The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Antelope Announces Orion32 HD with digiport & USB3 Audio Interfaces
Old 10th January 2017
  #31
Gear Addict
 
joemeek's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuseburn View Post
So, ignoring the digiport stuff for a second,
i really hope this second is a very SHORT second :-), as for many users like me THIS is the bis news (and the question if it really sounds better than the old orion)
Old 10th January 2017
  #32
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuseburn View Post
Yes, that's what I was hoping for and that's the actual big news portion for me !

So, ignoring the digiport stuff for a second, this thing is a full blown bi-directional 64 channel USB3 MADI interface. With plenty of added "benefits" (32 channels conversion, ADAT-spare channels, SPDIF IO, Monitor outs) - amazing job, guys !
Our Orion32+ does 64 channels of I/O right now, btw. But, yes this will also be ported to USB3 for Orion32 HD.
Old 10th January 2017
  #33
Gear Maniac
 
Fuseburn's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clybourne View Post
Our Orion32+ does 64 channels of I/O right now, btw. But, yes this will also be ported to USB3 for Orion32 HD.
That's amazing !
However - checking Antelope website again - it says about the Orion32+

Quote:
USB 2.0 Hi-Speed; Data stream up to 480 Mbits/192kHz, 32 channels I/O, Type B
So you guys enhanced that that with a firmware update I missed ?
I'm just talking about bi-directional USB-channel-count - ignoring Thunderbolt aswell ;-)
Old 10th January 2017
  #34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuseburn View Post
That's amazing !
However - checking Antelope website again - it says about the Orion32+



So you guys enhanced that that with a firmware update I missed ?
I'm just talking about bi-directional USB-channel-count - ignoring Thunderbolt aswell ;-)
No, that's the info about USB. Orion 32+ has 64 channels via TB and 32 channels via USB2.
Old 10th January 2017
  #35
Gear Nut
 
Massika's Avatar
 

Nice..
Old 11th January 2017
  #36
I think you targeted the right need, but possibly not exactly the customer base you may have been expecting.

With interactions with dozens of frustrated HD users, here's the real customer base, from my experience:

- HD Accel User (HDX to a lesser extent)
- Will mostly not use the onboard processing
- NEEDS sample accurate conversion that will work with hardware inserts
- NEEDS AVID HD I/O conversion delay matched perfectly
- WANTS USB 2 backward compatibility, as most HD users run traditional Mac Pros, not Trashcans. These Mac Pros have USB 2.0, not 3.0

So, if this is backward compatible with USB 2.0 for native usage and matches AVID HD I/O sample for sample, this is the perfect box for MANY users.

If it doesn't match sample for sample with HD I/O units most users will pass. If it's not backward compatible with USB 2.0, some users will pass.

Very great idea you guys have. It really can be the missing link if you've thought this through on the back end.

The current application of 4 192s may be acceptable as long as it's a sample accurate latency with the Digi 192s, but it will DEFINITELY not be preferred. Faster conversion of the HD I/O was at least as much of AVID's selling point as the better conversion.

That's a market you guys don't want to miss.

Make it instead emulate 4 AVID 8x8 HD I/Os perfectly and you guys will take sales from everyone.

Manually entering offset (which is different for each samplerate, BTW) is not a solution people desire.

You have the potential here to have the ultimate HD and native interface. Hopefully you guys can tidy up that back end implementation.
Old 11th January 2017
  #37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt Hepworth View Post
I think you targeted the right need, but possibly not exactly the customer base you may have been expecting.

With interactions with dozens of frustrated HD users, here's the real customer base, from my experience:

- HD Accel User (HDX to a lesser extent)
- Will mostly not use the onboard processing
- NEEDS sample accurate conversion that will work with hardware inserts
- NEEDS AVID HD I/O conversion delay matched perfectly
- WANTS USB 2 backward compatibility, as most HD users run traditional Mac Pros, not Trashcans. These Mac Pros have USB 2.0, not 3.0

So, if this is backward compatible with USB 2.0 for native usage and matches AVID HD I/O sample for sample, this is the perfect box for MANY users.

If it doesn't match sample for sample with HD I/O units most users will pass. If it's not backward compatible with USB 2.0, some users will pass.

