ArrayArrayArrayArrayArrayArrayArrayArrayArrayArrayArrayArrayArrayArray
BrainModularBrainModular Users Forum2009-05-16T09:16:32+02:00https://brainmodular.org/forums/app.php/feed/topic/15162009-05-16T09:16:32+02:002009-05-16T09:16:32+02:00https://brainmodular.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1516&p=8848#p8848Statistics: Posted by bsork — 16 May 2009, 09:16
]]>
2009-05-16T09:06:36+02:002009-05-16T09:06:36+02:00https://brainmodular.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1516&p=8845#p8845the procedure is: 1) clear the vst buffer (as much as possible) 2) send a sound to the vst, 3) wait until the sound comes out and calculate the delay.
most of vst have a 0 latency, that's probably why you have a 0 result. also the latency depends on effect itself:
- a FFF filter can have up to 4086 samples. - a look ahead limiter 50 samples, - a traditional filter 0 samples.
so if you you use a multi fx, the latency can depends on the fx chain and the kind of fx you use.
]]>2009-05-13T21:18:45+02:002009-05-13T21:18:45+02:00https://brainmodular.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1516&p=8799#p8799Statistics: Posted by gurulogic — 13 May 2009, 21:18
]]>2009-05-13T10:11:58+02:002009-05-13T10:11:58+02:00https://brainmodular.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1516&p=8783#p8783
Has anyone else tried the new latency out pin on VST's yet? I can't get any value other than 0 to a delay module when connecting to the delay in pin. Am I doing something wrong?
you have to start the latency test with the new button 'test latency' i guess, tested and ok for me
Statistics: Posted by martignasse — 13 May 2009, 10:11
]]>2009-05-13T08:59:21+02:002009-05-13T08:59:21+02:00https://brainmodular.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1516&p=8781#p8781Statistics: Posted by gurulogic — 13 May 2009, 08:59
]]>2009-05-06T19:06:06+02:002009-05-06T19:06:06+02:00https://brainmodular.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1516&p=8571#p8571Statistics: Posted by damstraversaz — 06 May 2009, 19:06
]]>2009-05-05T19:16:19+02:002009-05-05T19:16:19+02:00https://brainmodular.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1516&p=8544#p8544 And slightly off topic, but would it be possible to have an "invisible wire" mode for buses so that they would add no latency when used within a single track but still be name selectable, unlike a normal wire?
Statistics: Posted by gurulogic — 05 May 2009, 19:16
]]>2009-05-05T14:52:24+02:002009-05-05T14:52:24+02:00https://brainmodular.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1516&p=8535#p8535Statistics: Posted by siegfried — 05 May 2009, 14:52
]]>2009-05-05T09:45:56+02:002009-05-05T09:45:56+02:00https://brainmodular.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1516&p=8532#p8532Statistics: Posted by senso — 05 May 2009, 09:45
]]>2009-05-05T09:11:53+02:002009-05-05T09:11:53+02:00https://brainmodular.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1516&p=8531#p8531Statistics: Posted by bsork — 05 May 2009, 09:11
]]>2009-05-05T04:41:56+02:002009-05-05T04:41:56+02:00https://brainmodular.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1516&p=8528#p8528Statistics: Posted by gurulogic — 05 May 2009, 04:41
]]>2009-05-05T03:48:56+02:002009-05-05T03:48:56+02:00https://brainmodular.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1516&p=8527#p8527Also, if the VST had a latency value output in Usine, then assuming the plugin reports its latency at all,or even correctly, it would make it easy to see if a plugin had too much latency for the specific application without having to build a test with a phase inverted delay module.
Statistics: Posted by gurulogic — 05 May 2009, 03:48
]]>2009-05-05T02:44:55+02:002009-05-05T02:44:55+02:00https://brainmodular.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1516&p=8525#p8525 If the latency is noticable, though, isn't that going to be a pretty big problem for live performing anyways?
