Support |
> > it would be really nice if the program could > > "play" a test pulse which could be routed out > > of the soundcard , and then back in again and recorded. > > The value obtained could then be used to make everything line up. > > > > andy butler > > > I doubt that would be needed. We're talking software here and the > computer must "know" the latency value, Usually the user has to enter a figure into the application. Sometimes the audio drivers will have a figure available, and also allow you to adjust for minimum delay without breakup. ...but for someone using a generic PC soundcard the accepted method seems to be to overdub onto a recording then compare the timing. The help files for Cool Edit Pro recommend a "loopback" connection to re-record a pulse waveform . >. I've been working a lot with Logic and > SX and these programs does compensate automatically and it must be > possible to do that even in looping software. Well , I'd guess they just use a default value until you enter an exact figure in the "options". I don't think there's any way the application would "know" the specs of the soundcard. > But a computer can never > "know" what you (the "analog" musician) is going to play into the > recording input in the next second. huh, me neither sometimes ;-) > for live looping since the machine needs only a couple of milliseconds > to calculate latency compensation and line up the recording with the > spinning loop. I don't know much about software developing but I guess > it's called a "look-a-head function". > someone on the list (was it the "AmbiLoop guy",Christopher MacDonald) did post about how he solved the problem for looping software. best wishes andy butler