Very great idea you guys have. It really can be the missing link if you've thought this through on the back end.

The current application of 4 192s may be acceptable as long as it's a sample accurate latency with the Digi 192s, but it will DEFINITELY not be preferred. Faster conversion of the HD I/O was at least as much of AVID's selling point as the better conversion.

That's a market you guys don't want to miss.

Make it instead emulate 4 AVID 8x8 HD I/Os perfectly and you guys will take sales from everyone.

Manually entering offset (which is different for each samplerate, BTW) is not a solution people desire.

You have the potential here to have the ultimate HD and native interface. Hopefully you guys can tidy up that back end implementation.

I am going to throw it out there and say that manually entering offset values is entirely 100% the fault of Avid. Having to manually measure the offsets using square waves, and hoping that a tenth of a millisecond is adequate enough to provide sample accuracy is nothing short of a joke in 2017. Reaper has done it better for almost a decade. Heck, even Ableton Live does it better.

Given that Avid have now monetized the digilink protocol (quite possibly from both ends too, with end users and manufacturers having to cough up), we really should be pressuring Avid to overhaul the way it handles interface latency altogether. A one click setup for each sample rate should be entirely possible, with sample accurate alignment the result. You know, the kind of ease of use that warrants that old title of 'industry standard', so that regardless of whether users have a USB, FW or digilink interface they can align their DAW with the minimum of fuss.

It seems only PT users demand that third party manufacturers sort out interface latency... You can achieve sample accuracy with the Orion HD as it stands in just about any other DAW regardless of whether you use a HD|N card or USB! ...provided Avid's coreaudio drivers actually work.
Old 11th January 2017
  #38
Gear Maniac
 
Rythm'BackStudio's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clybourne View Post
The HW Inserts have a delay that you can adjust in the Pro Tools HD versions. We can even make charts for what to do. This is going to be quite low, and would even be faster than actually inserting hardware, as there's no converters involved with have more delay than our FPGA which his 2 samples in and 2 samples out. So you would type in a value and be done.

The pay off is over 30 free realtime FX that react and sound like hardware, since they run realtime on our FPGA. In fact, we're working on additional compressors as we type for our next update. What's going to be very cool is that these FX are updated for free and we've already populated the architecture with over 20 excellent EQ's with up to 40 instances. We have started the compressors with a FET76 that sound very authentic and we have some quite cool models around the corner, most likely in time for the Orion32 HD shipping.
So, it is not sample accurate to HD I/O?

Last edited by Rythm'BackStudio; 11th January 2017 at 02:46 AM..
Old 11th January 2017
  #39
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt Hepworth View Post
- NEEDS sample accurate conversion that will work with hardware inserts
- NEEDS AVID HD I/O conversion delay matched perfectly
I know Matt knows ... but what so many do not understand is that PTHD has no capacity to automatically put audio on the timeline other than exactly where it should go when using an HD I/O. It was designed to work with HD I/O's only. To be very clear - Pro Tools knows exactly how long it takes for output from its timeline to be output as analog audio from an AVID HD I/O. It also know exactly how long it takes to get analog audio into an HD I/O and then into Pro Tools.

So... if you output a square wave from the ProTools HD timeline to an AVID I/O output - then put a cable from that output to an input - and record the result on a separate track - they will line up exactly. This is true for HDN and HDX. If you use any other I/O and it does not have the exact delays of an AVID I/O - it will be placed on timeline incorrectly - and there is nothing in ProTools you can do to automatically make it go to the right place (I call this loopback testing). In HDN you can use the DDMF MetaPlugin to create a fake delay that is reported to the Audio engine (but un reality does not exist). This can then shift the audio later on the timeline to correct things. But there is no AAX-DSP plugin that can do this. You can put offsets in track by track but nothing automatic. In Studio One or Logic - it is a single value you enter in the preferences (but does change with every sample rate)....

So... Antelopes ZenTour conversion is way faster than AVIDs. Assuming the Orion is similar - a correct tweaking of the driver can fix all of this. So the big questions are... Do they understand - and will they do it??

