Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

[Newbie] Playback latency, direct monitoring, tascam us-122

Last response: in Home Audio
Share
Anonymous
a b C Monitor
March 21, 2005 6:36:33 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Hi all,

I'm doing some multi-track recording using a tascam us-122 over USB
with Adobe Audition 1.5.

I find that if I use the computer's internal soundcard to monitor the
mix, the signal being recorded matches well with the existing mix.
However, using the us-122's direct monitoring to monitor the mix
results in a noticeable timing mismatch between the recorded signal
and the existing mix.

Is there a way to compensate for this latency? I've tried changing the
buffer settings in the us-122's control panel but this does not appear
to affect the latency I'm experiencing.

Any ideas?

Thanks,
Jeste.
Anonymous
a b C Monitor
March 21, 2005 3:43:48 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <2c352066.0503210336.38b3d2e4@posting.google.com> jeste77@yahoo.com.au writes:

> I'm doing some multi-track recording using a tascam us-122 over USB
> with Adobe Audition 1.5.
>
> I find that if I use the computer's internal soundcard to monitor the
> mix, the signal being recorded matches well with the existing mix.
> However, using the us-122's direct monitoring to monitor the mix
> results in a noticeable timing mismatch between the recorded signal
> and the existing mix.
>
> Is there a way to compensate for this latency?

The idea of the direct monitor is to allow the player to hear himself
without latency. If there's a lag in the recording when you play it
back, this is something you need to tweak in your computer, but
there's only so much you can do. How much latency are you
experiencing?

The usual way of handling this is to slide the newly recorded track so
that it lines up with the previous tracks, but this shouldn't be more
than a couple of milliseconds off if everything in working right.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
Anonymous
a b C Monitor
March 21, 2005 8:22:41 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Jeste" <jeste77@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:2c352066.0503210336.38b3d2e4@posting.google.com...
> Hi all,
>
> I'm doing some multi-track recording using a tascam us-122 over USB
> with Adobe Audition 1.5.
>
> I find that if I use the computer's internal soundcard to monitor the
> mix, the signal being recorded matches well with the existing mix.
> However, using the us-122's direct monitoring to monitor the mix
> results in a noticeable timing mismatch between the recorded signal
> and the existing mix.
>
> Is there a way to compensate for this latency? I've tried changing
> the buffer settings in the us-122's control panel but this does not
> appear to affect the latency I'm experiencing.
>
> Any ideas?
>
> Thanks,
> Jeste.


I've never used to US122 so I'm kinda flying blind here. A quick look
at the manual didn't reveal much either. The only thing I could find
was reference to the "Direct monitor" switch. Overdubbing with that
switched off could cause the problem you're describing.

If I'm even understanding your problem correctly. Are you saying that
you hear yourself delayed while you're playing, or that the tracks don't
line up in your software after recording?

--
"It CAN'T be too loud... some of the red lights aren't even on yet!"
- Lorin David Schultz
in the control room
making even bad news sound good

(Remove spamblock to reply)
Anonymous
a b C Monitor
March 21, 2005 9:00:30 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <BpD%d.85099$fc4.47317@edtnps89> Lorin@DAMNSPAM!v5v.ca writes:

> I've never used to US122 so I'm kinda flying blind here. A quick look
> at the manual didn't reveal much either. The only thing I could find
> was reference to the "Direct monitor" switch. Overdubbing with that
> switched off could cause the problem you're describing.

The extended version (too long to make it into Recording) of my US-122
review can be had as:

http://mysite.verizon.net/mikerivers/UploadedFiles/US12...

There's a home made block diagram as well as a fairly detailed
description of how the monitoring works.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
Anonymous
a b C Monitor
March 22, 2005 5:18:50 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Hi Mike,

thanks again for your help. See below:

mrivers@d-and-d.com (Mike Rivers) wrote in message news:<znr1111414307k@trad>...
> In article <2c352066.0503210336.38b3d2e4@posting.google.com> jeste77@yahoo.com.au writes:
>
> > I'm doing some multi-track recording using a tascam us-122 over USB
> > with Adobe Audition 1.5.
> >
> > I find that if I use the computer's internal soundcard to monitor the
> > mix, the signal being recorded matches well with the existing mix.
> > However, using the us-122's direct monitoring to monitor the mix
> > results in a noticeable timing mismatch between the recorded signal
> > and the existing mix.
> >
> > Is there a way to compensate for this latency?
>
> The idea of the direct monitor is to allow the player to hear himself
> without latency. If there's a lag in the recording when you play it
> back, this is something you need to tweak in your computer, but
> there's only so much you can do. How much latency are you
> experiencing?

Yes, I'm able to hear myself without latency during recording - the
lag is only apparent when playing back the mix. I've just attempted to
measure the latency. To do this I created an initial click track, then
re-recorded the click track by feeding the Direct Monitor output back
as the input signal. Sound reasonable?

The newly recorded track is approximately 67ms behind the initial
click track. If I perform the same experiment but rather than using
the Direct Monitor output I feed the output from my internal soundcard
back as the input signal, the newly recorded track is in sync with the
existing track.

> The usual way of handling this is to slide the newly recorded track so
> that it lines up with the previous tracks, but this shouldn't be more
> than a couple of milliseconds off if everything in working right.

Yes, I guess that will work. It seems a little clunky and manual
though, is this really the best solution? I'd probably prefer to get a
mixer and use my internal soundcard for monitoring if so.

