), and that will flange with the delayed monitor sound.

Attempts at reducing your system latency can lead to high CPU use and clicks & pops.

I just say no to internal monitoring, and use a mixer to monitor a spare output of my preamp - along with the DAW output only. Zero latency monitoring.

I'm guessing the Motu cuemix offers a near-zero latency monitoring by taking the digital signal post A/D converter, which you will then only have the combined latency of A/D and D/A. This is probably only a millisecond or two, and far less than the latency through Cubase and it's ASIO drivers. (You ARE using ASIO drivers?) So if you somehow still have this enabled, you will be getting two delayed signals.

Otherwise - have you somehow already got an analog zero-latency path that you are hearing?

[BlueRadio]

Originally Posted by netrom

If it sound doubled, it IS doubled. Do you use a (hardware) mixer? If I run both software monitoring in Logic AND monitoring through the digital mixer, I get the same problem.

Yeah, like I said, I usually use CueMix, which is zero-latency monitoring via the MOTU 828mkII.

But CueMix is switched off...for sure.

I am trying to monitor a track direct through Cubase, which I have done before with fine success.

I just can't figure out what is going on here. I will play with the buffer sizes and see what happens. Any more help would be fantastic.

[alexp]

Originally Posted by BlueRadio

Yeah, like I said, I usually use CueMix, which is zero-latency monitoring via the MOTU 828mkII.

But CueMix is switched off...for sure.

I am trying to monitor a track direct through Cubase, which I have done before with fine success.

I just can't figure out what is going on here. I will play with the buffer sizes and see what happens. Any more help would be fantastic.

Yep its soundcard latency. I get it as well. Its not bad for monitoring. (aka you get used to it).

[BlueRadio]

Kiwi and Alex-

Thanks much.

Little update here...


I increased my buffer samples to 1024 (from 256) and the problem got SIGNIFICANTLY worse.

So, now that the problem is starting to make more sense...what buffer size would you guys recommend on a newer macbook w/ 2 gigs of ram?

Can I increase the buffer size for increased performance in Cubase, now that I will not be using Cubase for monitoring?

[BlueRadio]

I just really enjoy monitoring compression, and sometimes delay on vocals. damn.

[crypticglobe]

The guys above are mostly right, but there are a few things you should know as well:

1. Motu gear is really terrible for low latency. Even their "cue mix" software under direct monitoring is really, really slow. Alway sounded a bit "doubled" due to latency to me. The RME Total Mix system blows it away!

2. How low do you have your buffers set? You should set your buffers (devices>device setup) to the lowest possible setting without clicks and pops. With Motu, even on the fastest Quad and Eight Core systems I find it doesn't do well at 64 buffers (1.5ms latency) which is where you want it for singing and playing). Remeber this: low buffer setting = lower latency, higher CPU load. hgh buffer setting = more latency, lower cpu loads. So... high buffer settings are good for Mixing... lower buffer settings good for tracking.

3. RME and Lynx both do really, really well at these very low latency settings. Especially on single Quad Core machines. I rarely come out of the 64 buffer setting on my Quad Core system these days.

I hope this helps... but unfortunately without a very fast computer and the right soundcard... doing lots of work at very low latencies (64 buffers or below) is not gonna happen....

jmtc....

[AllAboutTone]

I track and mix OTB so i sort of had the same issues, i ran my latency down to 2.0 and everything is perfect.

[shanabit]

I hear you saying your CueMix is down?. That DOESNT mean your FADERS are not turned down inside the app, check that.

Lower your buffer to 128 and see if it improves. Cubase doesnt like 64 buffer setting with the MOTU here. Thats why they have the CueMix available. Steve is right as far as MOTU running at low buffers is difficult.
Theres a reason people suggest PCI or PCIe connections instead of Firewire. Throughput is only so much there. Set your AUIO priority in CUbase to HIGH as well