"Newtown Music" <muhammed@n...> wrote: >> Route them thru a bus and insert logics sample delay From: "John Pitcairn" <johnp@...> >Yeah, looks like that's what I'll have to do, but it means the >regions' _positions_ will still be inaccurate for editing purposes. > >And any sends from those tracks won't have the correct delay >applied, so maybe I'll have to whack a sample delay onto every >software-monitored recorded track. Bummer. Don't know how far along you are on this. Could you possibly use Pro Tools LE or Pro Tools Free to move the samples and then export as an OMF? Know anyone running Nuendo? As you've mentioned, fhe file's graphic representation is going to be off which makes editing a bear. Howard

--- In logic-users@y..., Howard Wooten <hwooten@d...> wrote: > Don't know how far along you are on this. Could you possibly > use Pro Tools LE or Pro Tools Free to move the samples and > then export as an OMF? Could, but I would have to do it _every_ time I record a track while software-monitoring. Given the time required to do it, pasting 322 samples at the head of each file might be quicker. And while most of the time I'm in OS 9, there's no PT free in OSX... For that matter, no record/playback delay compensation _at all_ in Logic for OS X. John Pitcairn ----------------------------------------------------------------- Got midi fader/knob hardware? Want to control/automate Logic? Fadermapper demo: http://www.revolver.co.nz/fadermapper/ -----------------------------------------------------------------

Could, but I would have to do it _every_ time I record a track while software-monitoring. Given the time required to do it, pasting 322 samples at the head of each file might be quicker. And while most of the time I'm in OS 9, there's no PT free in OSX... For that matter, no record/playback delay compensation _at all_ in Logic for OS X. John Pitcairn BTW, why all this? I record everything whith software monitoring , u shouldn´t have a prob doing so.

--- In logic-users@y..., "Newtown Music" <muhammed@n...> wrote: > BTW, why all this? I record everything whith software > monitoring , u shouldn´t have a prob doing so. Unless you are very lucky, you're kidding yourself - here's why: First, is your record delay correctly set? If you have a 4/4 audio click playing, and rerecord your monitoring outputs, is the rerecorded click exactly on the beat? If not, then assuming you are playing a real instrument in time with the click, and monitoring at source, when you record it and play it back it won't have the same timing as when you played it. If you use anything but the lowest buffer settings it'll probably be noticeable to a well-trained ear, or a drummer ;-) Getting the record delay set works for recording material that you were monitoring at source. But if you were monitoring through Logic, you are of course hearing what you play a little later (approx 2x the buffer size). So naturally, being a musician, you'll subconsciously compensate by playing a little earlier, right? So everything is still tight. But when you record that software-monitored performance, it'll be recorded with the record delay you calibrated for source-monitored material - so it'll be recorded where you _actually_ played it, not where you were hearing it - and when you play it back it'll be now be _early_ compared to what you were monitoring.. The big problem arises from Logic's highly inadequate record delay calibration - there's only one adjustment available (the "ASIO buffer delay IN"), and it's a very coarse adjusment (in multiples of the ASIO buffer), not sample-accurate. You shouldn't attempt to use the driver playback delay to compensate, because it won't adjust the actual position on the Arrange page, and will mess with the timing of all audio playback (which also makes calibrating the record delay more difficult). Ideally you need to be able to set a record delay in samples for each input, which can be set according to whether you're source-monitoring, software-monitoring, using analog inputs, digital inputs, etc. And you don't want to monitor through that record delay, which rules out using a simple sample delay plug on each input. The ability to record a plugin without monitoring through it would make all this go away... I use a combination of source-monitoring for external FX returns (you don't want to software-monitor those because it will screw with the sound of any time-based FX) and software-monitoring for most other inputs. It's not possible to correctly calibrate for both with a single record delay calibration. Why not just calibrate for the software-monitored inputs, and adjust for the more infrequent source-monitored recordings manually after the fact? Because the "ASIO buffer delay IN" setting only allows for a maximum positive delay of +1 buffer, which is not sufficient - I would need +2 buffers or more to correctly calibrate the record delay for software-monitored recordings (assuming it's accurate enough anyway, which it probably isn't for most buffer sizes). I come from a background of 4-track and 8-track tape recording, where what you played was what went on tape, with respect to timing. It's tempting to assume your computer and software works just like a tapedeck, but it doesn't. If you haven't paid any attention to calibrating the record delay for your system, and want to scare the crap out of yourself by finding out just how inaccurate it might be, run some tests. I can post a testing procedure if you want. John Pitcairn ------------------------------------------------------------------ Midi controller learn in Logic. Soft takeover. Lots of memories. Tracks remember control assignments. Write track automation. Fadermapper demo: http://www.revolver.co.nz/fadermapper/ ------------------------------------------------------------------