latency in Sonar...
-
- KVRAF
- 1959 posts since 10 Aug, 2004 from Valencia, Spain.
Hi
I've been using FL for 2 years now with my latency set at 11ms; no problems in general.
These days I'm trying Sonar's demo cos I'm interested in that program, but I'm having problems with latency in Sonar. I run FL as a plugin and I play a song which gives me no problems at all when using FL standalone, but in Sonar, with CPU not going past 60-70%, it produces intensive crackles. I triied both ASIO and WDM drivers of my terratec dmx 6 fire, but no good results; I can't get less than 15 ms of latency,and even with that and a higher latency, I get the same crackles.
any advice? thanks
I've been using FL for 2 years now with my latency set at 11ms; no problems in general.
These days I'm trying Sonar's demo cos I'm interested in that program, but I'm having problems with latency in Sonar. I run FL as a plugin and I play a song which gives me no problems at all when using FL standalone, but in Sonar, with CPU not going past 60-70%, it produces intensive crackles. I triied both ASIO and WDM drivers of my terratec dmx 6 fire, but no good results; I can't get less than 15 ms of latency,and even with that and a higher latency, I get the same crackles.
any advice? thanks
-
Stupid American Pig Stupid American Pig https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=4753
- KVRAF
- 7065 posts since 25 Nov, 2002 from not sure
I had better luck using WDM with my 6 fire. I set the DMA buffer(I think that is what it was called?) in the driver applet to 1ms, and I could get a solid 6 ms in sonar 2.2. I havent had the card since I have upgraded to V 4 and 5...
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 1959 posts since 10 Aug, 2004 from Valencia, Spain.
I tried my WDM drivers but no luck; actually, it was even worse. I can get less than 15ms and even then it crackles. maybe I'm not doing it right, right?
-
- KVRian
- 897 posts since 2 Aug, 2001 from norway
hmm.. i struggled for long to get decent latency with the dmx 6 fire in a computer music lab. but i managed it in the end with the asio driver.. but heck if remember what i did
there was some buffer setting or something hidden deep down somewhere.
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 1959 posts since 10 Aug, 2004 from Valencia, Spain.
my latency in FL is not bad, not having many problems...
-
- KVRian
- 897 posts since 2 Aug, 2001 from norway
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 1959 posts since 10 Aug, 2004 from Valencia, Spain.
damn! then I'm not alone. thx
-
- KVRer
- 7 posts since 5 Jan, 2006
Hello origami., i've been using the FLstudio long time , and i tried Sonar., but really., in my opinion., if you know how to use Flstudio very well, and I know you know cause i listened to your songs.origami wrote:Hi
I've been using FL for 2 years now with my latency set at 11ms; no problems in general.
These days I'm trying Sonar's demo cos I'm interested in that program, but I'm having problems with latency in Sonar. I run FL as a plugin and I play a song which gives me no problems at all when using FL standalone, but in Sonar, with CPU not going past 60-70%, it produces intensive crackles. I triied both ASIO and WDM drivers of my terratec dmx 6 fire, but no good results; I can't get less than 15 ms of latency,and even with that and a higher latency, I get the same crackles.
any advice? thanks
Then., i think that you dont need to use sonar., i think that it is better suited for a studio that record bands with several audio inputs, and outputs,.. For electronic music creations., like you do., or dance., house., hiphop., and many others that dont need intensive audio tracks., i think that keep using the flstudio is a good choice., and better if you already know how to work with it..,
My personal experience with sonar was good., but using it a few days i realized that wiht flstudio i can use my .wav samples, my vsts and in the end make my music faster, better, and the way i like to do it.
Try it,. and then you tell my what you think., may be you like more sonar than fl.
Anyway, trying new soft is always good.
Greetings!
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 1959 posts since 10 Aug, 2004 from Valencia, Spain.
I agree with you. FL is like a second skin to me. However, I had the 'dream' of combining both. But again, I'm more or less determined now to keep using FL. Though I'm a bit scared, since so many people are having problems with FL6...The problem also is it's not very comfortable for my hardware synth, but I'll look for the most convenient methods.
and btw, thanks for listening to my music, mate. big thanks.
and btw, thanks for listening to my music, mate. big thanks.
-
- KVRian
- 1378 posts since 22 Jan, 2005 from Andorra
Hay una maxima en la vida que no deberias olvidar: si va bien no lo cambies. 
PS: if something works great, don't change it!
PS: if something works great, don't change it!
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 1959 posts since 10 Aug, 2004 from Valencia, Spain.
Hay una maxima en la vida que no deberias olvidar: si va bien no lo cambies
Totalmente de acuerdo. Cambio al inglés para los demás jejeje. I totally agree with you. However, FL is not the best for working with hardware synths. But anyway I think I'll keep using it until I'm pretty sure there's another pro0gram which suits my needs and works great in my system.
Gracias.
Totalmente de acuerdo. Cambio al inglés para los demás jejeje. I totally agree with you. However, FL is not the best for working with hardware synths. But anyway I think I'll keep using it until I'm pretty sure there's another pro0gram which suits my needs and works great in my system.
Gracias.
-
- KVRian
- 1378 posts since 22 Jan, 2005 from Andorra
Have you tried EnergyXT? Very midi and audio routable and modular. And cheaper, too. Best 39€ ever invested.