Yamaha n12 Round-Trip latency

[trock]

not sure about the round trip, but i am getting 3ms at 128. the pre's are much better than the RME, the stability is as good, support as good, the capability with cubase is alot better, the onboard eq, comp and reverb is excellent and the RME doesn't have any of that

its truly no contest

had 2 RME's for over 5 years between the 2, the N12 blows it out of the water

[Amr Kadry]

hello trock,

thank you for your reply. is the 3ms the input latency? what is the output latency? would you be able to run the centrance tool i mentioned to measure the total latency? i am curious about that as i have latency figures using that tool for the RME so i can make a direct comparison. that would be very helpful for me.

i am also concerned about the latency when monitoring through a vst plugin in cubase, for example guitar rig. would i be able to play a guitar, run it through the plugin, and monitor on the n12 without latency? that's very important for me.

[Wiz_Oz]

Originally Posted by Amr Kadry

hello trock,

thank you for your reply. is the 3ms the input latency? what is the output latency? would you be able to run the centrance tool i mentioned to measure the total latency? i am curious about that as i have latency figures using that tool for the RME so i can make a direct comparison. that would be very helpful for me.

i am also concerned about the latency when monitoring through a vst plugin in cubase, for example guitar rig. would i be able to play a guitar, run it through the plugin, and monitor on the n12 without latency? that's very important for me.

I would dearly love to know this as well....

I really want to know , how low it goes....

cheers

Wiz

[Dog Boots]

Here are my results for my n12, using the utility you posted:

For 44.1kHz:

64 samples buffer: 6.92 ms
96 samples buffer: 6.01 ms
128 samples buffer: 6.73 ms
160 samples buffer: 7.28 ms

For 48 kHz:

64 samples buffer: 6.77 ms
96 samples buffer: 5.60 ms
128 samples buffer: 6.27 ms
160 samples buffer: 6.94 ms

For 96kHz:

64 samples buffer: N/A
96 samples buffer: N/A
128 samples buffer: 6.65 ms
160 samples buffer: 5.31 ms
192 samples buffer: 5.92 ms
224 samples buffer: 5.81 ms
256 samples buffer: 6.31 ms



44.1 kHz, 128 samples buffer is what I normally use in Reaper on my Q9450 - this setup can handle quite heavy tasks and I rarely have to up the buffer anymore...

[Dog Boots]

Originally Posted by Amr Kadry

i am also concerned about the latency when monitoring through a vst plugin in cubase, for example guitar rig. would i be able to play a guitar, run it through the plugin, and monitor on the n12 without latency? that's very important for me.

I can't speak for your personal thresholds but I play a lot of e-drums (Superior Drummer 2.0), bass, gtr (through ReValver MkII) and keys (SampleTank, Omnisphere) without feeling any discomfort from latency @44.1kHz/128 samples buffer.

[Amr Kadry]

Originally Posted by Dog Boots

Here are my results for my n12, using the utility you posted:

For 44.1kHz:

64 samples buffer: 6.92 ms
96 samples buffer: 6.01 ms
128 samples buffer: 6.73 ms
160 samples buffer: 7.28 ms

For 48 kHz:

64 samples buffer: 6.77 ms
96 samples buffer: 5.60 ms
128 samples buffer: 6.27 ms
160 samples buffer: 6.94 ms

For 96kHz:

64 samples buffer: N/A
96 samples buffer: N/A
128 samples buffer: 6.65 ms
160 samples buffer: 5.31 ms
192 samples buffer: 5.92 ms
224 samples buffer: 5.81 ms
256 samples buffer: 6.31 ms



44.1 kHz, 128 samples buffer is what I normally use in Reaper on my Q9450 - this setup can handle quite heavy tasks and I rarely have to up the buffer anymore...

Thank you very much Dog Boots, that is very useful. Strangely when you increase the sample buffers the latency does not always increase? I thought from 128 > 256 the latency should double, or am I wrong?

Originally Posted by Dog Boots

I can't speak for your personal thresholds but I play a lot of e-drums (Superior Drummer 2.0), bass, gtr (through ReValver MkII) and keys (SampleTank, Omnisphere) without feeling any discomfort from latency @44.1kHz/128 samples buffer.

