Right now i use my pc as a virtual tape recorder. I send in all my synths to chanels 1-16, then to nuendo/cubase and monitor back on inputs 17-32. Basically as an anlog studio. I do this so that i can control each channel individually. And so that any effect/eq that i apply comes after "tape".

The problem is i am trying to figure out latency for effects since i use the pc for that too. This is all done through a Motu 2408 I might add, I have 3rd slot in insert mode for aux 1-6 and a stereo out for the final proiduct once done.

What would be the correct time to delay the tracks by since my latency is 13 ms using a 512kb buffer? Would it be 26 ms (13 ms for the sound to come in for effects, and 13 ms to go out again digitally to the aux signals)

That is the championship winning question, as well as any suggestions you might have.

.

I believe the latency in native systems is constant no matter what effects you use, so you should be able to record something, run it through the board and record it back again on another track, and compare the distance between the two to determine the latency.

It doesnt seem like you guys have this problem. Does nobody use the DA7 in the same fashion i use it in or what?

.

Everyone uses the DA7 that way, Daniel!

Is there any reason you don't like the answer I gave you?

Because it happens to be the correct one!

Zumbido, those are TDM plug-ins, which have variable latency depending on the plug-in. Those figures are irrelevant for Daniel's system.

REPEAT: native processing usually has a *constant* latency. That's why Pro Tools TDM has just now been able to add automatic delay compensation, while many native systems have had it for years.

Nick,
Nuendo/Cubase just got adc( with the 2.0 updates which I haven't gotten yet....). I "believe" different plugins do have different latency values, but I can't say exactly what they are.

Daniel,
I use Cubase SX exactly as you describe. For the most part, low latency doesn't bother me. If the latency gets too high I either disable the plugins or monitor dry off the board ( before hitting SX ).

One way to tell would be to measure, DP. It may be that some of them use two buffers instead of one, or something like that. But I'm 99% certain they won't all have different amounts of latency.

So DP, you never use that daw mo0de? Is it even recomended since u cant use all faders?

And when would you use the buses 1-8 then if there really isnt a need for them? (or so it appears to me)

I suspect I'm being talked past, Daniel, but I'll answer anyway. Eight faders is not as good as nine or 16, but it's better than seven, so most people would consider it worth setting up if you're mixing in the DAW. After all, it doesn't cost you anything.

If you do mix in the DAW, things like lowering an 8-bar phrase where the singer was too close to the mic are probably easier using "off-line" mixing - i.e. drawing in the change. But most people find things like riding vocals easier with faders. So motorized control surfaces like the Mackie HUI, which has eight faders, were born. You can't perform the whole mix like you can if you have more faders. But on the other hand, you can't move all eight at once anyway, so in that sense you have more than you need.

Oh, and I assume you know about scrolling up and down in banks of eight faders (or one at a time)? That lets you control any channel in your DAW; the only limitation is that you get eight at a time. Sorry if you knew that already.

The "standard" way to send your synths to the DAW is to use the eight busses. Be aware that DA7 busses aren't like the busses in an analog board, because they're not hardwired - you can pretty much route any input to any output. So the concept of busses, etc. is all sort of a virtual paradigm.

Still, I have my Pro Tools system set up exactly like yours: busses go to PT, PT outs are connected digitally to inputs 17-24. Synths in 1-16.

I figured since you were running Pro-Tools it might have been a little different in config. Why would you use the busses out into pt? Wouldnt you just send each individual out instead of a bus (only eight???)?

"Tell me more about these buses" (in evil voice, tugging at my beard ) lol

I recently added an ADAT Bridge interface, so I have a potential 24 inputs into Pro Tools, but before this I only had (and needed) eight. You can use the direct outs if you have enough inputs into Nuendo, sure.

I've been using VIs these days more than hardware instuments. The "outboard" instruments I use these days are 99% GigaStudio, and then mostly orchestral sounds. That lends itself to submixing in four stereo pairs, i.e. strings, brass, ww, perc. - hence the eight inputs.