I need a powered monitor without dsp (no latency)

overture1922 said:
Today I measured the cheap Alto tx310, even this has latency (I thought it would not have since apparently it does not have dsp)


View attachment 108792
Click to expand...
Those signals look funny to me relative to one another. Maybe you're right about where signal onset really happens, but...?

And I think the only way you'd have zero latency is if you actually tapped the amplifier output, not using a mic at all. IDK how much "latency" there is in a voicecoil response, but there is inertial mass to move, etc. Then there's the distance between mic and speaker.

I do empathize: with IEM's in particular, I've been in situations where the latency of my AxeFX combined with the latency of the mixer plus a monitor mixer all combined to be distracting on a subconscious level. But I guess I've learned to tolerate it, just as I've learned not to clench my jaw when singing even though the other guitar player is out of tune.
 
greiswig said:
Those signals look funny to me relative to one another. Maybe you're right about where signal onset really happens, but...?

And I think the only way you'd have zero latency is if you actually tapped the amplifier output, not using a mic at all. IDK how much "latency" there is in a voicecoil response, but there is inertial mass to move, etc. Then there's the distance between mic and speaker.

I do empathize: with IEM's in particular, I've been in situations where the latency of my AxeFX combined with the latency of the mixer plus a monitor mixer all combined to be distracting on a subconscious level. But I guess I've learned to tolerate it, just as I've learned not to clench my jaw when singing even though the other guitar player is out of tune.
Click to expand...
The worst is when you are trying to harmonize with a great singer, and someone else comes in in the key of potato. I’m not a strong singer to begin with but I can harmonize just fine. It’s the blasts of feedback or the other guys who are vocally great apes that kill me.
 
Bruce Sokolovic said:
Thank you. How far is the mic from the physical speaker? Remember every inch is approx 1ms. If the speaker is recessed behind the cover even just 2”, you are giving the direct signal a 2ms head start.
Click to expand...


According to Presonus webpage and other articles, there is:

3ms in 1 meter distance (around 39,3 inches). This equals to 0.08ms in 1 inch distance.

Assuming that the Alto is 100% analog (I don´t know) and the measured latency was 0,5ms than the distance between the speaker and cable should be 6.55 inches. I can guarantee you that the distance was way closer since the speaker is close to the cover. In another test using an analog multimedia speaker there was 0 latency between the two tracks.
 
overture1922 said:
According to Presonus webpage and other articles, there is:

3ms in 1 meter distance (around 39,3 inches). This equals to 0.08ms in 1 inch distance.

Asuming that the Alto is 100% analog (I don´t know) and the measured latency was 0,5ms than the distance beetwen the speaker and cable should be 6.55 inches. I can garantee you that the distancer was way closer since the speaker is close to the cover.

In another test using an analog multimedia speaker there was 0 latency beetwen the two tracks.
Click to expand...
Yes I was wrong. This is correct. It’s roughly a foot a ms not an inch. I knew this. Brain fart
 
greiswig said:
And I think the only way you'd have zero latency is if you actually tapped the amplifier output, not using a mic at all. IDK how much "latency" there is in a voicecoil response, but there is inertial mass to move, etc. Then there's the distance between mic and speaker.
Click to expand...
It was not possible for me to measure the latency using the amp output (of course it would be better).
 
overture1922 said:
Assuming that the Alto is 100% analog (I don´t know) and the measured latency was 0,5ms than the distance between the speaker and cable should be 6.55 inches. I can guarantee you that the distance was way closer since the speaker is close to the cover. In another test using an analog multimedia speaker there was 0 latency between the two tracks.
Click to expand...
Maybe there was some kind of processing without delay compensation that caused the problem (mic pre emulation, etc.). IDK...maybe that was raw track vs. loopback instead of cable loopback vs speaker -> mic loopback or something....or Reaper got the delay compensation wrong. There's a lot of subtle things that can go wrong with these kinds of measurements. They're actually not as straightforward as people think, and there are "hidden" settings that can easily screw it up.

I'm not saying that's what happened...but I've been caught out by those kinds of things before.