Have you been using these in Reaper? I would also like to use the n12 with reaper, but I believe I won't be having the advantage of the 'WET' monitoring function, which I have read provides almost no latency monitoring for plugins inside of Cubase. If it works fine in Reaper, then I'm all set!

[soundrage]

Originally Posted by Amr Kadry

Thank you very much Dog Boots, that is very useful. Strangely when you increase the sample buffers the latency does not always increase? I thought from 128 > 256 the latency should double, or am I wrong?



Have you been using these in Reaper? I would also like to use the n12 with reaper, but I believe I won't be having the advantage of the 'WET' monitoring function, which I have read provides almost no latency monitoring for plugins inside of Cubase. If it works fine in Reaper, then I'm all set!

It works fine in Reaper, but no WET function.

[Amr Kadry]

Originally Posted by soundrage

It works fine in Reaper, but no WET function.

Soundrage, did you try monitoring with a plugin in Reaper, for example, guitar rig? How is the latency when doing so in reaper vs. doing it in Cubase and using the WET funciton? I want to know if having this kind of setup will be usable in REAPER:

Audio Input (Mic or DI) -> n12 -> Reaper Track with Guitar Rig -> Headphones

Will I be hearing myself in real time, or will there be a detectable latency that will make it hard to play to this?

[mcmacguy]

Originally Posted by Amr Kadry

Soundrage, did you try monitoring with a plugin in Reaper, for example, guitar rig? How is the latency when doing so in reaper vs. doing it in Cubase and using the WET funciton? I want to know if having this kind of setup will be usable in REAPER:

Audio Input (Mic or DI) -> n12 -> Reaper Track with Guitar Rig -> Headphones

Will I be hearing myself in real time, or will there be a detectable latency that will make it hard to play to this?

For all youse guys: I think you're getting way to hung up on numbers. I have excellent ears, and i never heard any latency "issues" with the N12 in over a year of heavy useage of all kinds. No need to measure it - I'd know it if I heard it, cuz timing issues drive me crazy.

Just buy one and quit agonizing!

Mick

[Amr Kadry]

Originally Posted by mcmacguy

For all youse guys: I think you're getting way to hung up on numbers. I have excellent ears, and i never heard any latency "issues" with the N12 in over a year of heavy useage of all kinds. No need to measure it - I'd know it if I heard it, cuz timing issues drive me crazy.

Just buy one and quit agonizing!

Mick

Mick,

my only concern now is whether playing audio thru a plugin and monitoring it in DAWs other than cubase is good or not. do you 'hear' any latency when doing that? or does it still feel playable? that's all that i am concerned about it the moment. the numbers were for comparison purposes with the RME - if they were waaay more than what the RME does it would have made me think.

I do appreciate that Dog Boots took the time to run the test and give us those numbers, thanks again!

[trock]

so how did it compare to the RME?

[Amr Kadry]

Originally Posted by trock

so how did it compare to the RME?

well, my understanding from reading on the reaper forums is that @ 64 samples the RME would have a total roundtrip latency of 6 ms. Actually I am not sure anymore if these figures should be compared, or how 'standard' this test should be considered. Jim Roseberry (custom DAW builder - Home) and others on the Reaper forums were discussing this and mentioned that the devices with best round trip latency are MOTU and RME devices, so that got me wondering about how the n12's latency would be in comparison.

As Mick suggested I think it doesn't matter as long as when using the actual device I would feel comfortable and not feel any 'delay' between playing and hearing the sound.

[trock]

so the N12 is pretty close to the RME roundtrip it seems

add to that all the other fantastic features and the fact the price dropped on it and went up on the RME and i think its pretty clear cut.

but good luck with the choice, i never had any issues with my 2 RME FF 800's. they are very good units

[Amr Kadry]

Originally Posted by trock

so the N12 is pretty close to the RME roundtrip it seems

add to that all the other fantastic features and the fact the price dropped on it and went up on the RME and i think its pretty clear cut.

but good luck with the choice, i never had any issues with my 2 RME FF 800's. they are very good units

Thanks trock! I think I will go with the n12 as it gives me more of what I need - the 8 preamps are necessary for me to record drums. And $1700 is honestly way too steep... given that for that much I can get the n12 and HS80m monitors now with the $200 rebate on them...

