If I have 2.9 ms latency...

Thanks in advance, BTW, and I hope I haven’t used up my three wishes. However, here’s a question that I would like to know empirically, and yes, I do realize that my initial 2.9 ms number may be inaccurate.

My Mackie Asio driver say that I have 2.9 ms latency. I have send a recorded track out via my interface, and then send it right back in to be recorded on another channel - how far ahead or behind should I bump the new track?

Honestly, I plugged in -5.80 and it sounds about right. But is this completely wrong?

OK, I am going to assume there are not a lot of reampers in the house?

I thought Cubase knew the latency of the interface and would make it right (not including any delay the external box imparts…) but I could be making that up as I haven’t done any external processing.

However, just do a ping test. Generate a couple of short pulses, do the external bounce, and then look at the two waveforms (original and newly recorded) and see how far they’re off.

ManChicken - Yeah, I have thought about this and I am thinking there are better tracks to reamp besides a two track finished song - which is what I used.

The problem still might be that the ‘ms’ thing is so minute that it would not be possible to do a good comparison. But I’ll think of something maybe.

As to the latency adjustment within Cubase, as far as I know, this is for VST instrument, not reamped tracks or overdubs. The user is still left wtih the track ‘sliding’ duties. I would just really like to hear from someone who has this down to a science, and who can say with certainty what the adjustment should be vs. the known latency of the interface. Say the latency is 5.00 ms. then the adjustment should be ‘xxx’ ms.? Yeah this would be helpful.

In thinking about this right now, I suppose I could try a huge latency setup, and then try to dial things in. It might be easier that way. In conclusion, if it’s 1:1, or 1:.85, or whatever, I justthought someone would have this all mapped out. Not the case apparently. :frowning:

It’s 2.9 ms each way. You’re going out of the interface at 2.9 and back in at 2.9 which = 5.8.

I re-amp quite a lot, mainly stupidly complex metal stuff.

I have always found cubase to compensate automatically. But then I don’t really worry about a couple of ms as I don’t use the original tracks once re-amped.

Remember that a mic placed 1 meter away from a speaker will be delayed by around 3ms.

Never tried it, but isn’t there a way to have Cubase calculate the latency automatically if you set this up as an external instrument?


Set what up as an external instrument?

Sorry, it’s probably called external effect or something (not with my DAW atm). I think I saw a sync button there when I looked at the setup page.

Thanks all for the responses. I can see where you might want to lose the original tracks, BTW, and yeah, recording with a mic from ‘X’ distance produces latency like you say. I guess overall I worry about an overdub, where the porential exists to destroy the groove. In my case, I am recording the bass guitar tracks first and the drummer is layin down on top of that. So it would be great to know that my track sliding is on target.

Sliding the track around is really interesting, BTW. There is a point, for example, in my senario at 2.9 ms, where I reamp the track and set the slider at -10 ms. The cymbal highs are gone and the bass tone is fat super fat - and yet the clarity of the vocals is still there. Really weird to hear this, and there are no ‘phasing’ effect to the audio. But if I go to -9.5, then the phasing effect comes on again, notably from the cymbals. It might turn out that this recording, B.B King Live at Cook County Jail/Every Day I have the Blues, used some processing that is giving the recording this phasing character to begin with, eh, I just grabbed it to try.

I need to try something more simple. Thanks again.