I have found that when I double the sample rate that it doubles my CPU usage making 96 and 192 useless on my bigger projects.. Is this just simple math or am I missing something?
Live 4.0.4
OS 10.3.6
2.5 dual G5
4 gigs of RAM
Edirol FA101 Help
yes, the math makes sense: double the sample rate, twice the work, twice the processing power needed...on any interface...
i use 96k for low latency so i can use live as a processor "live"
for really complex arrangements i try to consolodate as much a possible
on samples/fx and render parts to trigger as sections, etc. live..
this seems to be the best solution for cpu conservation..
cheers
i use 96k for low latency so i can use live as a processor "live"
for really complex arrangements i try to consolodate as much a possible
on samples/fx and render parts to trigger as sections, etc. live..
this seems to be the best solution for cpu conservation..
cheers
My projects are big, mainly because I am running 13 inputs from BFD rewire each with a compressor and eq. I also use a lot of the TRacks plug-ins which seem to take up more CPU than Live's or Apple's. My template for BFD runs 50-60% CPU usage before I start adding audio or midi tracks so I expect latency to be an issue. I was using the m-box and latency was about 11 ms which is the minimum the m-box can achieve. I like the FA101 because I have the option of increasing my sample rate to acheive lower latency on my smaller projects and I can in essence create an effects loop and resample audio through outboard gear which is not possible with the m-box. I have not compared it to any other firewire interfaces.
minus.
i use the fa101 as well. so far i am happy about the performance and the sound. BUT the fact that it "eats" around 10% CPU in idle is something, Edirol has to improve in the next driver version!
cheers, spacy
Athlon XP2400
Asus A7V333
512 DDRAM
cheers, spacy
Athlon XP2400
Asus A7V333
512 DDRAM
wow... how do you do that???isk8str8 wrote:My projects are big, mainly because I am running 13 inputs from BFD rewire each with a compressor and eq. I also use a lot of the TRacks plug-ins which seem to take up more CPU than Live's or Apple's. My template for BFD runs 50-60% CPU usage before I start adding audio or midi tracks so I expect latency to be an issue. I was using the m-box and latency was about 11 ms which is the minimum the m-box can achieve. I like the FA101 because I have the option of increasing my sample rate to acheive lower latency on my smaller projects and I can in essence create an effects loop and resample audio through outboard gear which is not possible with the m-box. I have not compared it to any other firewire interfaces.
if i increase my samplerate, the firmware of the fa-101 increases the minimum buffersize... so nomatter wich samplerate i use, with minimum buffer i can´t get under 11.1 ms of global lantency...
are u using other drivers then me??? should i give asio4all a try...
please help, i need a latency down by 5 or 6 ms... i really her/feel the 11.1... while drumming
thanks alot...
blablub
-
monoschall
- Posts: 91
- Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 2:35 pm
i use the little bro/sis to the fa101, the fa-66 and get lower than 8ms latency which is nice, although that rises if the computer has a lot to do. Sound it nice too, have used it in live gigs.
and it uses the standard built-in apple firewire audio so no drivers needed - which makes me wonder why M-Audio (M-Audio thread) has to provide drivers for their OSX products.
and it uses the standard built-in apple firewire audio so no drivers needed - which makes me wonder why M-Audio (M-Audio thread) has to provide drivers for their OSX products.
what do you mean wirth low latency... mine is minimum 11.1 ms... note that bad, bad far away from god?!?!babkubwa wrote:sound qualities not the best but good enough for the money.
I love it for the low latency and stability. Also needs no drivers or installation on the mac - truly plug and play
not a bad buy at all. sure I'll be using mine for another few years
whats your latency?