FM9 Latency - Around 5ms?

[Random Hero]

Does this sound right? I'm getting around 202 samples / 4.2ms with just an amp and cab block in the grid. This increases to 235 samples / 4.9ms with a drive block. Adding a delay and reverb doesn't seem to affect it. FWIW, just an input and output block shows as 87 samples or 1.81ms. Granted, even with a loaded up lead sound, it only gets to 5.6ms but that's slower than the Kemper's constant latency setting which is around 4.9ms I think. It's often lower than that.

I thought these were supposed to be around 3ms? Is it a firmware thing?

 

[mr_fender]

I think that's about right for the FM9 and FM3. The Axe III has lower latency.

The Amp and Drive blocks are the primary source of the latency. They use oversampling to increase the audio quality and that adds latency. The IRs you choose can affect the latency too if they have any leading silence.

 

[unix-guy]

I reported to G66, because Fractal says in their website that you should contact the seller if you didn't bought direct.

Their tech-support guy, answered to me that he will test it properly and so he did. He tested the Axe FX III, the FM3 and the FM9 with an oscilloscope and he said that to his surprise, the Fm9 had 4.6ms of latency. In comparison, the Fm3 had 2.9ms and the Axe FX III had 2.2ms in quality mode.

Including a relevant quote from another thread where this topic originated.

This seems very odd. I would hope the FM9 would be at least as fast as the FM3.

@FractalAudio - does this seem correct?

 

[Aleksi]

Including a relevant quote from another thread where this topic originated.

This seems very odd. I would hope the FM9 would be at least as fast as the FM3.

@FractalAudio - does this seem correct?

Just guessing here, but perhaps this has to do with the FM9 having to pass the signal between processors/cores? My understanding is that it has a dedicated core for amp modeling.

Or it's a bug/feature

 

[Random Hero]

Including a relevant quote from another thread where this topic originated.

This seems very odd. I would hope the FM9 would be at least as fast as the FM3.

@FractalAudio - does this seem correct?

Yeah in and of itself it’s not particularly bothersome or noticeable but on some shows I use a Sennheiser EW-D wireless which has 2ms which can start to become more noticeable. Plus then once I go into the desk, digital IEMs are sent to me and so on…

 

[Random Hero]

Just guessing here, but perhaps this has to do with the FM9 having to pass the signal between processors/cores? My understanding is that it has a dedicated core for amp modeling.

Or it's a bug/feature

This is apparently what slows the Quad Cortex down between Rows on the grid so it makes sense?

 

[Aleksi]

This is apparently what slows the Quad Cortex down between Rows on the grid so it makes sense?

Yep. It's just speculation, however, so let's wait for Fractal to comment on this.

 

[KJB]

Interesting I upgraded to FM9 and when I'm practicing pick alternate picking when slower sounds very clear when I up the BPS let's say in 100s up to 160 the clarity of the notes are as not sharp expecially with a drive in front .
I'm wondering if this is addressed with a firmware update can improve the latency issue?

 

[rickboot]

Interesting I upgraded to FM9 and when I'm practicing pick alternate picking when slower sounds very clear when I up the BPS let's say in 100s up to 160 the clarity of the notes are as not sharp expecially with a drive in front .
I'm wondering if this is addressed with a firmware update can improve the latency issue?

Think you mean BPM unless your strings and picks are melting.

Latency should not affect the clarity. Notes would just arrive a few thousands of a second later but still be spaced the same. And if you want clarity reduce the distortion and ditch the drive.

 

[KJB]

Meant BPM type errors will try the drive deal thanks for helpful advice!!

 

[Cainer]

Sound travels roughly a foot a millisecond, so 5 ms latency would be the same effect as standing 5 feet further from your amp/speaker.

 

[Thomas Obester]

5ms latency from product + another 5ms when standing 5ft. from speaker = 10ms

 

[blaggers]

5ms latency from product + another 5ms when standing 5ft. from speaker = 10ms

5ms latency from product + no additional ms when wearing headphones/in ears standing 5ft from an unused speaker = 5ms

 

[sprint]

5ms latency from product + another 5ms when standing 5ft. from speaker = 10ms

+ throw in a few more ms with an outboard pedal, and you can suddenly be into noticeable territory. The familiar: "Xms = Xfeet, so don't worry about it" type comment is hilarious since it's cumulative latency that often sneaks up and bites you.

edit: so it makes sense to want every digital component in a signal chain to be as abdolutely low in latency as possible.

 

[200man]

Back in 2022 Clif provided this, with no FM9 included:
“
FWIW here are the results of the various modelers I have:
AmpliFire: 1.9 ms*
Axe-Fx III (Min Latency): 1.6 ms*
Axe-Fx III (Best Quality): 2.2 ms
FM3: 3.3 ms
Helix: 2.0 ms*
Kemper: 5.0 ms
QC: 4.8 ms **
UAD Dream: 2.4 ms*
”
Post #30: https://forum.fractalaudio.com/threads/latency-of-amp-modelers.184918/page-2

 

[unix-guy]

Back in 2022 Clif provided this, with no FM9 included:
“
FWIW here are the results of the various modelers I have:
AmpliFire: 1.9 ms*
Axe-Fx III (Min Latency): 1.6 ms*
Axe-Fx III (Best Quality): 2.2 ms
FM3: 3.3 ms
Helix: 2.0 ms*
Kemper: 5.0 ms
QC: 4.8 ms **
UAD Dream: 2.4 ms*
”
Post #30: https://forum.fractalaudio.com/threads/latency-of-amp-modelers.184918/page-2

That's helpful as it confirms the Axe Fx III and FM3 numbers already mentioned.

 

[Smilzo]

Including a relevant quote from another thread where this topic originated.

This seems very odd. I would hope the FM9 would be at least as fast as the FM3.

@FractalAudio - does this seem correct?

seems like FM9 4CM...

 

[Randalljax]

It would be unlikely the FM3 would be 3.3 and FM9 5.0 unless the dual amps is causing it

 

[200man]

I have a fairly spartan preset(one amp), but the 5ms number is accurate.
One signal is before and one signal is after:

 

[northern_fox]

5ms latency from product + no additional ms when wearing headphones/in ears standing 5ft from an unused speaker = 5ms

Wireless and the digital mixing consoles both add latency - this is the reason low modeler latency is important, rather than being able to "feel" it just from the unit itself. If you're also using wireless guitar, that adds a bit more too. Anyone using 4CM or serial fx loops will also add more. 5ms is totally within any reasonable expectation IMO - but just saying.