Interfaces Latency?

[snarf]

I picked up an interface (a Zoom U-24) on the cheap a while back. Up until last night, anything I recorded with it was just whatever was coming through the interface to either the recorder on my phone or Audacity on my laptop. It works great for that.

Last night I tried to use it and record with a jam track. When I would do that, I was playing in time with the jam track, but when I would playback the recording, my playback was way behind the jam track. I could even play a bit in front of the beat, but it would come out like a beat behind on the recording. In order to post the recording, I ended up deleting the first 0.145 seconds of silence. That mostly lined my playing up with the track, but it still didn't quite mesh.

For those of you that record to jam tracks all the time, do you have to deal with latency, and what do you do? I've got a multitrack that I used to use that works great for that kind of thing, but it's a much bigger process to record to it (import the track, record, master and mixdown, and export), so I got the interface hoping to simply things a bit. Maybe it wasn't such a brilliant idea. Like I said, it works great so long as the entire signal is coming from the interface. The problem comes when I'm trying to play to a jam track on the laptop.

Anyone have any thoughts on what I could do to make it work better? The chain I was using last night was guitar and gear > Zoom U-24 interface > Audacity with the jam track being played in Audacity.

 

[Al Holloway]

I'm sure someone with far greater knowledge will chip in. However as a quick and dirty if you use audacity (I'm sure the others are the same) there is a latency correction you need to make. This is a one time (unless your hardware changes) global change and will work for all your recordings from then on. Here https://manual.audacityteam.org/man/latency_test.html is the manual section.

cheers

Al.

 

[Paleo]

I've been using Audacity on my MacBook ever since my first post years ago.

All of my recordings have been to one of Griff's backing tracks or a track in the VJR.

I had to deal with latency the first time.

First recorded and exported an mp3 using just a metronome, imported in back in, then played something to the "click" track.

(Guitar through my little Korg Pandora and into the laptop.)

I just measured the time difference from the timeline.

In preferences---->recording there's a "box" for entering the time difference.

Haven't made any changes within Audacity in all the years since.

 

[snarf]

Thanks, gents! I'm sure that's what it is, so I'll take a look and adjust that setting.

 

[artyman]

The easiest way to determine the amount of latency adjjustment in Audacity is to generate a click track, then Play a note to those clicks on another track. Expand the view so it's easy to see and then highlight from the click to where your note is and then read off the value at the bottom of audacity, then enter that in I think it's in preferences.

 

[snarf]

The easiest way to determine the amount of latency adjjustment in Audacity is to generate a click track, then Play a note to those clicks on another track. Expand the view so it's easy to see and then highlight from the click to where your note is and then read off the value at the bottom of audacity, then enter that in I think it's in preferences.

That sounds easy enough.

 

[JPsuff]

When I set up Audacity, I loaded a simple jamtrack and then played quarter notes over it -- no melody or anything, just quarter notes on the beat.Then I played it back and listened for the difference.

The factory latency setting was 180 msec and after a few go-rounds I ended up with 252 msec being perfect.

Your milage may vary.

I still have yet to set up S1 yet and with my new machine I'm sure the settings will be different but the procedure for setting it up is probably quite similar.

 

[PapaRaptor]

Thanks, gents! I'm sure that's what it is, so I'll take a look and adjust that setting.

https://manual.audacityteam.org/man/latency_test.html

After reading your initial post, I checked out Audacity again. I've had it on my computer for a while, but it rarely gets used. I wanted to compare setting it up vs. Studio One. I had Audacity generate a click track. I played it back and recorded it with my main microphone and then looked at the differential.
It looked like there had to be something wrong when I looked at the playback of the two recordings. It looked like my recording was actually ahead of the generated click track. It turned out that the latency which was set up in Audacity as -170 milliseconds. I don't know if that's a default value from Audacity or not, but it's certainly not something I set. It actually overcompensated and put the second track ahead of the playback. When I discovered that, I reset the latency to 0 and redid the test. I ended up with -68 milliseconds, which put me about 8 samples off. I tried to use a fractional (-68.7 milliseconds) and it just pissed Audacity off, giving me absurd results.

I then went into Studio One, which honestly, I've never touched since I first installed it. The first thing I noticed was that S1 tells you what the latency is on an interface and with the exact same settings on my interface (a Presonus Studio LIve AR12USB mixer) the default settings gave me about 7 ms of latency, according to it's built in testing.

I did the same click track test on Studio One and in graphic comparison between the original click track and the recording, the actual latency in the final recording as <=3ms. S1 doesn't give anything on the graphic display to hone in any closer than 1 millisecond.

Full disclosure, this testing was done on a completely updated Windows 10 PC running an Intel i7-8700 processor (8th generation) at 3.20Ghz. Audacity (2.33, there is a newer version available) uses Windows WASAPI, while Studio One is using ASIO. Studio One is version 5.1.0.61423.
I'm assuming that much of the difference in performance is due to the different drivers being used.