Last edited by ProPower; 11th January 2017 at 03:39 AM..
Old 11th January 2017
  #40
Lives for gear
 
ORyan87's Avatar
This seems promising.......
Old 11th January 2017
  #41
Lives for gear
 
Lipps's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clybourne View Post
Most customers early on will be 192 owners that switch, so I think it's a good choice, but keep in mind, we will start out with HD MADI, since it will handle all our 64 channels in unit MADI A and MADI B views in your Hardware Profile. Then, we can mimic other units going forward and add them with Firmware updates.

Our platform, as I mentioned in another reply, is constantly growing. The nice thing for HD customers is they are coming in after a year of evolution with now over 30 Vintage FX added, Matrix view mode, and things like panel splitting and resizing. We're also working on new Session Presets in time for shipping Orion32 HD.

Bottom line is our software/panel updating allow us to evolve this based on user feedback and will only keep getting better.
As soon as you get it to show/behave like an HDio, I'll be placing my order (after listening sessions of course).

In all seriousness, I'd like to squeeze out two of these for full 64 io. I'm rooting for this to happen.
Old 11th January 2017
  #42
Moderator
 
matt thomas's Avatar
Ironically I just decided against another manufacturer's interface and bought an antelope one because the other one wasn't sample accurate in PTHD.

If this one goes that way I'll probably upgrade to it.

And just for the record, personally I'm not interested in running plugins on my interface. Basic eq and reverb for monitoring is enough.

Matt
Old 11th January 2017
  #43
Gear Addict
 
joemeek's Avatar
+1 on:
Sample acurate simulation of HD i/o !!!
and: i don´t need plugins in my interface (at least i never missed them until now)
Old 11th January 2017
  #44
Quote:
Originally Posted by joemeek View Post
+1 on:
Sample acurate simulation of HD i/o !!!
and: i don´t need plugins in my interface (at least i never missed them until now)
It's all fun and games until you hear these FPGA FX my friend. :-) You don't know what your'e missing, until you have it/hear it, in other words, so I guess what you don't know can't kill you, but... Well, I'll make sure you hear them sometime.

As for the Timeline questions, we got it right in Native before others 4 years ago. Let's see how the shipping version shakes out before we jump to conclusions. We're well aware of the topic.

Keep the comments rolling in, it's all helpful. We ARE listening.
Old 11th January 2017
  #45
Gear Addict
 
joemeek's Avatar
ok i will have a listen anyways:-)!
Old 11th January 2017
  #46
Lives for gear
 
~ufo~'s Avatar
I'd be very interested in this as an upgrade path if it had TB3 in stead of USB3.
Why? Because I'm probably like a lot of PT HD users, a bit worried about my future with them and if I were to make a hardware upgrade, it would be cool that it's compatible with PT now, but it would be even cooler (paramount, to me) if it wasn't tied to it. If I decide to ditch PT in the future, just hook it up via TB3.
Now, I'm under the impression that TB3 is backwards compatible with USB3 right?
So if you'd provide a USB3 to TB3 adapter with it, you wouldn't lose but only gain functionality, right?

I'm just saying. This looks like an awesome box. It certainly ticks almost all of my boxes.
Of course, you can never please everyone. But since it's such an advanced box, I'm a little surprised that it has USB3 over TB3.
Or is USB (I don't know) so much more advanced than its predecessors that it matches the low latency of TB3?

I can understand that it's cool such an advanced box can accommodate clients who might bring a laptop to work on, that's really clever.
But could that not be supported via the cross protocol compatibility capabilities of TB3?

Thanks for making cool stuff! You weren't on my radar before, but you sure are now.
Old 11th January 2017
  #47
Gear Maniac
 
Rythm'BackStudio's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clybourne View Post
As for the Timeline questions, we got it right in Native before others 4 years ago.
With which product?

Sorry, but I don't understand why you are talking about plugins being a game changer, when the only thing that would be the game changer is sample accuracy to HD i/o's. That's it, that is what "everyone" on HDX wants.

To me this defeats the whole purpose of this product.(if it is not sample accurate). No talking around it, no amount of plugins and resizing of windows can change that.

