ASIO1 vs ASIO2

[pkole]

Does anyone know the difference between asio1 and asio2?
Which one do you use and why?

[Mr Arkadin]

i use ASIO2 but i can't remember why. It's the latest ASIO driver anyway so if you can use it. i think it added some features to do with latency free monitoring - which never affected us in Scope anyway . i found this from 1999:

"ASIO 2.0 Enhanced Sync options.

A mechanism has been added to allow sample accurate positioning. In its first version ASIO handled the synchronism of data being sent across the various outputs, but absolute positioning information was provided by MIDI Time Code. For most users this didn't pose a problem. However if data was transferred from an ADAT type device, the ‚absolute' positioning of the data transferred was effectively quantized to the nearest quarter frame; when transferring the data back, sample accurate placement back on the original device was not possible. ASIO 2.0 solves this problem by defining a protocol to define the absolute time. For instance, if a card has an ADAT port, it may provide time-code to ASIO and from there to the host, such that sample accurate sync is possible.

ASIO 2.0 Shares Hardware with other ASIO 2.0 Applications.

Now it is possible to have multiple ASIO 2.0 applications running on the same machine without the first one to get started grabbing the ASIO hardware for itself. As the applications are switched, the ASIO control is handed over to the next ASIO application. As more and more ASIO applications appear, this feature becomes more important.

Direct Monitoring ­ Zero Latency Auditioning.

ASIO 2.0 implements an additional protocol that allows Direct Monitoring, avoiding the delays associated with Operating system buffering schemes and drivers. ASIO 1.0 already provided a mechanism for low latency through processing, where for example the 750 milliseconds of the Window Multimedia system can be reduced to 40 milliseconds for a well designed driver; ASIO 2.0 goes further and allows any ASIO input to be directly assigned to any ASIO output when the user engages the record monitor function in the application.

These changes are downwardly compatible with existing ASIO applications and hardware that supports the ASIO 1.0 protocol. For an application to benefit from these new features, both ASIO host application and supported hardware need to conform to the ASIO 2.0 protocol. "

[hubird]

perfect

[pkole]

Very nice indeed.
Thanks.

[YISH313z]

I know the thread is old but just wanted to add that Steinberg created an unofficial Multi-Client driver for Asio, works by installing an ASIO proxy that allows multiple apps to connect to it(proxy driver) and in turn connects to the hardware asio driver.

cheers

[Bud Weiser]

I know the thread is old but just wanted to add that Steinberg created an unofficial Multi-Client driver for Asio, works by installing an ASIO proxy that allows multiple apps to connect to it(proxy driver) and in turn connects to the hardware asio driver.

cheers

Did you ever try it in a realworld scenario ?

When I tried it years ago w/ SCOPE 4.0, Reaper 3.xx, Plogue Bidule demo and Phead Reason 4,- it crackled.
That was on a WinXP SP2 single processor Pentium 4 northwood 2.4GHz machine and w/ a 15DSP SCOPE PCI card.

But now, I´ve found this ...
http://www.native-instruments.com/forum ... stcount=29
http://www.native-instruments.com/forum ... stcount=30

I wonder if that driver was updated or improved ever.

Bud

[YISH313z]

I tried it with Reaper and 2 FLStudio instances with no unusual issues. Of course running more than one audio app taxes the system for sure.

[Bud Weiser]

I tried it with Reaper and 2 FLStudio instances with no unusual issues.

o.k.,- thx ...

Of course running more than one audio app taxes the system for sure.

Yep, that´s true,- but even on the "slow" machine I mentioned above, Reason 4 rewired into Reaper didn´t crackle but Reason 4 and Reaper using individual input pairs into the multiclient ASIO proxy driver, this using SCOPE 4 ASIO driver (w/ asioscope_cubase_4.1_patch) crackled at same buffer/ ULLI settings (16Bit/44.1K/7ms).
I had the same results w/ Reason and Bidule.

Now, I wonder if asioscope_cubase_4.1_patch was for SCOPE 4.5 only and crackles were caused by usage of the SCOPE ASIO driver patch w/ SCOPE 4.0.
Anyone ? Gary ?

Bud

[garyb]

nope, doubt it very much.....

[Bud Weiser]

nope, doubt it very much.....

thank you,- cool ...

another one:

You know I use 2 machines,- one w/ SCOPE PCI and SCOPE 4.5 meanwhile as well as the other w/ XITE_1 and SCOPE 5.1.

Is it recommended to use the asio-scope patch mentioned above w/ SCOPE 4.5 anyway and regardless of usage of Cubase 4.x and above ?
Is it a general improvement over the stock SCOPE 4.5 ASIO driver and useful w/ any ASIO application?

Bud

[garyb]

Steinberg made some changes to the ASIO protocol with Cubase 5(i think it was 5). that's what the patch addresses. for apps other than Cubase, it may or may not matter. i'd say it doesn't matter for most or even any apps before vst3. for those after vst3, it may or may not matter.

the problem that lead to the patch was that Cubase wouldn't work with anything other than 44.1k otherwise. if the app you're using has no problems at 48k or 96k, then the patch wouldn't matter. if the patch was already installed and the app didn't require it, it also wouldn't matter.

[Bud Weiser]

Steinberg made some changes to the ASIO protocol with Cubase 5(i think it was 5). that's what the patch addresses. for apps other than Cubase, it may or may not matter. i'd say it doesn't matter for most or even any apps before vst3. for those after vst3, it may or may not matter.

the problem that lead to the patch was that Cubase wouldn't work with anything other than 44.1k otherwise. if the app you're using has no problems at 48k or 96k, then the patch wouldn't matter. if the patch was already installed and the app didn't require it, it also wouldn't matter.

thx Gary, good info !

Bud