Before I file a bug report on this I wanted to ask here, to avoid wasting peoples time.
So, I run on Windows with a Focusrite Scarlett 4i4 and this is generally how I set things up for vocal recording:
I have a separate Recording mixer track that takes the audio input and I generally only run a noise gate here. This track is then sent to a "Recording FX" track where I have a basic reverb (for mood ) and Pitcher or WavesTune which is in turn set to output directly to ASIO. The setup allow me to record completely dry audio if I arm the Recording track (with or without noise gate depending on if pre- or post-), or with FX if I instead arm the Recording FX track, with virtually no feedback delay (even with large buffers). Happy days.
Now, obviously the recorded audio will be delayed and off grid as I have other playback tracks with generators and FX, nothing strange there, and as far as I can tell there are two ways of compensating for this:
1. Use the Input latency compensation to adjust the recorded audio (positive values, generally)
2. Set the track latency of the armed track i.e. "Set from...master"
Now, option 2 works pretty damn good actually as I don't have to mess around with entering values manually BUT it doesn't update if I modify anything else that affects latency. I have to "Set from...master" again. This is annoying but I can live with it and to be honest I don't think that this is the intended use, as it's more for compensating for ill-behaved plugs. But should it not, or could it not, be updated AUTOMATICALLY as I have said that I want to take it from master?
Option 1 is what I understand you SHOULD use to compensate for latency (event->all your plugs and routing->headphones->sing->sample) but how do you estimate the value and does it actually behave as expected?
So, I did an experiment, simply recording the metronome by sticking the headphones on the mic and recorded the result. I then opened the clip in Edison and measured the delay from grid to the start of the sample. I then entered this value into the "Input latency compensation" and recorded again. Now the audio is ahead of grid with more or less the same value. I divided the value with 2 and the audio is more or less on grid, voila! Now, there is always a 40-60 sample offset that I just can't seem to get rid of regardless which is also strange) but:
Is this the way it is supported to work, that I should divide by 2? And if so, why? I can mention that the calculated output + plugs delay in the audio settings is of no use here, from what I've been able to tell. Is there a better process to get this spot on?
Anyone?
Latency compensation at recording, how is it actually supposed to work?
Return to “FL Studio Users Forum (Looptalk)”
Forum rules
Please read them here.
Please read them here.
[You can only see part of this thread as you are not logged in to the forums]
Re: Latency compensation at recording, how is it actually supposed to work?
Understanding latency is DAWs is like studying ...
Re: Latency compensation at recording, how is it actually supposed to work?
LeCroix wrote: ↑Wed Apr 21, 2021 4:43 pm
Unders...
Re: Latency compensation at recording, how is it actually supposed to work?
Is your overall recording result bad?
Re: Latency compensation at recording, how is it actually supposed to work?
Ked O.P. wrote: ↑Wed Apr 21, 2021 10:55 pm
Is y...
Re: Latency compensation at recording, how is it actually supposed to work?
It's always been off for me but I have always j...
Re: Latency compensation at recording, how is it actually supposed to work?
Yeah, it seems like everyone got problems with ...
Re: Latency compensation at recording, how is it actually supposed to work?
Better to say something about it if you think i...
Re: Latency compensation at recording, how is it actually supposed to work?
I filed a bug report, let's see what they say. ...