Last edited by Rythm'BackStudio; 11th January 2017 at 01:57 PM..
Old 11th January 2017
  #48
Gear Head
 

Agreed. Sample accuracy to HD I/O's should be the number one priority.
Old 11th January 2017
  #49
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clybourne View Post
The pay off is over 30 free realtime FX that react and sound like hardware, since they run realtime on our FPGA.
This again! They may react quickly and have low latency due to running on FPGA (no mean feat), but the FPGA is just crunching numbers exactly like DSP or any other digital audio processing - it is misleading to suggest there is any 'sound' benefit to running on FPGA.
Old 11th January 2017
  #50
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Agreed. Sample accuracy to HD I/O's should be the number one priority.
Yes I agree too!

Also anyone got an idea of a UK price yet?

Clybourne, is it possible to calibrate the AD / DAs and is the monitor output only controllable via software?

Thanks in advance.
Old 11th January 2017
  #51
Gear Maniac
Quote:
Originally Posted by hbadger30 View Post

Also anyone got an idea of a UK price yet?

Thanks in advance.
https://sxpro.co.uk/antelope-orion32-hd

£2999 (still to be confirmed)
Old 11th January 2017
  #52
Lives for gear
 
Squawk's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by londonengineer View Post
This again! They may react quickly and have low latency due to running on FPGA (no mean feat), but the FPGA is just crunching numbers exactly like DSP or any other digital audio processing - it is misleading to suggest there is any 'sound' benefit to running on FPGA.
In fairness to Marcel, most plugin developers who model analog devices claim that their plugins sound and react like the hardware they are modelling. This is not a claim exclusive to Antelope or FPGA.

Besides, they do have to be routed like hardware if you want to use them as inserts in your session.

Apart from that, the latency is extremely low, and they do sound excellent. It's also nice to see companies like BAE on board with Antelope.

As far as PTHD hardware latency, he did say that they are listening! I suspect that it will get resolved quickly.
Old 11th January 2017
  #53
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clybourne View Post
As for the Timeline questions, we got it right in Native before others 4 years ago. Let's see how the shipping version shakes out before we jump to conclusions. We're well aware of the topic.
I absolutely believe you guys are aware of the topic, but it's honestly as simple as this: match HD I/O latency sample for sample or most of your target customer market will NOT buy this product. I think you may be grossly underestimating how important it is to PTHD users.
Old 11th January 2017
  #54
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clybourne View Post
It's all fun and games until you hear these FPGA FX my friend. :-) You don't know what your'e missing, until you have it/hear it, in other words, so I guess what you don't know can't kill you, but... Well, I'll make sure you hear them sometime.

As for the Timeline questions, we got it right in Native before others 4 years ago. Let's see how the shipping version shakes out before we jump to conclusions. We're well aware of the topic.

Keep the comments rolling in, it's all helpful. We ARE listening.
Marcel - first off many thanks for engaging with this audience!!!

Second - I think the ZT is mostly brilliant

Third - for folks wanting a simple super low latency recording option independent of DAW buffer - the FX in the ZT are fabulous - and RTL is even lower than HDX.

Now - the problem - and why I am hammering on this topic....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clybourne View Post
As for the Timeline questions, we got it right in Native before others 4 years ago. Let's see how the shipping version shakes out before we jump to conclusions. We're well aware of the topic.
I tried out the Zen Tour in November and Purchased it a week ago. When I was trying it out I ran the loopback test in Pro Tools and Logic at 44.1k and 96k (as you can find in the Zen Tour thread). I just reran the loopback test last night on the new ZT unit (with latest firmware) and the results are the same. Loop back error at every sample rate. This is compounded by the fact that every output on the ZT has a different RTL. Routing PT output to the ZT internal Mixer 1 and then the Mix1 out to the physical outputs you get - At 96kHz - Analog in to the Line Out is 304us, the HP out is 324us and the Monitor out is 824us (a big change here).

Loopback error on the PT timeline is
Audio is placed 29 samples early for the Line out
Audio is placed 50 samples late for the Monitor out

So - to me - it seems you did not understand my posts is November on this topic so I spell it out very clearly here. I wrote Antelope tech support as well and after we agreed on what the issue was I did not hear anything further. Now in Native land the DDMF plugin can fix this. In HDX land - not going to do it.
Old 12th January 2017
  #55
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProPower View Post
Marcel - first off many thanks for engaging with this audience!!!

