Bitwig Studio 1.1.9 RC-1

[llze]

Dom once said that pdc problems aren't hard to fix now with that flux compensator.

I'm just being funny but, it's the flux capacitor, what truly makes time travel possible....

hehe, yea true..sry, the heat limits my electrical brain efficiency

[Zimlee]

Hey guys,

I'm currently shopping for a livid controller and as I updated Bitwig to 1.1.9 RC-1, I noticed that they ''improved'' their scripts?

Does anyone have specifics details on which ones and what has been updated.

Also as of now which one would be your go to production/live machine from livid?

Cheers!
zimlee

EDIT: I found some info about the bug corrections on wiki.lividinstruments.com

[Ezzda]

For those who are interested or want to have a look what the report looked like...

Id like to see 3 very serious bugs fixed asap, as they are a part of PDC, which should ALWAYS be working.
Id also like to apologize for my terrible english. I dont know how to explain the issues, so I filmed a video of how to reproduce them.

Did the tests on 1.1.6., .7., 8. and 1.9.1 RC. All the same.

The first bug happens when you would want to split process an instrument.
I would make atleast 2 channels, both with audio recievers, which take audio from the instrument. Instrument would have no output.
I would also rote those 2 channels to a 3rd one.

When I would add plugins to first audio reciever, the both channels, would route a corrent PDC.
But if i would add any kind of a plugin to other audio recievers, which route to the 3rd channel, the pdc on them would break.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrWRCfaZLBY



The second bug happens with modulation and FX slots. Input to modulator would be PDCed, but what ever plugin it is modulating in the FX box, would have its modulation delayed by biggest channels latency ms.
Heres the video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OfZXJpr5r7k


The third bug is when automation is not PDCed. Happens just like that, like in ableton.

Id highly suggest dews to go trough PDC again, because that thing is not working at all anymore!

[goatgirl]

I did notice in the first video when you placed the ProQ2 and set to linear phase high setting, the inspector correctly displayed 209ms latency and matches the value to be expected from the fab filter manual. However, this is displayed in red. I am no expert, but that suggests there may be a problem there. I would look at your buffer settings in the audio preferences. If that is set too low, then that may be a contributing factor.

[Ezzda]

I did notice in the first video when you placed the ProQ2 and set to linear phase high setting, the inspector correctly displayed 209ms latency and matches the value to be expected from the fab filter manual. However, this is displayed in red. I am no expert, but that suggests there may be a problem there. I would look at your buffer settings in the audio preferences. If that is set too low, then that may be a contributing factor.

No, red is just indicating a high number, not an error. They display latencies all fine, its just that trough all the routing, those latencies dont add up correctly and bug out each other.
I set the latency high, to be able to better present the bug.

[goatgirl]

Indeed, though there is still a limit to what Bitwig will compensate, albeit it is usually quite a high number. It may also be worth letting Bitwig know what your settings are in the preferences, audio devices, driver, buffer etc.

[Ezzda]

Indeed, though there is still a limit to what Bitwig will compensate, albeit it is usually quite a high number. It may also be worth letting Bitwig know what your settings are in the preferences, audio devices, driver, buffer etc.

I wonder tho... All of you dont seem to know these bugs. What are you doing with bitwig?

[llze]

there was a poll going on once how much ms of latency should be compensated at maximum. Like how far the range should go. Since you set up several linear phase EQs, this might be out of the range.

And to answer your question, personaly i do not use bitwig with such routings.

[goatgirl]

I wonder tho... All of you dont seem to know these bugs. What are you doing with bitwig?

Can't speak for everyone... but I don't use any latency inducing plugins.

I have however, replicated the problem you described... curiosity got the better of me. The latency works great when everything is inline, but as you say, when you start splitting the audio with an audio receiver, and have different latencies, then there are issues.

Strangely , it you split an audio signal into 3 paths with different latency, only the one with the largest latency is correct, as seen in the image.

