Where is the latency o meter on the Ren?

Just got my device the other day. Knocked out a few bangers last night, every thing was all good until today.

I just recorded some guitar pluck from the stock MPC samples and the shit sounded like Dr Dre bruh. It was off time like a mother ****. That shit would be acceptable if I ramped up the swing and was doing hip hop, but I'm doing new age and it wasn't in sync with my harps and kettle drums

Been looking for the so called latency sensor for a hour and cant find it.

I also read somewhere on here there's some work around if you lower some setting and that action will hook a mother **** workflow up or will latency be never ending problem with this damn thing?

There's no mother **** latency meter and **** shit like that brodar.

Try editing the **** sample in the mother **** sample editor and shit. Change the **** start time or move the mother **** MIDI note with quantize off and shit until it sounds in **** time and shit bruh.

Ayo bruh, you got me misscuntrooled dawg, It was not a "sample" it was some stock sound the came with the device.

I tap lightly on the pad and the sound doesnt show up for the party, I have to bang on it bruh risking damage and shit.

The pads have somehow gotten drunk, I need my shit to be on point

It was fine a day ago what happened?

So it's a plugin bruh? Check your mother **** latency settings in the mother **** preferences menu and shit. Click MPC then preferences and all that hot **** shit. Check the **** audio setup n shit, lower it to 256 or something lower and that shit will get rid of the **** latency and shot bruh

Your set latency settings in all software is in an audio preferences menu. Put the sample buffer number as low as you can get it without hearing clicks, pops or distortion, and then go.

The more you have running in a session the more you may have to increase the settings. Anything from a 128 sample buffer setting to 512 should be generally useable, but 128/256 are nice compromise numbers.

ASIO on windows in best case scenarios can go as low as a 32 sample buffer, Core Audio can go to 14 or sor but generally 32 is the lowest there too in real world scenarios.

@Airyck, just noticed the frightened cake sig, nice.

**** ****** ** ** ***** * * *** no??

I am using my Ren/Studio on OSX. I keep my buffer settings at 256 or 512 samples. When it comes to timing/latency, I have very little need to use lower buffer settings. My system (2.3 Ghz Intel Core i5, 16 GB Ram, OSX 10.7.5 w/ UAD Apollo I/O using Thunderbolt) goes all the way down to 64 samples.

For me one of the big differences (and one of the reasons I use mostly hardware synths right now) between software and hardware synths is the latency. With hardware (in most cases) I get really low latency when playing. This is very important to me because it can affect the feeling of what I'm playing quite a bit. While you can't really hear latency below a certain threshold (say 7ms on average) you can feel the lag a bit and I think that has an effect even if it's subconscious on how I play and also on how much something feels like a real instrument or not.

On the REN at least at the beginning I can get away with 64 samples (about 1.5ms of latency) which is awesome. I just move it up as needed. So at the beginning I can work with soft synths (DCAM Synth Squad, Largo, MS-20) but as the latency increases I feel the need to move to my hardware. Although off topic, this another mother **** reason for multicore support and shit bruh.

Metatron72 wrote:@Airyck, just noticed the frightened cake sig, nice.

The thread might be dead but the moment lives on in imminence

Better Mouse Trap wrote:Ayo bruh, you got me misscuntrooled dawg

Airyck wrote:For me one of the big differences (and one of the reasons I use mostly hardware synths right now) between software and hardware synths is the latency. With hardware (in most cases) I get really low latency when playing. This is very important to me because it can affect the feeling of what I'm playing quite a bit. While you can't really hear latency below a certain threshold (say 7ms on average) you can feel the lag a bit and I think that has an effect even if it's subconscious on how I play and also on how much something feels like a real instrument or not.

On the REN at least at the beginning I can get away with 64 samples (about 1.5ms of latency) which is awesome. I just move it up as needed. So at the beginning I can work with soft synths (DCAM Synth Squad, Largo, MS-20) but as the latency increases I feel the need to move to my hardware. Although off topic, this another mother **** reason for multicore support and **** bruh.

So you believe multicore support will improve latency?

I dealt with multi core in that other thread, seemingly to Jerome's chagrin, but real world facts often send him into a frenzy. Maschine and Ren are basically the only non multi core apps out of anything widely in use, and it is a humongous hindrance.

The thread is about latency so I don't see your post as off topic at all. (short a bruh or two maybe but... )

Just for the sake of clarity that 1.5ms @64 buffer would have to be only the input latency being reported, a lot of software doesn't give the total round trip latency number of input latency+processing+output latency. but the real number would still come out between 4.5ms - ~7ms. Very useable but if it were in actuality 1.5ms it would be near the low latency of a hardware MPC. There isn't a $300-$500 on earth that can do this.

If you have it reporting the 7ms number that real RTL number is well over 10ms so you starting feeling some minor lag. And no it isn't subconscious you are truly having to adjust.

Anyway just wanted to point that out, Jerome can reply later with whatever kind of "I don't have the Ren so..." he wants.

I simply stated last summer that while the Ren would be low latency it would not be ultra latency. By the end of all that he actually made an implication that I was wrong even in calling a hardware MPC ultra low latency, because I refused to do a loop back and measure.

Anyone who has touched a hardware MPC knows that's not necessary. Ultra low latency defined pretty much universally as sub 4ms RTL reported or measured correctly is not happening on a $300 interface inside a $1299 machine and matching RTL numbers of interfaces that cost as much as the Ren.

So Jerome call it near zero latency if you want but it wouldn't make it correct. Simply basic low latency operation on par with just about any other low to mid priced USB 2.0 interface.

And I can't really fathom why he'd rock the UAD/Studio combo at 256/512 with onboard DSP for FX, having claimed he uses few plugins with a pretty solid 64 buffer there for the taking.

And yes multi core support could absolutely improve low latency performance. What do you think processes ASIO and Core audio buffers? It's CPU's. Every lower buffer setting on anything exponentially increases the CPU load, the most pronounced on a USB interface as USB is a Host based protocol that has all data and procedure calls ran through the CPU's.

So more CPU's, more executable threads are something that will help latency and using smaller buffers as the CPU will not be as taxed to refresh the buffers.

JAH wrote:So you believe multicore support will improve latency?

I believe it will allow me to run more soft synths at a lower latency yes.

Airyck wrote:with 64 samples (about 1.5ms of latency) which is awesome.

When you set the Sampling Rate to 88.2 you can even get 0.7ms latency.

AnSolas wrote:

Airyck wrote:with 64 samples (about 1.5ms of latency) which is awesome.

When you set the Sampling Rate to 88.2 you can even get 0.7ms latency.

At double the CPU load compared to 44.1khz keep in mind. And again that's not a real RTL number just one part of the process being measured. Still a good number/response, I just get a little when software doesn't report the real number.