I would say that I doubt it's 100% analog just because it's a modern budget monitor speaker...they pretty much all have some DSP. But, it doesn't have any EQ options and only advertises a limiter...which could be analog. Even if it is just the limiter, it's probably actually cheaper to just convert to digital and then straight back and call the ADC clipping a limiter than it is to build an analog limiter. IDK...maybe I'm wrong about that, but a straightforward 1-channel ADC/DAC loop probably only costs a few cents. The parts to make an analog limiter should at least be a few dollars.

Bruce Sokolovic said:
Yes I was wrong. This is correct. It’s roughly a foot a ms not an inch. I knew this. Brain fart
Click to expand...
It happens to us all.
 
marsonic said:
Maybe there was some kind of processing without delay compensation that caused the problem (mic pre emulation, etc.). IDK...maybe that was raw track vs. loopback instead of cable loopback vs speaker -> mic loopback or something....or Reaper got the delay compensation wrong. There's a lot of subtle things that can go wrong with these kinds of measurements. They're actually not as straightforward as people think, and there are "hidden" settings that can easily screw it up.
Click to expand...
The key thing is that one speaker gave me 0 latency and the other gave me some latency using virtually the same conditions for both. How can you explain that?
 
Is there any delay introduced with the mic pres? Looks like the player went in LINE and the mic went thru the pre. Could be some circuitry there.

Edit: disregard. Looks like they both went in line level. Be sure channel 1 bypasses the pre though.
 
Last edited:
overture1922 said:
The key thing is that one speaker gave me 0 latency and the other gave me some latency using virtually the same conditions for both. How can you explain that?
Click to expand...
Forgot that.

Sorry....I'm talking about this a few places trying to figure some things out. If you got that result, you almost certainly got it right.

I think we're all but forced to conclude that it has some DSP whether it says it does or not.

Personally...I'm starting to wonder if it's not better to just use simple studio monitors (though they're hard to find without DSP now too) and IR for quiet and a SS power amp and real cab without IR for loud.
 
marsonic said:
Personally...I'm starting to wonder if it's not better to just use simple studio monitors (though they're hard to find without DSP now too) and IR for quiet and a SS power amp and real cab without IR for loud.
Click to expand...
Yes, after reading this thread I started to consider this possibility.
 
0.5 ms is imperceptible as latency.
And yes, there’s definitely a DSP in the circuit if there is latency. But 0.5 ms is extremely low and should not be perceived.
 
Patzag said:
0.5 ms is imperceptible as latency.
And yes, there’s definitely a DSP in the circuit if there is latency. But 0.5 ms is extremely low and should not be perceived.
Click to expand...
the point has to keep getting re-iterated in these latency related theads - it's NOT about the latency in any one component and whether it's percievable or not. it IS about the cumulative amount of latency in the whole signal chain and how closely that approaches, or exceeds a given user's personal tolerance (which can vary from person to person). Tracking + minimizing latency in each component as much as possible is important so that one's whole assembled rig can remain viable and open to expansion without pushing the total latency past the point of tolerance. For my needs, any monitors dsp is a waste of latency margin.
 
Last edited:
sprint said:
the point has to keep getting re-iterated in these latency related theads - it's NOT about the latency in any one component and whether it's percievable or not. it IS about the cumulative amount of latency in the whole signal chain and how closely that approaches, or exceeds a given user's personal tolerance (which can vary from person to person). Tracking + minimizing latency in each component as much as possible is important so that one's whole assembled rig can remain viable and open to expansion without pushing the total latency past the point of tolerance. For my needs, any monitors dsp is a waste of latency margin.
Click to expand...
You Took The Words Right Out Of My Mouth
 
I’m not an advocate of latency. By any stretch of the imagination.
But 0.5ms is actually negligible, even added to the 3ms of the FM3.
The point I was making, and it’s not gain saying the OP at all, is that a professional monitor will not add perceptible latency.
Yes, if you add the FM3 to a Bluetooth monitor you’re not going to like it. But please tell me, could you feel the latency of the Alto?
If so, you are much more sensitive to it than I will ever be.

I am very sensitive to phase issues and comb filtering. These drive me mad and are why I can’t use Xitone wedges that use the Dayton amps. Their DSP induces horrible phase artifacts that drive me mad.

Or it might be the latency and I just didn’t know it! 😂
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom