![]() ![]() That's almost a 40% increase in input latency (output is similar), and that's while running at low buffer size with the protection feature turned off. ![]() The new "Protection Feature" they added does nothing but ramp the latency up to unacceptable levels, is on by default, and may actually be what is causing these issues.īut I'm just going to go back to the AudioBox 96, because it just isn't worth trying to troubleshoot this with such a great option available to me.ĭefinitely not buying another Focusrite interface, though!ĮDIT: Just checked again. They have always been fairly terrible (which is why I switched to the M-/Audio/PreSonus interfaces - I've had more issues with Focusrite Drivers than any other devices I've ever used), but this is really takign the cake. These don't even feel like they're the same class of device, and the Scarlett solo is both more expensive and lacking in I/O compared to the AudioBox 96. I had the buffer at 192 to try to claw back some of that latency. The Scarlett Solo has almost ~11 msec input latency 48Khz 192 Buffer. My M-Audio Air 192|4 is comparable to the Maschine. My Maschine MK3 on my desktop (basically a Komplete Kontrol 2) is only a bit over 8msec. ![]() The AudioBox has < 8 msec input latency 48KHz 256 Buffer - 7.8msec, basically. I took the AudioBox 96 off of my Laptop and put the Scarlett on, because it a bit smaller and lighter - due to the PreSonus using heavier/more robust materials - generally a great thing, but I'm planning to travel, soon.Īfter using it for about 10 minutes, all input from my controllers was delayed significantly (feels like 500msec+ latency).Īdditionally, these drivers give 30%+ higher latency than the AudioBox 96 Driver (which is probably unfair, as I think PreSonus has some of the best ASIO & WDM drivers on the market for their interfaces). ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |