Latency Indicator in FM9-Edit - Similar to CPU Usage Indicator

WhiteRoom

WhiteRoom

Inspired
I would find it really useful to be able to get an idea of the impact on latency of adding different blocks as I build Presets in FM9-Edit. Obviously this would require the functionality to be added to the firmware in the first instance :)
 
From what I understand, only the Amp, Cab and (maybe) Drive blocks add latency and it's a specific number of samples per block.

If you know that information it would be fairly trivial to do the math.
 
WhiteRoom said:
I would find it really useful to be able to get an idea of the impact on latency of adding different blocks as I build Presets in FM9-Edit. Obviously this would require the functionality to be added to the firmware in the first instance :)
Click to expand...

It sounds like you might be under the impression that more block types incur latency than actually do. A drive block is about 0.5 msec. An amp block is about 1 msec, depending on the oversampling option. Send/return is 16 samples. Pitch varies but is usually about 10 msec. Other than that, there really aren't any blocks with latency, unless you explicitly use a latency-incurring option, for example compression lookahead or an IR with leading silence.
 
I requested this because overall latency does make a big difference. I have absolutely no idea what the latency cost of different Blocks is, why should I?

What I have read Cliff saying is that Pitch algorithms incur latency, and some of the reason some things don't get implemented on the FM9 vs the Axe III is related to latency impact which isn't quite as much of a problem on the Axe.

Regarding the 2 milliseconds jibe, if you think that 2 milliseconds doesn't make a difference, how about 5? The Headrush Prime was at between 8-10 milliseconds, and even higher for intensive Presets and a LOT of people were noticing it and complaining about it, so much so in fact, that Headrush supposedly released a firmware update to attempt to address some of the latency issues.

I haven't noticed latency particularly on the FM9, and reportedly it's somewhere around 5-6ms BUT if it does increase under certain circumstances to say 8 or 9ms, trust me you will notice when playing. I know this because the latency differences for various settings on my audio interface are noticeable when I'm playing guitar when the differences are as little as 5ms. If you search "human detectable latency in audio" you'll find this confirmed in enough studies to make it credible.

For me it would be useful because I hate it when I can detect it when I'm playing. I suppose you could argue that since it hasn't been a problem so far why do I care - it's just useful to know when I might be pushing the limits of what I'm happy with, similar to CPU. There are a number of synth plugins that I use which indicate current latency and I find it helpful when I'm working with modular stuff, where each component can have a significant impact on the overall latency - especially when they are 3rd party components.

If the FM9 could never really exceed 6-7ms then yeah it wouldn't be worth it. Do we know that?
 
WhiteRoom said:
re update to attempt to address some of the latency BUT if it does increase under certain circumstances to say 8 or 9ms, trust me you will notice when playing.
Click to expand...

Nah.

Latency is never a problem with FAS units. It can only become an issue when used in combination with other digital issues (through additional AD/DA conversion) that add latency.

All about latency:
https://wiki.fractalaudio.com/wiki/index.php?title=Latency
 
I defeat my own wishes all the time. I was thinking of adding a wireless into the mix but latency (and having to break apart my board while still having a cable for the guitar synth) was the killer of that dream. It kinda sucks. I'll give a symbolic +1 if it helps :D
 
Latency on the FM9 after using the rack version of the AXE3 (instantaneous) its noticeable and it blows that the fm9 doesnt have low latency mode. Does anyone know where in the forum i can request a low latency update? I know the fm9 turbo can handle it.
 
WhiteRoom said:
What I have read Cliff saying is that Pitch algorithms incur latency,
Click to expand...

All pitch algorithms on any device by any manufacturer incur latency. That's just a given.

My understanding is that this is because you need enough time to be able to sample and analyze low pitches which have longer wavelengths, so you have to wait longer until you've "seen" it that wavelength peak to peak (or trough to trough).
 
Nicko Dyshy said:
Latency on the FM9 after using the rack version of the AXE3 (instantaneous) its noticeable and it blows that the fm9 doesnt have low latency mode. Does anyone know where in the forum i can request a low latency update? I know the fm9 turbo can handle it.
Click to expand...
What are you talking about?

Both devices have latency and the difference between them is about 2ms.

It is impossible to not have latency.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom