Latency?

Bug reports & end-user support for Akai's MPC Software 'controllers' including the new MPC Studio 2, the MPC Touch, MPC Renaissance & original MPC Studio and MPC StudioB lack.
 Reply Share on Facebook

How do you feel about latency?

8
42%
2
11%
1
5%
1
5%
4
21%
3
16%
  • Total votes : 19
User avatar

Latency?

By MeSoHordey Sat Jun 23, 2012 3:49 am
:nod:
User avatar

Re: Latency?

By Metatron72 Sat Jun 23, 2012 3:57 am
Honestly this is the one thing I am most curious about on the Renaissance. I have never seen an interface priced below $800USD match an MPC in terms of properly calculated real time round trip latency. They said they are writing a highly customized driver for the interface portion of the Ren which is the way to do it. But then I remember this is the company that repaints $40 chinese guitar pedals and calls them "boutique" level construction and components...
User avatar

Re: Latency?

By TYPO Sat Jun 23, 2012 4:12 am
But then I remember this is the company that repaints $40 chinese guitar pedals and calls them "boutique" level construction and components...[/quote]
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
User avatar

Re: Latency?

By Retrofreak Sat Jun 23, 2012 5:49 am
The one thing thats unforgivable with digital ITB production.

I already know that the Ren wont be as tight as hardware based MPC
User avatar

Re: Latency?

By Metatron72 Sat Jun 23, 2012 6:00 am
Retrofreak wrote:The one thing thats unforgivable with digital ITB production.

I already know that the Ren wont be as tight as hardware based MPC


I agree but if you break bread and get an Echo, Apogee, MOTU or RME the RTL numbers are within 1ms is not slightly less of an MPC. I have lots of hardware but also tons of ITB stuff. I perceive a slight difference with the ITB latency compared to the MPC's here but it's very, very small. RME Multiface II/pci-e is what I use. Best money I ever spent considering the improvement it makes to any virtual instrument.

On the Ren I'd be surprised myself if it matches interfaces that retail for 2/3rds or even more than the Ren itself. It has to hit an RTL number under 5ms for people not to notice a difference from a hardware MPC almost immediately.
User avatar

Re: Latency?

By JAH Sat Jun 23, 2012 7:07 am
A few questions:

So what do you "think" the latency of a typical hardware MPC is?

How much latency do you "think" the Ren will have?

And what latency performance would you find acceptable when using the Ren?
User avatar

Re: Latency?

By Metatron72 Sat Jun 23, 2012 7:31 am
I "think" the RTL latency of a typical hardware MPC could not be lower than around 1.2ms based on the real limits of the operations being carried out. Even as a dedicated unit it is still a 16 bit computer bound by the limitations of data transferal.

I "think" the Ren will be hard pressed to go lower than 3.5ms -5.0ms RTL. Are these acceptable numbers to work at? Absolutely. My curiosity is it will be just enough that it will be discernible to hardware MPC users if that's were it ends up. I simply wondeer if they will just get used to slight addition of latency. Obviously this forum is a testament to a lot of historically hardware guys having issues with the addition of more latency when they venture ITB. If Akai matches the performance of the manufacturer's interface's I mentioned I'd tip my hat to them.

Your last question is essentially answered in my response to question two.

So what do you "think" ?, and I don't mean how you "feel". Meaning we all know your view of Akai is gushy to apologist in the eyes of many. I have raised valid technical questions about the device. I have no interest in buying one but I have nothing against it. But for $1300 I want to see what level of performance they can hit with this interface that currently the public knows little to nothing about technically.

Your as I see them, facetious quotes on the word think already tells me you'll likely just go revert to "but it's not out how would you know?" That still wouldn't change the validity of the points I've raised.
User avatar

Re: Latency?

By Metatron72 Sat Jun 23, 2012 7:33 am
DJ Hellfire wrote:I don't have latency issues as I have the proper equipment and settings for software based production and recording! :nod:


And that is all I'm ever saying in the Ren threads. Will the internal interface match that level of performance proper equipment affords us? Simple as that. If it does I will be happy as hell for all the guys here buying the Ren.
User avatar

Re: Latency?

By JAH Sat Jun 23, 2012 7:55 am
Metatron72 wrote:I "think" the RTL latency of a typical hardware MPC could not be lower than around 1.2ms based on the real limits of the operations being carried out. Even as a dedicated unit it is still a 16 bit computer bound by the limitations of data transferal.

I "think" the Ren will be hard pressed to go lower than 3.5ms -5.0ms RTL. Are these acceptable numbers to work at? Absolutely. My curiosity is it will be just enough that it will be discernible to hardware MPC users if that's were it ends up. I simply wondeer if they will just get used to slight addition of latency. Obviously this forum is a testament to a lot of historically hardware guys having issues with the addition of more latency when they venture ITB. If Akai matches the performance of the manufacturer's interface's I mentioned I'd tip my hat to them.

Your last question is essentially answered in my response to question two.

So what do you "think" ?, and I don't mean how you "feel". Meaning we all know your view of Akai is gushy to apologist in the eyes of many. I have raised valid technical questions about the device. I have no interest in buying one but I have nothing against it. But for $1300 I want to see what level of performance they can hit with this interface that currently the public knows little to nothing about technically.

Your as I see them, facetious quotes on the word think already tells me you'll likely just go revert to "but it's not out how would you know?" That still wouldn't change the validity of the points I've raised.

Not really interested in what hardware MPCs can't be. But I am interested in facts...what is the RTL for hardware MPCs. Without having this information, it is silly to try to compare it to the MPC Ren.

In this thread...several sound card manufacturers were mentioned that have superior drivers. I suspect the Ren will be able to use these devices just like Maschine. So if you feel that the MPC Ren drivers are not to your liking....perhaps you can use the reknowned RME driver....making this a non-issue.

I believe most people will be impressed with the latency performance of the Ren....

Metatron72 wrote: I simply wondeer if they will just get used to slight addition of latency. Obviously this forum is a testament to a lot of historically hardware guys having issues with the addition of more latency when they venture ITB.

Whomever this applies to needs to step their tech game up. Quite a few of us have been using MPCs and Audio/MIDI interfaces (and they latency they produce) with software synths and samplers for a decade.....
User avatar

Re: Latency?

By Metatron72 Sat Jun 23, 2012 8:35 am
JAH wrote:
Metatron72 wrote:I "think" the RTL latency of a typical hardware MPC could not be lower than around 1.2ms based on the real limits of the operations being carried out. Even as a dedicated unit it is still a 16 bit computer bound by the limitations of data transferal.

I "think" the Ren will be hard pressed to go lower than 3.5ms -5.0ms RTL. Are these acceptable numbers to work at? Absolutely. My curiosity is it will be just enough that it will be discernible to hardware MPC users if that's were it ends up. I simply wondeer if they will just get used to slight addition of latency. Obviously this forum is a testament to a lot of historically hardware guys having issues with the addition of more latency when they venture ITB. If Akai matches the performance of the manufacturer's interface's I mentioned I'd tip my hat to them.

Your last question is essentially answered in my response to question two.

So what do you "think" ?, and I don't mean how you "feel". Meaning we all know your view of Akai is gushy to apologist in the eyes of many. I have raised valid technical questions about the device. I have no interest in buying one but I have nothing against it. But for $1300 I want to see what level of performance they can hit with this interface that currently the public knows little to nothing about technically.

Your as I see them, facetious quotes on the word think already tells me you'll likely just go revert to "but it's not out how would you know?" That still wouldn't change the validity of the points I've raised.

Not really interested in what hardware MPCs can't be. But I am interested in facts...what is the RTL for hardware MPCs. Without having this information, it is silly to try to compare it to the MPC Ren.

In this thread...several sound card manufacturers were mentioned that have superior drivers. I suspect the Ren will be able to use these devices just like Maschine. So if you feel that the MPC Ren drivers are not to your liking....perhaps you can use the reknowned RME driver....making this a non-issue.

I believe most people will be impressed with the latency performance of the Ren....


You go measure it if it means that much to you. Regardless, anyone who had used hardware and and software can discern differences in latencies without resorting to running a loop and clocking it, and you know this. Again do it yourself. I don't need a scientific reading to prove to you the obvious fact that EVERYONE knows that a hardware MPC is about one of tightest responding audio/MIDI devices around, and those low latencies are prevalent throughout the hardware world. But whatever come back and say I imagine hardware MPC's being low latency because I won't bother to measure to appease you.

I already said I have no interest in the Renaissance other than observational curiosity and the hope those who are purchasing get the best possible performance for their money. But what you propose would assume a buyer wants and needs the extra hands on control and the still unquantified vintage mode. Otherwise you'd be better off with the Studio as you'd be paying an interface you're not using. Although on OS X I'm sure you could aggregate your interface with the Ren's internal one which many would find very useful.

You may have reason to believe the performance will be up to par. If that reason rhymes with NBA, fair enough.

There's nothing controversial about posing the question, "will they get ultra low latency performance and if so what is the methodology and components?"
User avatar

Re: Latency?

