Latency differences of Scope+Daw

[Music Manic]

I was just wondering how Scope plugins deal with latency when streaming audio from the DAW.
How well does it deal with latency compensation? Would ASIO deal with it all together?

I ask this because if I bounce a track from my DAW through scope's mixer I get a slight phase compared to the original when I add them together. The DAW is sample matched if bounced internally isn't it?
Also if I use two tracks of the same content and add a compressor etc in scope to one the channels will it still be sample matched in phase?

Thanks

[Mr Arkadin]

Well isn't it the journey from ASIO and back via ASIO that causes this, rather than Scope? I don't think Scope is the problem. But at any rate I am trying to imagine a scenario where it would be a problem. If you have a track going through a Scope compressor, why bother using the uncompressed original, unless you're really into parallel compressing? Then you'd just play the uncompressed track via Scope anyway.

If you just bus everything through Scope it will all be phase-aligned anyway: I don't see why you would only send some things through Scope and then do others in the DAW. I like to keep it simple and do it all through Scope. Are you not monitoring via Scope? If you bus a track to an effect in Scope and then into Scope's mixer and bus the unadulterated track through Scope's mixer then there should be no noticeable difference.

Could you explain why you are using a track via Scope and one not. Not being rude just trying to understand the scenario as it's never been an issue for me.

[Music Manic]

Could you explain why you are using a track via Scope and one not. Not being rude just trying to understand the scenario as it's never been an issue for me.

At some point I begin to record everything to wav format from MIDI so I can free resources and clear up clutter.
I compare the recorded audio and it seems slightly out of phase.

[Mr Arkadin]

What I'm driving at is why would you ever use an audio track in your DAW and an audio track recorded via Scope at the same time? Wouldn't you just use one or the other?

I tend to record everything in my DAW at some point then mix via Scope. I can't see where any phase issue would come into play.

[Music Manic]

What I'm driving at is why would you ever use an audio track in your DAW and an audio track recorded via Scope at the same time? Wouldn't you just use one or the other?

My question was why is the recorded audio slightly out of phase. It's a case of doing many things while creating and mixing, and understanding what you have done. Say I've recorded a loop which is layered with loads of other drums. The recorded sound then creates an imbalance compared to what I had before which makes me have to waste more time to align the recorded audio, which shouldn't have to be done. 1 sample can mess up a good layered kick.

Also when I'm doing things realtime I want to test different effects and I want to know how the DAW and Scope work with each other. If I have a group effects channel in my DAW and one in Scope then things may phase relative to the plugins.

I don't want guesswork.

[Mr Arkadin]

OK, I understand a bit more. I never use DAW effects or mixers, I just bus everything via Scope, so I have never had that issue.

If I'm recording a synth, whether it is hardware, a Scope device or VSTi I record via Scope real time. To be honest if you go through any external gear you'll get phase errors. If you use a big analogue desk you can get phase errors. They've always been there, but I guess we're at a stage where we can now micro-analyse things to sample size.

I obviously don't know your working methods. In your example if you had the loop and the layered drums all recorded via Scope in my mind they would all be still aligned. I will have to try it to try and replicate what you are hearing, but I've never had a phase issue. Then again my music is probably sloppy compared to yours: sounds like you like it tight.

I think if everyone had re-align their tracks everytime we would have heard about it by now, seeing as the technology has been around for 11 years.

Hopefully someone with more knowledge than me, like garyb or Astro, will chip in now.

[dante]

My system is setup in a way such that I never have to render single MIDI tracks to WAV - as everything is included in the final mixdown anyway. But on occasion I have done this and yes, the recorded track can be delayed slightly due to something in the MIDI back to WAV routing adding some processing time.

But in Cubase its easy to move such a track back into place - so I do just that to compensate.

[the19thbear]

Hmmm interesting problem. Have you tested with other daws?
Is it always th same amount of latency?

[next to nothing]

Its the ASIO delay, i am pretty sure. See if the delay is consistent on multiple takes, also see how much it varies depending on your ULLI settings. There are compensating methods for this.

[dawman]

I believe it's the Duplex aspects of ASIO double trip too.
But I also find that solo'ing every track I can isolate some of the out of phase audio and ten to keep most of it as I tend to prefer that out of phase sound of synths especially.
It means when you kick on the Chorus or Phaser effects their presence is more ormoinent, which suits me well.

[Sounddesigner]

Its the ASIO delay, i am pretty sure. See if the delay is consistent on multiple takes, also see how much it varies depending on your ULLI settings. There are compensating methods for this.

Yep , in Sonar there is "Record Latency Adjustment (samples)" where you do a 'Manual Offset' by entering in the number of Samples your soundcard, etc is not reporting and Sonar will include that value in the recording process from then on. I'm sure Cubase has this to.