Ableton Forum

Hello everyone, this is more or less what i would like to achieve
http://youtu.be/XXgiIKMTv9A
the guy apparently is using just asio and no audio interface and the result is good enough to me..

Well i'm on a macbook pro 2.4 ghz dual core and coreaudio is not doing the job properly, because the actual delay is around 50 ms which is not good to perform live (overall latency is 14 ms in audio preferences after the tutorial audio setup).

First conclusion: the pc in the video is performing better than a macbook built in audio card... of course you can't consider audio quality with a youtube video but the response is better.

Question: is it possible to do this with a MPB and a proper audio interface?
Beardyman is doing all of his beatboxing with boss loopers....
In 2012 a boos loop machine is still better than a computer? I refuse to think so....

Tim Exile (another great artist) is doing live beatboxing through a laptop... so somehow it's possible i guess....

What audio interface should i use?

I guess you could probably help even if you have any experiences in live guitar looping / recording or any device to the audio input!

Thanks a lot for your time!

Bye

What is your price range? There are a ton of options. Also, if you have a mac, core audio is usually pretty good. How is the actual delay 50ms, when the overall latency is 14ms?

Try changing your sample rate to get a lower latency.

For live looping, I use an m-audio fast track pro, and it's fine. I am in the market for a much better interface though, as you get what you pay for. I personally just want better overall sound, and more i/o's for more instrumentation.

if i set the sr to 96k and the buffer to 256 i get a latency of 6 ms with my mbp (i7 2.5Ghz, 8gb ram, 7200rpm hd) and coreaudio.
thats pretty good. it depends on how many effects and stuff you want to use. if its to much your mac won`t be able to handle it, of course. but if your goal is "simple" livelooping without huge effect racks, dozens of tracks and many hungry 3rd party-plugs you should be ok.
maybe you can try even lower buffer sizes if your setup is very minimalistic

and keep in mind, the human mind can't discern 15ms or lower.

Cymatic Kicks wrote:and keep in mind, the human mind can't discern 15ms or lower.

according to Levitin, and my ears, its 3ms

I don't know who Letvin is, but according to this article:

http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/jan05/a ... sician.htm

I stand corrected, thank you.

simmerdown wrote:

Cymatic Kicks wrote:and keep in mind, the human mind can't discern 15ms or lower.

according to Levitin, and my ears, its 3ms

Some claim they can detect 1.5 ms. It makes you wonder if there is some fault in measurement.

i believe 1.5...all levels of perception out there...i guess if you cant hear 10ms you should could yerself lucky, everything sounds frikkn great! lol


and yes, all scales relative (except that 3ms number, that was in a lab)...final arbiter is your own ears, whatever the numbers say

the figure depends on the experimental method used to measure the perception of latency, and of course individual differences.

to the original question, the latency reported in the Live preferences shows you the lowest possible latency attainable. it does not include any latency that may be induced by any effects or fancy routing you may be using in your set. try starting with no effects, and pay attention to how the latency increases as you add them one by one.

yeh as i recall, the 3ms figure was an average...so some people must have been way better...i'll look it up again