Second - I think the ZT is mostly brilliant

Third - for folks wanting a simple super low latency recording option independent of DAW buffer - the FX in the ZT are fabulous - and RTL is even lower than HDX.

Now - the problem - and why I am hammering on this topic....



I tried out the Zen Tour in November and Purchased it a week ago. When I was trying it out I ran the loopback test in Pro Tools and Logic at 44.1k and 96k (as you can find in the Zen Tour thread). I just reran the loopback test last night on the new ZT unit (with latest firmware) and the results are the same. Loop back error at every sample rate. This is compounded by the fact that every output on the ZT has a different RTL. Routing PT output to the ZT internal Mixer 1 and then the Mix1 out to the physical outputs you get - At 96kHz - Analog in to the Line Out is 304us, the HP out is 324us and the Monitor out is 824us (a big change here).

Loopback error on the PT timeline is
Audio is placed 29 samples early for the Line out
Audio is placed 50 samples late for the Monitor out

So - to me - it seems you did not understand my posts is November on this topic so I spell it out very clearly here. I wrote Antelope tech support as well and after we agreed on what the issue was I did not hear anything further. Now in Native land the DDMF plugin can fix this. In HDX land - not going to do it.
Your points about monitor, line and HP outs aren't a surprise, because all of these use different DAC chips with different latencies of conversion. For true sample accurate recording, there must be compensation done in the DAW and it's quite true that many users forego this detail. It's just not possible to add buffers into the interface to adjust all this, as it would drive the costs up and we don't even use buffered-DSP processing, we use much faster FPGA.

Why do you say that HDX land isn't "going to do it"? Keep in mind, Zen Tour isn't an HD interface. The Orion32HD will have consistent delays on the DB25 I/O which will most likely have to be delay compensated in the DAW. The Monitor outs aren't designed for HP outs, but for actually speaker outs, but I can see how you may be monitoring a guitarist, etc and this could throw things off a few samples, but there are some trade offs here and many savvy engineers I know can account for this.

I do compliment your attention to these details, but in the world of digital recording there are these imperfections and still a need for attention to sometimes manual delay recording latency correction.

I can say I've personally assisted in the past with the Orion32 RTL reporting and we did indeed line them up sample accurately in Logic, Pro Tools and other DAW's we tested/measured. But, on the hybrid interfaces which have multiple types of I/O, it certainly does get more involved.
Old 12th January 2017
  #56
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clybourne View Post
Why do you say that HDX land isn't "going to do it"? Keep in mind, Zen Tour isn't an HD interface. The Orion32HD will have consistent delays on the DB25 I/O which will most likely have to be delay compensated in the DAW. The Monitor outs aren't designed for HP outs, but for actually speaker outs, but I can see how you may be monitoring a guitarist, etc and this could throw things off a few samples, but there are some trade offs here and many savvy engineers I know can account for this.
Thanks Marcel for keeping the conversation going - and you make some very good points. But on this one point - "which will most likely have to be delay compensated in the DAW" - HDX (or HDN - or even Vanilla Pro Tools!) to the best of my knowledge has no way to do this except literally entering in the needed value on a track by track basis in the delay offset field. For the folks who are concerned with "sample accurate inserts" this is a different but related situation that will need the corrections entered in the insert delay comp window.

I know I speak of the ZT because it is the only one of your I/Os I have - but I am also a long time PTHD guy and current HDX owner :-). Now if your last sentence

" I can say I've personally assisted in the past with the Orion32 RTL reporting and we did indeed line them up sample accurately in Logic, Pro Tools and other DAW's we tested/measured. But, on the hybrid interfaces which have multiple types of I/O, it certainly does get more involved."

If this is saying that on the new Orion 32HD it will have the exact right reporting in HDX mode to line things up in PT with no loopback error then that would be great. But I don't think there is any reporting in the HD software - only PT's expectation that it is looking at an AVID I/O - but on this you know better than me. For now - count me as very curious to see the results when loopback and insert behaviors are both measured :-).

