|
> Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2011 12:17:02 +0200 > From: sed@xxxxxxx > To: dj_kaza@xxxxxxxxxxx > CC: linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; arve.barsnes@xxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [LAU] Applying effects when recording electric guitars: before or after recording? > > ----- "Dale Powell" <dj_kaza@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > The only difference is that you can push hard on the box with your > > > foot while you play live. > > > > > > > Disagree! Effects pedals and the like have almost no round-trip > > latency (through soundcard, to the processor, and back for monitoring) > > and usually a much lower processing time (especially if they are > > analogue!) both of which are very important points when you are > > listening to the effected path while playing. > > okay, I half-agree with that. The latency problem... > > On one hand it is, indeed, a difference. The computer gets some data > in, in chunks, process it, and sends that back to physical world. All > is in the chunk's size, which introduces some delay. Right. > > But! did you actually try to play the guitar and use a linux-based effects chain? > I tried guitarix. With 1024 samples of latency I notice some delay. Below I > don't notice anything. 256 is fine. Go down to 64 and it's psychologically > similar to no delay at all. There were links about latency issues on the > lists a few weeks ago. So yeah, latency. But below a given threshold you > don't feel latency at all. > > So there again, just try and see/hear what happens. I am personally not > disturbed by a bit of latency (a bit being 256 samples at 44.1KHz). OK I admit personally I don't play guitar but have done some recordings for people in the past. I can generally agree that with a reasonably modest computer (doesn't have to be the fastest in the world) and a half decent soundcard, just using one or two not-too-intensive effects you can usually get away with monitoring through the effected chain of the PC. If you are going to do this I would suggest using a more simple chain to give the idea of the sound you are after, record the dry (or both) signal(s) and then you have the option of applying more CPU/latency intensive plugins once it is recorded, yet you can monitor with at least an idea of what it will sound like, rather than monitoring dry. I also have to admit so far I haven't played much with the effects available on Linux. Still trying to get myself migrated from Windows but little niggles often pull me back to the dark side... |
_______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
