New control surfaces?

But does USB3 give less latency? Higher data capacity is not the same as less latency. Faster internet doesn’t give you a lower ping either, same thing.

there is no point to USB3 interfaces at all.

a good USB interface can already do very low lantency EG RME UC/UFX/Babayface
is stienys drives are anywhere as good then you can expect the same.

not unlike FF 400/800 vs MR816

its all those crap USB interfaces (the majority of them,using bog standard windows drivers) that give USB a bad name.

One should not confuse bandwidth with latency or you eventually get to the conversation I overheard in a PC world shop where the salesperson was trying to explain that a particular graphics card was better because it had a faster bandwidth :laughing:

Yes, USB3 can result in lower latencies because of the increased bandwidth. If data can be transfered faster, that leaves more time available for processing. I understand that latency is also subject to hardware interrupts etc., but from a processing perspective there is a clear advantage.

BTW, any further news on the upcoming control surfaces? This is such an obvious gap in steinberg’s product line right now. I still use my Houston on a daily basis, but I’m also ready for something better. 16 or 24 faders would be nice. Something like a D8B (from a layout perspective) or HUI (with more faders) would be nice. Or maybe something more sophisticated among the lines of Euphonix would also be very welcome. I can’t wait to see what’s in store…

No, we just said that increasing bandwith does absolutely nothing for the transfer speed, unless a controller uses up more than full bandwith of usb2 which I’m sure they don’t.
If a car drives at 100km/h over a single lane road and the road changes to a double lane, that doesn’t make the car drive any faster, unless there was so much traffic that the 1 lane wasn’t enough.

No… It does not follow that increased bandwidth means lower latency.

Your just because something can pass 4Gbit/s doesn’t mean it gets there any faster the something that passes 480Mbit/s
It just means you can get more data there in one go (as it were)

Ok its about network transmission but the sentiment is there.

http://www.stuartcheshire.org/rants/Latency.html

But, you can split your cargo between two cars and have them travel in parallel on two lanes. The end result is that your cargo will arrive once the full length of a car has crossed the finish line vs. the length of two cars if there was only one lane available!

Exactly. This thinking applies to only to networks, where we are dealing with pre-set hardware and other handshake latencies. The USB handshakes are done through the communication channels established that take advantage of the higher available bandwidth. The end result is that the USB handshakes take much less time to be established therefore allowing for lower latency between the point of transmition and reception.

For isochronous devices like audio streams, the bandwidth is constant, and reserved exclusively for a given device. The bus bandwidth therefore only has an effect on the number of channels that can be sent at a time, not the “speed” or latency of the transmission.

Source USB - Wikipedia

sorry but it does not work like that
case in point
RME PCI vs RME PCIe having benchmarked both numerous times the PCIe offers NOT decreased latency period.
what the PCIe offers over PCI is BANDWIDTH something we keep trying to tell you.

so while the PCI slot was limited to 64 I/O @ 32 buffer it could now do 128 i/o @ the same 32 buffer with PCIe

notice MORE i/o not lower latency…

as i had already mentioned with USB 2 RME can do a 48 buffer with any of there interfaces do tell me how is one going to decrease latency?

USB 3 offers absolutely nothing for lower latency, what it can offer is MORE I/O at the same buffer.

now in regards to the majority of USB 1/2 interfaces the reason they suck so bad is bad drivers (lazy manufacturers using the windows driver model)
USB 3 wont help with that either. not until they write their own drivers

I was just sitting here thinking… Yeah, big task, right! and remembered… that video… the grainy bleeping Sasquatch video… It was all about control surface… then, Steinberg introduced 2 new audio interfaces. :confused:

Now everything is really making sense in my head :laughing:

Oh and while I’m in a pedantic mood…

Surly if data is transferred faster that would leave less time available for processing :laughing:

That is in fact a very good point. If you increase bandwith you might overload other components which can increase latency rather than decrease it. Sorry mr. etl17, you are wrong.

I stand corrected. You guys made some very good arguments. :slight_smile:
Now, I am dying to get some more news on the control surfaces. I was almost ready to give in and get me a couple of Avid Artist modules. I guess now I’ll have to wait and see…

Is anyone else less than bowled over by the new CMC controllers Steinberg announced today?

I’m pretty disappointed Steinberg.

Al

I will for sure check them and think I am ending buying some of those.
I like that concept.

Yeah, underwhelmed. No flip control for controlling those tiny FX sends, not a lot of user program ability.
Cheap though…

Cheap by nature…available at toysRus. I’m still hoping there’s a company out there clever enough to spot the market for a professional 24/32 channel moving fader, solid build, meterbridged console specifically for DAW control…It’s got to happen sooner or later.

Posted some in-use videos in the lounge

There already is, how much $$ you wanna spend?
Look at the SmartAV Smart Console it is exactly you described.
Great features come at a high price, steinberg is targeting the casual user with a minimum budget, ok stuff if you are in that catagory.