[trock]

Just an FYI, right here on GS in the classifieds is an N12 for 950 bucks, go make him an offer, check out some pics, make the deal, spend 900 or so, and use the other 800 for something else

[Amr Kadry]

Originally Posted by trock

Just an FYI, right here on GS in the classifieds is an N12 for 950 bucks, go make him an offer, check out some pics, make the deal, spend 900 or so, and use the other 800 for something else

Thanks trock! I will check it out

[Wiz_Oz]

Thank you very much for taking the time to post your round trip latency setting, thats very kind of you...


Here are mine for the RME 9632 in case that helps someone else looking into this stuff...using the centrance utility.

(on a side note, wouldnt it be fantastic if this stuff was published by the manufacturer....LOL.....)

For 44.1kHz:

32 samples buffer: 4.26ms
64 samples buffer: 5.71ms
128 samples buffer: 8.62ms
256 samples buffer: 14.42ms



cheers

Wiz

[Amr Kadry]

Wiz,

Thank you for posting the results for your RME interface. These verify my question about the results that were posted for the n12... how come for higher sample buffers the latency wasn't increasing? It would make sense that like the RME, for 128 sample buffers the latency would approach 9ms, and for 256 be ~ 15/16 ms, and so on. All the results posted for n12 were in the ~ 7 ms range, which doesn't make a lot of sense.

In any case, the ~ 7 latency is close to that posted for RME @ 64 bits, which is close to 6ms, as I thought it would be.

[Wiz_Oz]

Originally Posted by Amr Kadry

Wiz,

Thank you for posting the results for your RME interface. These verify my question about the results that were posted for the n12... how come for higher sample buffers the latency wasn't increasing? It would make sense that like the RME, for 128 sample buffers the latency would approach 9ms, and for 256 be ~ 15/16 ms, and so on. All the results posted for n12 were in the ~ 7 ms range, which doesn't make a lot of sense.

In any case, the ~ 7 latency is close to that posted for RME @ 64 bits, which is close to 6ms, as I thought it would be.

Hey Amr

I dont know is the fastest answer...8)


I would dearly like someone else to test their N12, just to verify.

George?


cheers

Wiz

[soundrage]

Originally Posted by Amr Kadry

Soundrage, did you try monitoring with a plugin in Reaper, for example, guitar rig? How is the latency when doing so in reaper vs. doing it in Cubase and using the WET funciton? I want to know if having this kind of setup will be usable in REAPER:

Audio Input (Mic or DI) -> n12 -> Reaper Track with Guitar Rig -> Headphones

Will I be hearing myself in real time, or will there be a detectable latency that will make it hard to play to this?

No, the WET function will not work in the same way it works integrated with Cubase. I have only played around a little with software amp sims and don't have anything like that I could check in Reaper.

Lot of people are using software sims, how do they get around the latency? I will say this...the "only" time I have been able to track with a reverb or delay plugin and not hear any echo (latency) is with the n12 using it's Wet function. I was pretty amazed when I first heard it.

[Amr Kadry]

Originally Posted by soundrage

No, the WET function will not work in the same way it works integrated with Cubase. I have only played around a little with software amp sims and don't have anything like that I could check in Reaper.

Lot of people are using software sims, how do they get around the latency? I will say this...the "only" time I have been able to track with a reverb or delay plugin and not hear any echo (latency) is with the n12 using it's Wet function. I was pretty amazed when I first heard it.

Thanks soundrage. I guess I will have to try it and see if I can live with the latency in REAPER. If not I can always use guitar rig in Cubase AI and use the WET function, record, then move the tracks to REAPER.

[kamiahmed]

Nice thread....
should'nt we consider CPU/PC performance in this.

I believe the somewhat 'ratio' of buffer:sample:latency varies on different computers because of different processing power. Its not entirely rack/board dependent. (or did i miss a read back there.)

hit me
-KAM-

[lowerlameland]

Hi there, resurrecting an old thread to see if anyone understands why upgrading from an i3 2100 to an i5 2500k would make the latency worse. I can't set the slider any lower than 160 (used to be able to slide it down to 48 or something like that) and the latency is just getting to noticeable (7.1 & 13.3, in & out). Should I just reinstall the drivers? or? Am I missing a deeper setting? Thoughts? Thanks!

PS. it's an N12 on a win7 64 machine that works really well except for these weird new higher latency numbers...