Reply To: QU32 with pro tools 12

Forums Forums Qu Forums Qu general discussions QU32 with pro tools 12 Reply To: QU32 with pro tools 12

#52374
Profile photo of Andreas
Andreas
Moderator

This sounds indeed you’re using the Qu primarily as an audio interface and perform all mixing inside ProTools. Latency shouldn’t be an issue at all and could easily be dealt with. Of course you need to determine your overall latency once and configure ProTools to automatically compensate for it.
Just pick some percussive tone, playback through your monitoring system, use a Microphone to pick up the sound and record that signal to a fresh track.
The recorded pulse is likely few mSec (4-6mSec) too late on your track which is caused by the sum of processing in ASIO/CoreAudio (i.e. 2×0.7mSec for 32 Sample Buffers at 48kHz), transport layer (2×250┬ÁSec HighSpeed USB), DAC and ADC within the digital Mixer (2×0.7mSec according to Qu Spec) and distance between Microphone/Ears and Speakers (3mSec per meter, 1mSec per feet). This calculation does not consider the human factor (ear-to-hand latency), which easily outrules the others.
Latency caused by USB is rather low due to the high frame rate (125┬ÁSec). Madi and Dante are network based protocols with probybaly lower framerates hence larger latency (low mSec range).
If I’d be picky with latency, I would go with USB.