Live 9 latency comparison to other DAWs

[H20nly]

So, have you learned to live with 256 samples or is there a workaround?

i think you were directing that at me...

i have no idea what the situation is with 256 samples any more. i run at 92 or 128 typically.
i play a bass guitar and record vocals. sometimes there's some 6 string guitar. everything else is MIDI. i have no issue with latency and no audio crackles or pops... IF i did, i would increase the buffer.


i also use Cubase.

i purchased Logic but i never use it


you mention your computer being a MAC, but i see no mention of your audio interface. are you running Live off the onboard audio?

It's a NI Komplete Audio 6.
92 buffer renders Live absolutely unusable for me. It's great that you don't have this problem so it seems that the problem is just with my setup, but for the life of me I can't figure it out. I maintain it mean and lean and both Logic and StudioOne perform beautifully. Except for Live, both in 32 and 64bit mode

sorry you're having issues.

I have an Apogee Duet 2 on an iMac with an i5 chip... 20 GB of Ram. I'm running Live 9 64 bit and now that I'm home I had a look at my buffer... It's currently set to 128. I hadn't fiddled with the settings in a while so I double checked... I set it to 256 just for fun and got no audible latency when playing my bass and/or Push and/or an Axiom 25 keyboard... with a MIDI drum loop playing. Although the round trip latency clocks in at 14 ms at 256 samples.

Have you checked for any driver or firmware updates do your interface?

[eyeknow]

I've heard this time and time again about latency being higher in live than "other" hosts (other being several others)

My latency between studio one and live is so close, it's not even worth mentioning. It's about 5.5ms roundtrip for both.

[fishmonkey]

regardless of how absolutely low you can go with the latency settings, Live will tend to crap out earlier than other linear hosts when you start adding stuff to your set.

[ansolas]

It would be great if there would be a resource Monitor in Live.
(SUG-0824)

[madeofoak]

same exact issue here. running live 9 on a brand new quad core MBP. I get crackles starting at around 17% if the buffer is set to 128 samples.

switch to 256 and i'm good to go, but it ruins a lot of my live vocal processing. i've found a bunch of workarounds, but it seems absurd that this hasn't been fixed on ableton's end. why have lower buffer settings if the software can't handle them??

just for reference, the same exact patch runs about 8% cooler in live 8 on the same machine with the buffer set to 128, no crackles or problems at all.

[madeofoak]

... also should note that I had the same problem using both a motu 828 mkIII hybrid and a focusrite saffire pro 40. (was trying to eliminate the soundcard as the problem)

any help here or notice of ableton changing anything would be very helpful!! i'd love to use the extra horsepower of the new laptop for some more elaborate live processing at lower buffer rates.

[Stromkraft]

... also should note that I had the same problem using both a motu 828 mkIII hybrid and a focusrite saffire pro 40. (was trying to eliminate the soundcard as the problem)

any help here or notice of ableton changing anything would be very helpful!! i'd love to use the extra horsepower of the new laptop for some more elaborate live processing at lower buffer rates.

I see now that you tried both 64bit and 32bit with similar results. Did you ever try with Live 8 and compared?
Try an RME interface if you can or any other audio interface that have known fast drivers compatible with OS X Mavericks. While those you mention are good interfaces, the drivers used may not be fully compatible. I see though that Apogee claims the Duet 2 are compatible (Someone else mentioned this interface).

[kenporter]

I am not sure about Studio One, but to do a fair comparison between Live and Logic you would have to raise the buffer in Live to 1024 samples as Logic's playback buffer size is usually around 1024 samples, unless you record enable a track. That track will then be at the set buffer latency.

Logic will always perform better than Live if Live is set to 128 samples or even 256 samples using the same plugins. As mentioned a fair test would be if Live was set to 1024 samples.

Ken

[fishmonkey]

As mentioned a fair test would be if Live was set to 1024 samples.

it's still comparing apples and oranges, as Live's processing overhead will always be higher.

[Stromkraft]

As mentioned a fair test would be if Live was set to 1024 samples.

it's still comparing apples and oranges, as Live's processing overhead will always be higher.

It's still valid to compare, as processing overhead may be something you want to consider when you make your choice of DAW.

Fair doesn't enter into this issue other than a goal to strive for. Performance is interesting, fairness is not.

[kenporter]

As mentioned a fair test would be if Live was set to 1024 samples.

it's still comparing apples and oranges, as Live's processing overhead will always be higher.

That's the whole point of his test. If he compares both DAWs at 128 samples it's Apples to Oranges. When comparing them at a buffer of 1024 it's comparing Apples to Apples to see which one uses more processing overhead, which is still Live. However, it's a fair test, which at 128 samples it's not!

Ken

[login]

have you tried to use the same live set and saem audio interface in other computer?

[ansolas]

I even get glitches when I switch scenes when having a latency smaller than 20 ms !