"Listen" button/Direct monitoring question

Again tonight I scoured the Cubase Artist Preferences menu over and over and can’t find how to turn on the monitor button automatically whenever Record Enable button is activated!! Can anyone describe how you do that in Cubase PREFERENCES?

there’s no mention of tape machine Mode in the entire preferences menu…no mention of the monitor button, or any preferences linked to it either.

5 seconds searching the manual would be far easier than scouring over and over. :wink:

Of course there is.

Try “Tapemachine style”, a quick search of the manual using the search function revealed it to me in less than a minute (I searched for “Tape”.).

Alexis did say “Tape machine mode or something similar”, I wouldn’t have remembered the exact term either.

Hi svennilenni - I’ve been thinking about what you wrote above, that interfaces don’t have latency. When I refer to Vin Curigliano’s work, I may be wrong but it looks like he has measured input, outpt, and round trip latencies of various interfaces (and shows that they can vary up to 50% between interfaces, the kind of thing I had in mind when comparing RME vs. K-mart interfaces):

https://www.gearslutz.com/board/music-computers/618474-audio-interface-low-latency-performance-data-base.html

Additionally, my Steinberg UR28M has some inpt and outpt latencies listed in its control panel, I’m pretty sure.

I wonder what your thoughts are on all that, if you had a moment please - thanks! :slight_smile:

I was refering to the “Direct monitoring” signal path of an inteface. I have not read all of what you linked to, but to me the link seems a comparison of how well different interfaces / drivers perform how with a given CPU load on the computer they are connected to. But that (for me), is not the interface´s latency but rather the "system´s latency, which involves more than only the interface, which is drivers, controllers. I can see some interfaces, that have a lower Round trip latency than the reference, RME interface, but a lower overall rating, because the whole system performance is measured.

Ah, I see what you are saying.

I may be mistaken, but I believe the computer is removed as a variable among the tests, and so the differences measured among interfaces in round trip latencies (sometimes measured in 10s of milliseconds) would just come down to the interfaces themselves i.e., not a function of the computers.

Of course, I am not sure of that :slight_smile:

No that’s not it, all the interfaces are tested on the same computer. The computer both hardware and OS is always the same, that gives us some comparable results.
If you did test on your computer, you might get different results, that is what Vin refers to with “Removing the computer from the equazion”
RME are a little special, they use FPGA and can essential use the same chips in all their products and program them for whatever I/O and features they need for a specific product.
They also use dual ROM (for a lack of a better word) on their USB interfaces. The interface detects if it is connected to a MAC or a PC and uses the optimized ROM to talk to the computer.
The “Low Latency Performance Data Base” shows the roundtrip delay and performance of the system, not only the Direct Monitoring(AD/DA) delay, that only adds a few samples to the overall result.
Hope that makes sense, kind of hard to condense it (over 2100 msg in that thread)

Was your post responding to mine, immediately above it?

Thanks for the details on how RME handles Macs vs PC differently. My understanding of Vin Curigliano’s testing results seems to be the same as yours - the latencies of the interface can affect overall system latency significantly.

Someone please correct me if this isn’t right - I don’t want to spread misinformation if that is incorrect.

Thanks!

Ah yes I think I misread your message, we are basically saying the same thing :slight_smile:
The “Low Latency Performance Data Base” also shows the differences between driver versions for the same audio device, worth noticing.
Direct Monitoring is again just telling the interface to send an Input signal, Directly to an Output.
Hopefully not confusing anyone, got a little sidetracked there :slight_smile:

RME interfaces DO have lower latency. It’s because 1. The conversion is done in very few samples. 2. (more importantly) they write very good drivers so the audio is able to reach the DAW and get back from the DAW to the interface more quickly.

I had an RME fireface 800 for years (released in 2005) and I now have a Steinberg AXR4U. The RME had significanly lower latency. The newer ones are even lower (like the Babyface Pro FS, etc).

I will use direct monitoring for tracking in the AXR4, and the built in reverb and compression sounds good. Sometime I won’t use it for the first few tracks, before putting latency inducing plugins.

There is a button which turns off all plugins in Cubase as well to reduce the latency going out as low as possible for doing overdubs (contrain delay compensation).

RME interfaces also offer built in EQ, compression, reverb, delay etc. Their software is pretty awesome. The AXR4U is a really incredible interface also and incorporates wonderfully with the inspector.