 

[ChrisGSP]

Just like Paleo and the others, I went through that Latency-adjustment process in Audacity once and haven't needed to compensate for latency ever again. I think there's actually a video tutorial about the process somewhere, but can't remember where.
NOW, regarding your Zoom I/F; I use a Vox Amplug I/O for what sounds like basically the same thing that you are doing - AND when I record in Audacity I get just the dry Guitar signal - none of the processing that occurs in the Jamvox software gets transferred into Audacity. I presume that's because Audacity is "listening" to the Amplug whereas I am listening to the JamVox output, and it's the JamVox software that does all the processing. I have tried and failed, a couple of times, to set up either JamVox as a plugin to Audacity or vice-versa but haven't found the solution yet.

 

[PapaRaptor]

Just like Paleo and the others, I went through that Latency-adjustment process in Audacity once and haven't needed to compensate for latency ever again.

As long as you haven't changed the interface you are using into your computer, you should not have to readjust the latency. It is also important to make sure that you have no other applications open that may steal CPU time away from Audacity.

 

[CaptainMoto]

This is like a science class which, I was never very good at.
Bottom line, looks like it's fixable............I guess.

 

[aleclee]

This is like a science class which, I was never very good at.
Bottom line, looks like it's fixable............I guess.

Eminently fixable, particularly if you switch DAWs. Depending on how you value your time, free software can sometimes be surprisingly expensive.

 

[snarf]

Eminently fixable, particularly if you switch DAWs. Depending on how you value your time, free software can sometimes be surprisingly expensive.

Oddly enough, largely because of this conversation, I've changed gears a bit. At this point I'm looking at Studio One and will probably end up buying it.

 

[PapaRaptor]

Oddly enough, largely because of this conversation, I've changed gears a bit. At this point I'm looking at Studio One and will probably end up buying it.

You can always try the freebie version. You won't lose anything if you decide to upgrade to S1 Artist and you'll know if Studio One is for you.
Additionally, you can pick up a Presonus Audiobox USB 96 for $99.95 and you'll get a copy of S1 Artist with it. S1 Artist by itself is $99.95 so there isn't much risk involved.

 

[snarf]

Additionally, you can pick up a Presonus Audiobox USB 96 for $99.95 and you'll get a copy of S1 Artist with it. S1 Artist by itself is $99.95 so there isn't much risk involved.

I downloaded the free version a couple of days ago, but haven't taken time to start playing with it yet. If I buy it, Artist looks like probably all I'll need for now. That's good to know about the purchase. If I'm going to spend the bill on it, I may as well get the interface too.

 

[dvs]

If you go for that interface (Audiobox 96), be aware that the inputs are for mic level or instrument level only - it is not designed to take the higher, line-level output from another audio device such as a mixer. Many interfaces have a line-level switch that bypasses the preamp, but this one doesn't. You can accomplish the same thing by setting the input levels for both channels at zero, but that is kind of a kludge and is against PreSonus' advice. If you don't plan to use it that way, it is a great little device.

 

[PapaRaptor]

If you go for that interface (Audiobox 96), be aware that the inputs are for mic level or instrument level only - it is not designed to take the higher, line-level output from another audio device such as a mixer. Many interfaces have a line-level switch that bypasses the preamp, but this one doesn't. You can accomplish the same thing by setting the input levels for both channels at zero, but that is kind of a kludge and is against PreSonus' advice. If you don't plan to use it that way, it is a great little device.

Wow! I've read two or three reviews and watched several videos comparing the Audiobox to the Focusrite 2i2 either that wasn't mentioned or I clearly missed it. But in checking the Presonus website I was really surprised. Right on their website they recommend using a DI box if you need to use a line level input.... Never mind!
Looks like the entry level Presonus product that accepts line level input is the Studio 24c, which is $60 more than the Audiobox. At least it still comes with Studio One Artist, but it certainly makes it a less appealing option.
Thanks, Doug!

 

[snarf]

be aware that the inputs are for mic level or instrument level only - it is not designed to take the higher, line-level output from another audio device such as a mixer.

My mixer can be used as an interface when I set it up correctly, so the current plan is to run everything to the mixer and then to the laptop. I just figure if I'm spending the money on the software and it's a choice between the software on its own or the software with an official interface for the same price, I may as well get the one with the interface. Then, if I don't ever end up using it, I can give it to someone that might need it...or sell it for cheap on Reverb.

 

[dvs]

I learned about this after I bought one. We found a place for it where it is mainly used for output to powered monitors or headphones and we would rarely use the inputs. It is compact and solid, USB powered, so not unhappy with it, just a little disappointed that it's not perfect. I think I'll add a review at Sweetwater, because I didn't catch that anywhere.