latency

Forums › Forums › iLive Forums › Archived iLive Discussions › latency

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 16 total)
1 2
  • Author
    Posts
  • 2012/02/21 at 6:33 pm #22939
    Profile photo of dshriverdshriver
    Participant

    What is the total latency of the iLive. How long does it take to go from input socket>AD conversion >dynamic processing>inserts (fx, etc)>DA conversion >output socket

    Is this a fixed latency or does it vary based on what dynamics are engaged? Does routing an IP via a group increase latency? Does adding an insert FX increase latency?

    Thanks!

    -d

    2012/02/22 at 4:58 am #29594
    Profile photo of Anonymous
    Inactive

    Uhm!! Interesting. I never really cared, but ill take some measurements soon.

    Gil Parente
    Design & Integration
    Entertainment Arts, Inc.
    iLive 176, T112
    iDR48 , iDR16, iDR10
    Multiple iPads
    Dante
    Etc..

    2012/02/22 at 7:53 am #29595
    Profile photo of inlinemediainlinemedia
    Participant

    hi!

    i have done various time-measurements on my ilive ;)
    if someone wants that – please contact me!

    greetz,
    andee

    —
    andreas putz
    foh engineer
    office@inlinemedia.at

    2012/02/22 at 3:54 pm #29601
    Profile photo of Anonymous
    Inactive

    Search and ye shall find….

    [:)]

    [url][https://iliveforum.allen-heath.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=1130&SearchTerms=Latency/url]

    http://www.TotalLiveSound.com

    2012/02/22 at 6:04 pm #29673
    Profile photo of inlinemediainlinemedia
    Participant

    @ graham: nice – but there are differences in latency if you use an aux, group, matrix, …

    that’s why i made these measurements ;)

    greetz,
    andee

    —
    andreas putz
    foh engineer
    office@inlinemedia.at

    2012/02/23 at 1:55 am #29676
    Profile photo of Anonymous
    Inactive

    Put all the measurements online then, Why keep them to yourself? Or are you the latency police?

    http://www.TotalLiveSound.com

    2012/02/23 at 7:44 am #29678
    Profile photo of inlinemediainlinemedia
    Participant

    … why should i keep it by myself?? i wrote that anybody can have this sheet … ;)

    here it is – especially for you, graham ;)

    https://www.andreas-putz.com/tech_files.html

    greetz,
    andee

    —
    andreas putz
    foh engineer
    office@inlinemedia.at

    2012/02/24 at 10:42 am #29685
    Profile photo of woutertwoutert
    Participant

    I wouldn’t use white noise for latency measurements.

    Since this is quite randomly generated noise, it’s harder for the software to find the exact latency, moreover because you’re not constantly in the digital domain. I would use a less random source like music.

    To me, the 1,3ms is significant and maybe the 0.5ms difference between “mixrack local” and “mixrack to surface”. The 0.1ms differences between using a group or matrix, to me, are less significant.

    One could argue that it’s a pity that there isn’t a latency correction in the board, just like DAW software does. Does anyone know if other brands implement this?

    Wouter
    IDR32, R72, Dante, Mixpad
    laptop, TP-Link TL-WR1043ND

    2012/02/24 at 1:33 pm #29686
    Profile photo of DaveDave
    Participant

    Latency correction just adds more latency. Hopefully such a feature would be switchable for those that don’t find a need.

    iDr48/T-112/MADI

    2012/02/24 at 3:00 pm #29687
    Profile photo of inlinemediainlinemedia
    Participant

    hi all!

    … white noise is the best stimulus you can use for such measurements ;)
    why? because you have equal power within a fixed bandwidth – music will be more randomly, of course!

    and no – the software does not correct the internal latency – so it is like it is!

    greetz,
    andreas

    —
    andreas putz
    foh engineer
    office@inlinemedia.at

    2012/02/24 at 11:35 pm #29688
    Profile photo of SteffenRSteffenR
    Participant

    quote:

    Originally posted by inlinemedia

    hi all!

    … white noise is the best stimulus you can use for such measurements ;)

    Seriously, it’s better to use a MLS or short pulses. MLS sounds like white noise but it has no random components. Short pulses contain the whole spectrum, also very good for measuring.
    But to be fair, the results would not be that different, I guess.

    SRV-AVB
    R-72, iDR-16, xDR-16, Dante

    2012/02/24 at 11:47 pm #29689
    Profile photo of SteffenRSteffenR
    Participant

    quote:

    Originally posted by woutert

    I wouldn’t use white noise for latency measurements.

    Since this is quite randomly generated noise, it’s harder for the software to find the exact latency, moreover because you’re not constantly in the digital domain. I would use a less random source like music.

    To find sync points is possible…music is not really better…

    SRV-AVB
    R-72, iDR-16, xDR-16, Dante

    2012/02/24 at 11:51 pm #29690
    Profile photo of SteffenRSteffenR
    Participant

    some explanations from the developers…

    https://iliveforum.allen-heath.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=1840

    SRV-AVB
    R-72, iDR-16, xDR-16, Dante

    2012/02/25 at 2:08 am #29691
    Profile photo of CMattECMattE
    Participant

    There is no way to have no latency in a digital system. I am a bit surprised not everything has the same latency. I don’t yet use any fancy routing so I’m okay, but would like a “delay compensation” option to keep things phase accurate.

    T112/48, MacBook Pro, D-link DIR-815, iPad 1 w/mixpad, Dante card feeding a Mac Mini w/DVS.

    2012/02/25 at 6:43 am #29692
    Profile photo of SteffenRSteffenR
    Participant

    A delay compensation would keep phase coherency but will introduce more latency.

    SRV-AVB
    R-72, iDR-16, xDR-16, Dante

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 16 total)
1 2
  • The forum ‘Archived iLive Discussions’ is closed to new topics and replies.