Scary thread about Live on KVR - please address!

[mdk]

Does that make sense? Someone! Anyone! Please tell me this makes sense!!!!

it makes sense to me (just replace Guitar Rig with Revalver mk3)

[[nis]]

rhythminmind, have you read the 2nd half of my post?

Also, why should I monitor my hand clap through software? I can hear it directly, so I turn monitoring off, record and all is good. I guess you're getting these two concepts mixed up.

You have to monitor more often then not.. A vocalist with headphones in a booth. A guitar player playing with realtime plugin FX. Someone with a mpc jamming in realtime with plugin FX, Nevermind someone recording with a virtual instrument. ect, ect.

I'm not trying to be a PITA i'm just having a real hard time with abes view.

You're not a PITA, don't get me wrong.

If you monitor your handclap or your guitar through software fx and you are playing along a pre-recorded audio track, then you NEED to manually compensate yourself if you want to be in time with the rest of your song. There is no other choice. So either you get used to it or use direct monitoring without software fx. Show me a software solution where this is different and I eat my hat.

[rhythminmind]

All other major DAW's i have used (Sonar, Logic, Protools, cubase, reaper.) will record actual timing while monitoring software FX. PDC is usually handled during playback. There is still uncompensated latency while monitoring, thats with every DAW. Let me say this again monitoring only. Live is the only one that requires manual offsetting after recording.

[jbone1313]

If you monitor your handclap or your guitar through software fx and you are playing along a pre-recorded audio track, then you NEED to manually compensate yourself if you want to be in time with the rest of your song.

Not neccessarily. Please see my Piano example as quoted from earlier in this thread:

There's some confusion about latency going on here. There are two types of latency we're taking about: playback latency, and the latency Live adds when you're recording with monitoring on.

I can get used to the playback latency I hear when I'm playing (just like I would with a "real instrument"), but not the recorded latency. I want the notes to be recorded on time--not with the latency.

There's a big difference. Think about it like this: suppose you take a "real instrument", and mic it up. Lets say a piano. Then you record it with monitoring. Since Live adds latency to the recorded audio, you get 2x the latency. You get the latency from the "real instrument" plus Live's added latency.

See what I mean?

[[nis]]

There is still latency while monitoring thats with every DAW. Let me say this again monitoring only.

There you said it. Whilst you are monitoring you have latency. The audio signal you feed through a software will be late by the amount of the roundtrip latency latency of your audio interface. This means that what you play is not in time. Live does not add any latency, it records what you play. If you want to be in time with the previously recorded track, you need to compensate your play.

[rhythminmind]

Well if Live recorded what i played then Live dosen't have recording compensation. The fact is if you monitor a track while recording (like you normally would) it will be late. Live & Live alone has this problem.

[[nis]]

I give up.

[rhythminmind]

Agree. It's at the pointless stage. The info is out there & people will decide whats best for there own needs.

[kb420]

I give up.

[jbone1313]

I give up.

Me too. But, I do appreciate you talking with us about this.

Even though I disagree, I appreciate it. Thank you.

[[nis]]

I give up.

Me too. But, I do appreciate you talking with us about this.

Even though I disagree, I appreciate it. Thank you.

You're welcome.

[kb420]

A lot of companies support team members would have never taken that kind of abuse on a forum.

I salute you!

[Machinesworking]

[nis] I have a question here, is jbone right about this at all? It seems like he's not, but if you could clarify that would be cool.

I get what you're saying, it's one reason why I think in order to use FX on my vocalist live, I'll have to get her to buy a couple pieces of hardware.

There's some confusion about latency going on here. There are two types of latency we're taking about: playback latency, and the latency Live adds when you're recording with monitoring on.

I can get used to the playback latency I hear when I'm playing (just like I would with a "real instrument"), but not the recorded latency. I want the notes to be recorded on time--not with the latency.

There's a big difference. Think about it like this: suppose you take a "real instrument", and mic it up. Lets say a piano. Then you record it with monitoring. Since Live adds latency to the recorded audio, you get 2x the latency. You get the latency from the "real instrument" plus Live's added latency.

See what I mean?[/quote]

[rhythminmind]

A lot of companies support team members would have never taken that kind of abuse on a forum.

I salute you!

This is true..
It wasn't messy until "some retards" to quote them early on in this thread took this on a negative path.
The original KVR thread & most issues discussed here are purely to inform. Not to bash.
Truth is Live is unique & excels in it's strengths. It is vital to my creative workflow. Just not for tracking. Ableton will continue to get my $ for ver 8

[stjohn]

cool thread lads, found it v informative reading! thanks