PS -- it may seem like I am being just critical but the real deal is I totally want you guys to succeed! This new one is SO close to what I really want in my studio being an HDX and Native guy. But I want everything to have all the good features that have kept me in AVIDs hands for so long too :-)

Last edited by ProPower; 12th January 2017 at 05:33 AM..
Old 12th January 2017
  #57
Lives for gear
 
barryjohns's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ProPower View Post
Thanks Marcel for keeping the conversation going - and you make some very good points. But on this one point - "which will most likely have to be delay compensated in the DAW" - HDX to the best of my knowledge has no way to do this except literally entering in the needed value on a track by track basis in the delay offset field. For the folks who are concerned with "sample accurate inserts" this is a different but related situation that will need the corrections entered in the insert delay comp window.

I know I speak of the ZT because it is the only one of your I/Os I have - but I am also a long term HD guy and current HDX owner :-). Now if your last sentence

" I can say I've personally assisted in the past with the Orion32 RTL reporting and we did indeed line them up sample accurately in Logic, Pro Tools and other DAW's we tested/measured. But, on the hybrid interfaces which have multiple types of I/O, it certainly does get more involved."

If this is saying that on the new Orion 32HD it will have the exact right reporting in HDX mode to line things up in PT with no loopback error then that would be great. But I don't think there is any reporting in the HDX driver - only PT's expectation that it is looking at an AVID I/O - but on this you know better than me. For now - count me as very curious to see the results when loopback and insert behaviors are both measured :-).
Spot on here, I was very excited when I started reading this thread, now, I'm moving on as there is no way I'm interested if things are not compensated for without me needing or even thinking I need to do something about it.

Keep working on it, maybe next NAMM!
Old 12th January 2017
  #58
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProPower View Post
Thanks Marcel for keeping the conversation going - and you make some very good points. But on this one point - "which will most likely have to be delay compensated in the DAW" - HDX (or HDN - or even Vanilla Pro Tools!) to the best of my knowledge has no way to do this except literally entering in the needed value on a track by track basis in the delay offset field. For the folks who are concerned with "sample accurate inserts" this is a different but related situation that will need the corrections entered in the insert delay comp window.

I know I speak of the ZT because it is the only one of your I/Os I have - but I am also a long time PTHD guy and current HDX owner :-). Now if your last sentence

" I can say I've personally assisted in the past with the Orion32 RTL reporting and we did indeed line them up sample accurately in Logic, Pro Tools and other DAW's we tested/measured. But, on the hybrid interfaces which have multiple types of I/O, it certainly does get more involved."

If this is saying that on the new Orion 32HD it will have the exact right reporting in HDX mode to line things up in PT with no loopback error then that would be great. But I don't think there is any reporting in the HD software - only PT's expectation that it is looking at an AVID I/O - but on this you know better than me. For now - count me as very curious to see the results when loopback and insert behaviors are both measured :-).

PS -- it may seem like I am being just critical but the real deal is I totally want you guys to succeed! This new one is SO close to what I really want in my studio being an HDX and Native guy. But I want everything to have all the good features that have kept me in AVIDs hands for so long too :-)


Ironically, the Orion HD represents such great value for money as it is that you could buy a pair of them, still have saved $2000 compared to the price of two HD 16x16 interfaces and you will have twice as many analogue channels as well, so could create an analogue insert of every channel in pro tools regardless of whether there is an outboard processor in there or not. If you delay every channel by the same amount, it will still be phase coherent.
Old 12th January 2017
  #59
Quote:
Originally Posted by barryjohns View Post
Spot on here, I was very excited when I started reading this thread, now, I'm moving on as there is no way I'm interested if things are not compensated for without me needing or even thinking I need to do something about it.

Keep working on it, maybe next NAMM!
The unit hasn't shipped yet, I didn't say anything definitively. Keep in mind, as closely as I'm involved in product development, I'm not coding or designing. There will be more announcements as we get closer to shipping in just over a month, I suggest "staying tuned".
Old 12th January 2017
  #60
Lives for gear
 
Keith Moore's Avatar
 

So when will there be any tests to conclude if this will indeed preform as an HD i/o regarding the revolving latency discussion?
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump