iv’e known for quite a while now that texas chipset is needed to be able to stop the crackles you get from the via chipsets ,but will it actually make any diference to lacency , my ultralite seems to be running quite high lacency wise at 5.6ms in 256, so im just wondering will the chipset make a diference ?
a complete knob ed question from an old atari head
many thanks freq
I get 4.1 ms at 128 samples. I think I can get down to 64 samples before things get flaky.
Motu UltraLite with Adaptec TI FW PCI card.
Other than the crackles issue with other chipsets, I’ve not aware that a TI card offers any advantage in latency.
QuBe.
Hi ff,a 5.6 ms latency at 256 samples, considering it’s an external soundcard (which adds its own hardware buffer on top of the software one) is very good. I get this latency with my pci m-audio card at 256 samples, i won’t talk about my FW Saffire… If it’s crackle free, i think you should be happy. Do you really find this amount of latency to be a problem?
hi manakesna
there is no issue with the sample buffer in timing respect it was just a question ,to find out if you change the firewire card to texas chipset would it actually speed up the connection and get you less lacency , after all this time iv’e just ordered a ti chipset as the crackles seem to be getting worst with the ultralite mk3 ,i had the same issue with my 828 and that is where i found the issue and checked motu where they STRICTLY advise ti chipset !
cheers knob ed question from an old atari ed !
freq
cheers Qube
thanks for your answer ,im just looking forward to crackle free playback 
cheers freq
Cool.
Out of curiosity, do you get the rolling glitchies on your MkIII?
I believe mine is the first version of the UltraLite.
It’s been a while, but I used to get these weird freakouts every now and then…sound would cut down all scratchy with lots of crackling.
Could never pin down a cause…resetting the device fixes it.
I also have the dying LED backlight issue.
It doesn’t have any effect on the operation of the UL, but the screen is now about 1/3 brightness and flickers randomly.
Seems it’s a very common issue with Motus. They said they’d fix it for $100 + shipping.
Nah, don’t think so.
Times when it’s burned out completely I can still read it if I shine a pen light into it at an angle.
QuBe.
hi Qube
i have not had that problem with the ultralite ,is it the latest driver your running with the latest cuemix fx ?
i installed the latest driver and the computer went spasticated so i rolled back to the previous drive which solved the issue ,but the backlight problem uuummmm ,long story cut short ,my ultralite hybrid is a trade in with motu as my 828 mkII backlight started playing up and then getting digital spillage from the s/pdif which caused loads of noise and crackling with the led lights going mad until one day the bugger would not turn on , it was only 3 years old ,sent it to motu and 4 1/2 months later they decided to do a deal on the ultralite for £100 ,believe me i was not happy with motu. so i hope what yours is doing is not the start of a great hair pulling out session like the 828 !
all said i must amit i do like the ultralite more than the 828 and will carry on using motu like i have since the atari days.
all my thoughts go with you in your dark hours of motu madness !
regards
the freq
Yep, been there. 
They did the pooch with the first driver version that had new Cue Mix console.
Looked nice and all, but with my Ultralite it went all goofy when you changed tracks to stereo and whatnot.
I went back to 3.6.7.4 but now I’m using 3.6.8.14 and it seems to work okay.
,but the backlight problem uuummmm ,long story cut short ,my ultralite hybrid is a trade in with motu as my 828 mkII backlight started playing up and then getting digital spillage from the s/pdif which caused loads of noise and crackling with the led lights going mad until one day the bugger would not turn on , it was only 3 years old ,sent it to motu and 4 1/2 months later they decided to do a deal on the ultralite for £100 ,believe me i was not happy with motu. so i hope what yours is doing is not the start of a great hair pulling out session like the 828 !
all said i must amit i do like the ultralite more than the 828 and will carry on using motu like i have since the atari days. all my thoughts go with you in your dark hours of motu madness !
regards
the freq
Sadly, I’ve read a few stories like yours with the 828’s.
I first noticed my backlight acting weird about a year and a half ago…it was only 3 years old as well.
At first I had kittens and thought it was the beginning of the end.
Same with the glitchies…first time it happened I near had a heart attack because I thought a eardrum blowing pop or screech was about to blast out my monitors.
Fortunately, over the years it’s never popped but only put the signal through a digital mangler until I cycled the unit.
I’ve long learned to live with both issues, because audiowise it still sounds good and works the same as when I got it. I just look at it as being haunted instead of broken. 
Although I think I’ll be going RME next time though. 
QuBe.
The New Sandy Bridge (Socket 1155) is out now…
and Intel has a mainboard with integrated FireWire CHipset
Intel DP67BG
At what samplerate?
I take it thats just the input or output latency figure?
No difference at all, 100% sure.
hate to say it vinark it has made a difference to the latency ,now the crackles and pops only start at around the 512 buffer size ,im finding the best setting for the buffer size at the mo is 64 with latency of 2.3 and absolutely no problems at all so in away yes it has has made the latency issues alot tighter
regards
freq !
Surprising…i’d have agreed with vinark that it wouldn’t affect latency. Another sort of paradox here is that contrary to what you say, usually pops and crackles begin when going down in samples and not up. Conclusion, AI! computers do have their own caprices & preferences
ok so what are we trying to achieve with the latency setting ,a small sample buffer or a large buffer , iv’e never understand the buffer size ,ive alway as i record all my external synths and and don’t use any vsti’s have always tried to get the sample rate buffer down as low as possible ,but the via chipset would never allow it as it would crackle and distort , im i doing the right thing taking it down as low as possible ?
regards
freq
yes, you’re doing the right thing, the lower the buffer samples, the lower the latency - at the cost of system resources and possible instability (system and asio driver dependable)
aaahh now see in a weird and wonderful way texas chipset has allowed me to gain that extra low latency where the other chipset would not allow me to take it as low without the “warning this machine will self destruct in 30seconds” rearing its ugly head ,so in a roundabout way it has helped the latency ,but not in the way you would think
an old atari head playing with setting and expecting something to blow up very soon
regards
freq