Thanks again,
Jeste.
Anonymous
a b C Monitor
March 22, 2005 5:25:28 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Lorin David Schultz" <Lorin@DAMNSPAM!v5v.ca> wrote in message news:<BpD%d.85099$fc4.47317@edtnps89>...
> "Jeste" <jeste77@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
> news:2c352066.0503210336.38b3d2e4@posting.google.com...
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I'm doing some multi-track recording using a tascam us-122 over USB
> > with Adobe Audition 1.5.
> >
> > I find that if I use the computer's internal soundcard to monitor the
> > mix, the signal being recorded matches well with the existing mix.
> > However, using the us-122's direct monitoring to monitor the mix
> > results in a noticeable timing mismatch between the recorded signal
> > and the existing mix.
> >
> > Is there a way to compensate for this latency? I've tried changing
> > the buffer settings in the us-122's control panel but this does not
> > appear to affect the latency I'm experiencing.
> >
> > Any ideas?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Jeste.
>
>
> I've never used to US122 so I'm kinda flying blind here. A quick look
> at the manual didn't reveal much either. The only thing I could find
> was reference to the "Direct monitor" switch. Overdubbing with that
> switched off could cause the problem you're describing.
>
> If I'm even understanding your problem correctly. Are you saying that
> you hear yourself delayed while you're playing, or that the tracks don't
> line up in your software after recording?

The latter - using Direct Monitoring there is no delay on the signal
that I'm recording, the tracks just don't line up after recording. See
my response to Mike Rivers for more info.

Thanks, Jeste.
March 22, 2005 9:55:53 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

67ms sounds like you might be using the MME driver by mistake. I don't
know what AA1.5 is but see if it has an option to use the ASIO driver
instead. You should see about 20ms with that box, which is fine. I use
a US-224, which is the same brain, with Sawplus and have never had
anything not line up recording or playing back. keep rockin'. s.

On 22 Mar 2005 02:18:50 -0800, jeste77@yahoo.com.au (Jeste) wrote:

>Hi Mike,
>
>thanks again for your help. See below:
>
>mrivers@d-and-d.com (Mike Rivers) wrote in message news:<znr1111414307k@trad>...
>> In article <2c352066.0503210336.38b3d2e4@posting.google.com> jeste77@yahoo.com.au writes:
>>
>> > I'm doing some multi-track recording using a tascam us-122 over USB
>> > with Adobe Audition 1.5.
>> >
>> > I find that if I use the computer's internal soundcard to monitor the
>> > mix, the signal being recorded matches well with the existing mix.
>> > However, using the us-122's direct monitoring to monitor the mix
>> > results in a noticeable timing mismatch between the recorded signal
>> > and the existing mix.
>> >
>> > Is there a way to compensate for this latency?
>>
>> The idea of the direct monitor is to allow the player to hear himself
>> without latency. If there's a lag in the recording when you play it
>> back, this is something you need to tweak in your computer, but
>> there's only so much you can do. How much latency are you
>> experiencing?
>
>Yes, I'm able to hear myself without latency during recording - the
>lag is only apparent when playing back the mix. I've just attempted to
>measure the latency. To do this I created an initial click track, then
>re-recorded the click track by feeding the Direct Monitor output back
>as the input signal. Sound reasonable?
>
>The newly recorded track is approximately 67ms behind the initial
>click track. If I perform the same experiment but rather than using
>the Direct Monitor output I feed the output from my internal soundcard
>back as the input signal, the newly recorded track is in sync with the
>existing track.
>
>> The usual way of handling this is to slide the newly recorded track so
>> that it lines up with the previous tracks, but this shouldn't be more
>> than a couple of milliseconds off if everything in working right.
>
>Yes, I guess that will work. It seems a little clunky and manual
>though, is this really the best solution? I'd probably prefer to get a
>mixer and use my internal soundcard for monitoring if so.
>
>Thanks again,
>Jeste.
Anonymous
a b C Monitor
March 22, 2005 1:33:40 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <2c352066.0503220218.17f76cc2@posting.google.com> jeste77@yahoo.com.au writes:

> Yes, I'm able to hear myself without latency during recording - the
> lag is only apparent when playing back the mix. I've just attempted to
> measure the latency. To do this I created an initial click track, then
> re-recorded the click track by feeding the Direct Monitor output back
> as the input signal. Sound reasonable?

Yes. That's the way I measure this sort of thing. You're not really
feeding the DIRECT monitor signal back to the recorder since its
source is only the input source, but when you connect the monitor
output back to the input, you're feeding the playback of the previous
recording, which is what you want.

> The newly recorded track is approximately 67ms behind the initial
> click track.

That's dreadful. Something has too much latency.

> If I perform the same experiment but rather than using
> the Direct Monitor output I feed the output from my internal soundcard
> back as the input signal, the newly recorded track is in sync with the
> existing track.

That sounds like the latency is in playback. I'm not sure if that's a
good enough clue to help. I'm not a computer person.

> > The usual way of handling this is to slide the newly recorded track

> Yes, I guess that will work. It seems a little clunky and manual

You shouldn't have to correct for 67 ms. Try making a call to TASCAM.
Sometimes you can still get good tech support there. When I had the
US-122 in for review, the only thing I had to do was tweak it a bit so
that it stopped glitching, and that was a tweak to decrease the
latency. So I don't really have any experience in fixing your problem.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
Anonymous
a b C Monitor
March 22, 2005 6:51:29 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Jeste" <jeste77@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>
> using Direct Monitoring there is no delay on the signal that I'm
> recording, the tracks just don't line up after recording.


That's weird. Most software automatically compensates for inherent
throughput delays. Is it a problem with Audition? It seems unlikely,
given how many people here use it, but you never know...

--
"It CAN'T be too loud... some of the red lights aren't even on yet!"
- Lorin David Schultz
in the control room
making even bad news sound good

(Remove spamblock to reply)
!