Latency with Pro Tools. Please Help

[gsozz]

When I try to plug a Pod into my digi oo2 and hit record I can here it just fine , but There is too much latency............So, I hit the Low Latency switch and there is no sound from my guitar when trying to record....
How do I record through a Pod with low latency?? I thought Low Latency was suppose to be turned on while recording in this fassion with a POD pluged directly into the digi 002.
Please comment

[richpeax]

What type of computer(laptop? pc? apple?), processor(intel?) and speed, and how much RAM do you have? Just so I can get an idea.

[richpeax]

Here's one important thing with LE. When recording don't make the machine do too much work. If you have things like plug-ins or Reason or BFD running when trying to record it eats up processing power, which takes away from what's needed for recording.

Try buffer setting at 256 which may work. If not 512.

Make sure you don't have anything going on but Pro Tools on your machine when recording. Set CPU usage as high as you can.

Try this stuff first as see if that helps

[blueline]

Even with an HD system you need to limit what the computer does. The less processing required the less latency. The newer versions of PT also require more work from the computer, which makes some computer begin to have issues. This could be your issue.

[elambo]

Originally Posted by blueline

Even with an HD system you need to limit what the computer does. The less processing required the less latency. The newer versions of PT also require more work from the computer, which makes some computer begin to have issues. This could be your issue.

With HD systems there's no latency on input. That's a big part of its advantage.

And the latency itself isn't a product of how hard the computer is working, it's a product of the hardware buffer setting, which, for recording, I'd suggesting setting as low as possible. During the mix stage you can go as high as you please. Actually, higher buffer settings will allow the CPU to breathe and it will allow more simultaneous functions, like plugins.

[Mondoslug]

Originally Posted by gsozz

When I try to plug a Pod into my digi oo2 and hit record I can here it just fine , but There is too much latency............So, I hit the Low Latency switch and there is no sound from my guitar when trying to record....
How do I record through a Pod with low latency?? I thought Low Latency was suppose to be turned on while recording in this fassion with a POD pluged directly into the digi 002.
Please comment

As far as I/O on the 002....which inputs are you using and especially which analog outputs do you have it routed through?

[elambo]

Originally Posted by gsozz

When I try to plug a Pod into my digi oo2 and hit record I can here it just fine , but There is too much latency............So, I hit the Low Latency switch and there is no sound from my guitar when trying to record....
How do I record through a Pod with low latency?? I thought Low Latency was suppose to be turned on while recording in this fassion with a POD pluged directly into the digi 002.
Please comment

Are you routing the POD into ProTools via an Audio Track or an Aux Track?

[cochese]

An easy solution to this is using an external mixer (if you have one). There is latency in any device that is using an A/D converter. It's just very low in a digital mixer or interface but the latency is there whether you perceive it or not.

I use a Motu 828 but used to have the Digi 001 and I'm surprised you are running into this problem with the Digi 002. It sounds like you might have a configuration problem or perhaps your computer is choking a bit.

[elambo]

Originally Posted by cochese

An easy solution to this is using an external mixer (if you have one). There is latency in any device that is using an A/D converter. It's just very low in a digital mixer or interface but the latency is there whether you perceive it or not.

If he wants to record into ProTools along with audio that is already in ProTools, or a click track, how does the mixer help him out?

And I don't think unperceived latency is a problem for anyone. The delay of an A/D or D/A convertor is incredibly small. Technically speaking, there's even latency in the traveling of sound through an audio cable but you wouldn't notice it even if the cable was many miles long.

The problem he's having is due to the buffer. The little cache of bits that the computer holds on to that allows the CPU to eat away at it as it chooses. It's the nature of Host processing, unfortunately, and part of why TDM is so damn expensive.

[Mondoslug]

If he wants to record into ProTools along with audio that is already in ProTools, or a click track, how does the mixer help him out?

Output of the 002(already recorded audio) into 2 channels of the external mixer and or the click out into the mixer - headphone out of the Pod into another 2 channels of the mixer. This is strictly for monitoring...meanwhile send the main outs of the Pod into two channels of the 002 to record. The mixer is strictly for monitoring. works like a charm...no latency monitoring. The Pod's output & 002's output are arriving at the mixer at the same time.

[elambo]

Seems like a viable option, but more trouble than necessary. And anyway, that's what low latency monitoring is supposed to emulate, but I think he's using the wrong type of track for monitoring.

[Mondoslug]

Yeah it does sound like some operator error is going on. The "Low Latency" option does work in PTLE if done right but using a console to monitor in general is what those large desks are sitting there for in studios while tracking. It's just a scaled down way of doing it if you have a cheezy little mixer sitting around and fear the latency thing in general.

[disaster]

is the latency on the monitored tracks, or on the signal being recorded? (did I miss that?)
If it's on the input signal, mute the track while recording and use the non-latency monitoring provided by the 002.

[cochese]

Originally Posted by elambo

Seems like a viable option, but more trouble than necessary. And anyway, that's what low latency monitoring is supposed to emulate, but I think he's using the wrong type of track for monitoring.

The advantage to using an external mixer is you have tactile control over your tracks as opposed to using a mouse. Also it's much easier to deal with tracks in a hurry with a fader. You can also route your external tracks to outboard gear for processing which will save you CPU power. If you like to track with reverb that will really start to strain your CPU if your computer is not really powerful.

There is nothing wrong with doing everything in the box but I find you can make you're life easier by using a mixer.

The studio I record at uses Cubase SX. They also use a Motu 24/IO interface and a 32 channel mixer. We are running several Synth Modules, effects and numerous group tracks.

I'm not trying to talk anyone into anything. At home I mainly do my own guitar tracks. They are then imported to the computer at the studio I work at. Even at home I usually record with two mics at the same time and record several takes of 2-3 different parts. This can really build of the track and take count. I can work much more quickly even using my little Mackie 1202 than I could by constantly working in the computer. Just my opinion.

[elambo]

Originally Posted by Mondoslug

Yeah it does sound like some operator error is going on. The "Low Latency" option does work in PTLE if done right but using a console to monitor in general is what those large desks are sitting there for in studios while tracking. It's just a scaled down way of doing it if you have a cheezy little mixer sitting around and fear the latency thing in general.

The big studios will nearly always have HD and they'll monitor through ProTools when recording, then into the console. I'm not saying that an external mixer is a bad idea for everyone, but it's not necessary for the average Joe, as long as you're using ProTools in the right way. The "how-to" of recording is in the PT LE manual.