Statistics: Posted by runagate — 05 May 2009, 02:44
]]>2009-05-05T01:55:19+02:002009-05-05T01:55:19+02:00https://brainmodular.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1516&p=8524#p8524Statistics: Posted by gurulogic — 05 May 2009, 01:55
]]>BrainModularBrainModular Users Forum2009-05-16T09:16:32+02:00https://brainmodular.org/forums/app.php/feed/topic/15162009-05-16T09:16:32+02:002009-05-16T09:16:32+02:00https://brainmodular.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1516&p=8848#p8848Statistics: Posted by bsork — 16 May 2009, 09:16
]]>2009-05-16T09:06:36+02:002009-05-16T09:06:36+02:00https://brainmodular.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1516&p=8845#p8845the procedure is: 1) clear the vst buffer (as much as possible) 2) send a sound to the vst, 3) wait until the sound comes out and calculate the delay.
most of vst have a 0 latency, that's probably why you have a 0 result. also the latency depends on effect itself:
- a FFF filter can have up to 4086 samples. - a look ahead limiter 50 samples, - a traditional filter 0 samples.
so if you you use a multi fx, the latency can depends on the fx chain and the kind of fx you use.
]]>2009-05-13T21:18:45+02:002009-05-13T21:18:45+02:00https://brainmodular.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1516&p=8799#p8799Statistics: Posted by gurulogic — 13 May 2009, 21:18
]]>2009-05-13T10:11:58+02:002009-05-13T10:11:58+02:00https://brainmodular.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1516&p=8783#p8783
Has anyone else tried the new latency out pin on VST's yet? I can't get any value other than 0 to a delay module when connecting to the delay in pin. Am I doing something wrong?
you have to start the latency test with the new button 'test latency' i guess, tested and ok for me
Statistics: Posted by martignasse — 13 May 2009, 10:11
]]>2009-05-13T08:59:21+02:002009-05-13T08:59:21+02:00https://brainmodular.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1516&p=8781#p8781Statistics: Posted by gurulogic — 13 May 2009, 08:59
]]>2009-05-06T19:06:06+02:002009-05-06T19:06:06+02:00https://brainmodular.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1516&p=8571#p8571Statistics: Posted by damstraversaz — 06 May 2009, 19:06
]]>2009-05-05T19:16:19+02:002009-05-05T19:16:19+02:00https://brainmodular.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1516&p=8544#p8544 And slightly off topic, but would it be possible to have an "invisible wire" mode for buses so that they would add no latency when used within a single track but still be name selectable, unlike a normal wire?
Statistics: Posted by gurulogic — 05 May 2009, 19:16
]]>2009-05-05T14:52:24+02:002009-05-05T14:52:24+02:00https://brainmodular.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1516&p=8535#p8535Statistics: Posted by siegfried — 05 May 2009, 14:52
]]>2009-05-05T09:45:56+02:002009-05-05T09:45:56+02:00https://brainmodular.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1516&p=8532#p8532Statistics: Posted by senso — 05 May 2009, 09:45
]]>2009-05-05T09:11:53+02:002009-05-05T09:11:53+02:00https://brainmodular.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1516&p=8531#p8531Statistics: Posted by bsork — 05 May 2009, 09:11
]]>2009-05-05T04:41:56+02:002009-05-05T04:41:56+02:00https://brainmodular.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1516&p=8528#p8528Statistics: Posted by gurulogic — 05 May 2009, 04:41
]]>2009-05-05T03:48:56+02:002009-05-05T03:48:56+02:00https://brainmodular.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1516&p=8527#p8527Also, if the VST had a latency value output in Usine, then assuming the plugin reports its latency at all,or even correctly, it would make it easy to see if a plugin had too much latency for the specific application without having to build a test with a phase inverted delay module.
Statistics: Posted by gurulogic — 05 May 2009, 03:48
]]>2009-05-05T02:44:55+02:002009-05-05T02:44:55+02:00https://brainmodular.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1516&p=8525#p8525 If the latency is noticable, though, isn't that going to be a pretty big problem for live performing anyways?
Statistics: Posted by runagate — 05 May 2009, 02:44
]]>2009-05-05T01:55:19+02:002009-05-05T01:55:19+02:00https://brainmodular.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1516&p=8524#p8524Statistics: Posted by gurulogic — 05 May 2009, 01:55
]]>