Looper's Delight Archive Top (Search)
Date Index
Thread Index
Author Index
Looper's Delight Home
Mailing List Info

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]

Re: OT: slow HD+Logic (was: upgrading my MacBook)



Hi Warren,

Yep. I too monitor the software treated sound when doing live looping
concerts. That's the point in replacing stomp boxes with at laptop.
There's a delicate challenge, when programming sound patches, to get
the balance right between the three poles: the direct input, the
latency affected output and beat synced effects.

I wouldn't say my tolerance for latency is fairly high, but having
lived through years of playing electric guitar live on stage I have
developed ways to adapt to latency. But I don't like it. I get a
better feel playing electric guitar on rigs with small speakers
because they are faster. And I like the flute because the sound source
is close to my ears (once gave up the Bari sax partially for that
reason). I guess my optimal instrument would be a digital brain wave
converter!  ;-)

Per




On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 4:16 PM, Warren Sirota <wsirota@wsdesigns.com> 
wrote:
> my interface doesn't have direct monitoring, so i have to rely on the
> monitor mix created by my recording software, which is at least a buffer
> round-trip's worth of latency. and it's actually necessary for me, and
> probably most live loopers, to monitor the actual "mix" - there's 
>usually no
> distinction like there is in a recording studio when you're, say, 
>recording
> a (more traditional) band live.

> I guess after playing guitar synths, my tolerance for latency is fairly 
>high.

>
> On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 9:50 AM, Simeon Harris
> <simeonharris40@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>> yes, but if you have an audio interface that allows direct monitoring of
>> the input signal, it's not a problem (although i'm not exactly sure 
>what you
>> mean by "monitoring" as something separate from recording)
>> sim
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 2:41 PM, Warren Sirota <wsirota@wsdesigns.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 9:28 AM, Simeon Harris
>>> <simeonharris40@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> oh, and the buffer size for the audio interface makes a huge 
>difference
>>>> as well. larger numbers for better performance
>>>>
>>>
>>> and greater latency, which is no problem for recording, but might be 
>for
>>> monitoring
>>