Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
2021/03/06 at 11:50 pm #99620
I’m really interested to do a comparison between Dante & Waves in terms of RTL.
Hoping I can get a hold of a SQ Waves card in Melbourne to test it out.
It would make sense that Waves would advertise under 1ms latency, when used with a Soundgrid server likely (locking you to Waves plugs only). The Waves system is obviously built for purpose.
2021/03/06 at 6:34 am #99604Hey Brian
Exactly – most instances of UAD induce the same latency per instance as Waves (natively) for example – somewhere around 1-2ms per instance at 96k + 128 sample buffer.
DSP usage is definitely where it helps out though – as you mentioned.
A UAD plug-in might use up 2% DSP on my system per instance, whereas a Neural DSP amp sim may use 20% DSP per instance…
2021/03/02 at 1:21 am #99429Hey all!
I’m joining Keith Johnson from Allen & Heath tomorrow for a webinar based around my new touring setup: using plug-ins live with the SQ5 console. Join in at 8am AEDT (Melbourne), or click the link below to find out the equivalent time in your part of the world.🤓🤓🤓
2021/02/21 at 8:26 pm #99085@Europe
I’m using the touch-base driver on the Mac to give me touch functionality. A little bit of money, but it is totally worth it.
Correct – no reason that you can’t use the UAD liverack – especially now that A&H released the SQ MADI card (this wasn’t out when I invested in this setup). HOWEVER – the UAD liverack also only has optical MADI connectivity, so you would also need some kinda of converter to go from BNC-Optical. $$$!!!
2021/02/21 at 4:10 am #99064For me it’s by no means about achieving an ‘analog’ sound.
I do agree though, that while the additional SQ plugin options are nice (I don’t own them on my SQ, though I have used them on the D-Live), there are many characteristics to what specific plugins can do in terms of control and processing that are part of what give it the unique flavour. For example, an API 2500 compressor exhibits more aggressive characteristics than anything thats available on the d-Live or SQ in my opinion.
2021/02/21 at 2:52 am #99062@Hugh
Great question, thanks for asking.
Is your question alluding to why I use Dante for audio transport instead of using Waves?
For the particular show that I was working on, its a solo artist that is adapting full-band songs. I wanted to take a small input list (Guitar amp, looper, vocals) and create many other textures with the guitar to make the song arrangements more engaging and dynamic. A clean guitar DI from stage allows me to push this signal into many other layers of processing to build a mix into something much more detailed and varied that the original 3 channels. In particular, there are amp sims that i’m using in the plug-in world that audio consoles such as the SQ and the D-Live have no way of replicating.
In addition, I’m lucky enough to have great connections with a number of plugin manufacturers and it excites me to be able to attempt to bring them into the live domain.
2021/02/21 at 2:42 am #99061The pros for me are being able to add additional tones, control and processing that are outside of the realms of what the SQ can do. Don’t get me wrong, the SQ is an absolutely fantastic console for its price point, and the reason that it is the main driver behind this setup.
The cons for this particular setup is the additional gear involved, but for me its a non-issue as its a sacrifice i’m happy to make – in the name of doing something a bit outside-the-box, being a bit experimental with audio transport and processing in the live world, and generally just trying to trying to push the boundaries.
2021/02/21 at 2:39 am #99060Hi all,
I’ve posted a rig rundown video on YouTube to help explain some of the specifics.
2021/01/21 at 7:44 am #98240Update:
4 gigs successfully completed with this rig over the last 2 weeks.
I’ve been hosting a range of plugins by UAD, Neural DSP, Soundtoys and Waves. Dante is used as the audio transport, Liveprofessor is used as the plug-in host.
SQ controlling LP cues, sending midi messages to external processing.
Fun!
More info to come on this setup.
Attachments:
You must be logged in to view attached files.2020/07/12 at 10:15 pm #93312Thanks for the detail Keith, appreciated.
So I’m assuming that the D-Live handles this differently, yes?
2020/07/11 at 12:48 pm #93285Update..
This seems to be running pretty sweet – I’m looking at about 7ms RTL based on channel/mixbus insert and a further masterbus insert via dante/UAD & Live Professor as the plugin host.
LP reporting 0.49ms on the input and output. Buffer @ 64 samples, which seems pretty stable right now, but need to try and see what breaks it.
Based on a channel going through a sub-group LP insert, then master bus LP insert – calculated something like this:
Sub-Group Insert
SQ5 > Dante 0.25ms
Dante > LP 0.49ms
LP Distressor Insert 1.6ms
LP > Dante 0.49ms
Dante > SQ5 0.25msMaster Bus Insert
SQ5 > Dante 0.25ms
Dante > LP 0.49ms
LP Shadow Hills Insert 1.0ms
LP > Dante 0.49ms
Dante > SQ5 0.25msCalculates to about 5.6ms, but then I guess factor in the fixed latency of the SQ5 which is 0.7ms, and we’re probably pretty close.
2020/06/11 at 1:26 pm #92513Received my SQ a couple of weeks ago, and funnily enough – bent USB for me too. I don’t believe it was retailer, but I’m not bothered by it to be honest. Seems to work fine, and USB feels snug in the slot.
-
AuthorPosts