[goatgirl]

Forgot to add. I don't see it as a problem with too much latency, as when the latency is on the same track as the source, everything is fine. It just goes wrong when you split the signal, so some logic is being illogical

[Beerhunter]

i can confirm that behaviour as well,
but as far as i can tell, Fab Filter might be the problem ??

Could you check it on other DAW´s ?

Cause I use Pianoteq v5 and it does not cause any latency comparable to 3 instances of the FabFilter with settings "Linear" and "High" or "Max", and Pianoteq i guess is way more load on the CPU than Fab... correct me if i´m wrong.

@ Ezzda

have you talked to the Fab devs ?


cheers

[Beerhunter]

@ goatgirl

when i run just 1 instance of FabFilter after a polysynth on the same track, Settings: of FabFilter are "Linear" and "Max", letting the metronome tick, and stop the track it´s not stoping at the same time, and does not start at the same time....


just found this in the manual:

Linear-phase processing provides an answer to these problems. Linear-phase filters only change the magnitude of the audio, while leaving the phase untouched. However, linear-phase filters also have some disadvantages. First of all they introduce latency: the entire signal is delayed when passing through the plug-in. Higher processing resolution (for better response in the low frequencies), results in longer latency, but unfortunately this can also introduce 'pre-ring' that can make transients (e.g. a kick drum) lose their
edge.

When Linear Phase processing is selected, a Processing Resolution button becomes available.
Choosing the correct resolution is a compromise depending on the program material and your personal preference.

The following resolutions are available:
Low
provides linear-phase processing with a minimal latency. Use only with low Q settings, or when only changing the mid-high part of the spectrum. With a sample rate of 44.1 kHz, it results in a total latency of 3072 samples (about 70 ms).

Medium
is a good compromise between low-frequency resolution and latency and we recommend to use this in general for linear-phase processing. The total latency is 5120 samples at a sample rate of 44.1 kHz (about 116 ms).

High
gives great low-frequency resolution. If you need to use high Q settings when changing the low end of the spectrum, use this mode. The total latency is 9216 samples at a sample rate of 44.1 kHz (about 209 ms).

Very High
gives even better low-frequency resolution. The total latency is 17408 samples at a sample rate of 44.1 kHz (about 395 ms).

Maximum
results in very high low-frequency resolution at the expense of a very large latency and possible pre-echo
problems. The total latency here is 66560 samples at a sample rate of 44.1 kHz (about 1509 ms).


Note that changing EQ band frequencies in Linear Phase mode sounds just as smooth as when using the other modes, no zipper effects whatsoever. This might sound trivial, but it's actually quite unique in linear-phase processing!

Choosing a suitable processing mode
As already explained, in almost all normal mixing and mastering situations, Zero Latency mode or Natural Phase mode (with its even better accuracy and phase response) will be the best choice.

It is important to understand that linear-phase processing is not better or more transparent than normal processing, it is different!
Linear-phase EQ'ing is a problem-solving tool, in general only used to avoid phase cancellation problems.To learn mode about linear-phase vs. normal EQ'ing, watch Dan Worrall's excellent video
tutorial on the subject:
http://www.fabfilter.com/video/eq-linea ... imum-phase
.

and too be honest even 70ms is way to much to play in time, just my opinion.....

cheers

[goatgirl]

I've just been going by the bounces, that way I can see the different timings . The metronome may have its own issues.

I have re-tested with another latency plugin (Slick EQ) and I got similar results, so it is not just an issue with fabfilter.

[goatgirl]

@ goatgirl

when i run just 1 instance of FabFilter after a polysynth on the same track, Settings: of FabFilter are "Linear" and "Max", letting the metronome tick, and stop the track it´s not stoping at the same time, and does not start at the same time....

I have tried this and don't really see a major issue. There is a delay when I first press play, that I assume is equivalent to the latency. However, once it starts, the metronome and the polysynth play in time. Or am I missing something?

edit:
Looks like there is a delay when I press stop too, as sometimes extra notes get played when I stop.

[LLCoolJeans]

FIXED - Raw audio events are sometimes painted incorrectly if there is tempo automation.