By Retrofreak Sat Jun 23, 2012 10:07 am
Agreeing with Metatron72 on this.

I have a range of interfaces including Apogee and RME some are better than others, but the facts remain...timing and responsiveness suffer under buffer size settings and Plugin/CPU load.

I cant see this getting better until music programs have their own stripped down OS.
User avatar

Re: Latency?

By JAH Sat Jun 23, 2012 1:51 pm
You guys regurgitate the same stuff that has been said in this forum for over a decade....

Your basic argument is that an MPC has rock solid timing that can't be achieved with a computer (providing no facts or measures you taken yoursself). Yet software sequencers and VST instruments have been used for quite sometime now. What's wrong with these people? Didn't they get the memo that rock solid timing can only be achieved using an MPC or hardware? How they creating hit music without using an MPC? How can they play a grand piano VST using a keyboard controller and sound card that is inferior to an MPC?

If you have issues with timing and responsiveness due to Plugin/CPU load...you will have that issue whether you use an MPC or not. Using an MPC to sequence VSTs is no better than using the MPC Ren to do the same thing.

Will the MPC Ren get ultra low latency performance..you ask? How do you define ultra low latency exactly? 10 ms? 5 ms? 1.5 ms? What is the round trip latency of hardware MPCs we can't create rocksolid music without? You can find this info in one or more of these threads...but Akai set out to deliver sub 5 ms of latency...its is reported they have achieved as low as 2 ms? Again...what is considered ultra low latency to you? Akai easily exceeds my expectations in this regard...as I have been using Maschine (without any timing issues) with significantly higher latency.

As far as the Vintage Mode...this is not remotely relevant to this conversation. And just like Maschine...I suspect no one is making a purchase deceision based off of the Vintage Mode. And as you put it...MPCs are rock solid which is why people use them. But in the same breath...another reason (equally or more important) why people use MPCs is the hardware interface. The MPC Ren's hardware is just like a traditional MPC...the Studio isn't. It will be up to each individual how they choose to use the Ren. No one particular set-up fits everyone's needs. I will use the MPC Ren the same way I have used every MPC before it. MPC Ren on computer #1....Main DAW on computer #2. The I/O of the MPC Ren connected to my Apollo interface. The Apollo interface is used to route audio in/out of computer #2.
User avatar

Re: Latency?

By Lampdog Sat Jun 23, 2012 3:14 pm
Metatron72 wrote:RME UFX is what I use. Best money I ever spent considering the improvement it makes to any virtual instrument.


DJ Hellfire wrote:I don't have latency issues..
User avatar

Re: Latency?

By DJ Hellfire Sat Jun 23, 2012 5:15 pm
Metatron72 wrote:Honestly this is the one thing I am most curious about on the Renaissance. I have never seen an interface priced below $800USD match an MPC in terms of properly calculated real time round trip latency. They said they are writing a highly customized driver for the interface portion of the Ren which is the way to do it. But then I remember this is the company that repaints $40 chinese guitar pedals and calls them "boutique" level construction and components...


I use a 003 in my studio. But in my living room, I use an Mbox Micro and the response time is great. Even when I started on a regular Mbox in the main studio, latency wasn't an issue. But then again, I don't play like Araab music. :lol: For what I do, the responsiveness feels just as quick as a hardware unit, even when I'm making non sampled beats with tons of VST's loaded or huge racks in Reason. Never had an issue!

Retrofreak wrote:I have a range of interfaces including Apogee and RME some are better than others, but the facts remain...timing and responsiveness suffer under buffer size settings and Plugin/CPU load.

I cant see this getting better until music programs have their own stripped down OS.


Like I explained to you before, you aren't supposed to compose with a high buffer. Anything higher than 128MB is asking for trouble. I keep it at 64MB, 128 tops, but never higher while actually making the beat. When your shit starts popping an clicking, that's just your computer being pushed. But that's a limitation of the computer hardware, not a problem with the latency of the music hardware or software. Obviously, the more powerful your system, the more load it can handle at a low buffer. If the stuff you're running has a 64-bit version and you have a lot of ram, then you're even better off. Lastly, it helps to have your computer properly tuned and set for music production. You can have the most powerful i7 with a million GB of ram and if your shit ain't tuned and set right, you're gonna have trouble!

As for the stripped down OS thing, how do you suggest making this possible without making the computer completely useless for anything other than using it with that music program? Even if you do a dual boot, how would you run other DAW's together? Like how would you run MPC Ren or Maschine inside of Pro Tools or Logic or Ableton, when the OS is dedicated to one piece of gear?
 Reply
Return to MPC Studio, MPC Touch & MPC Renaissance