HORST:
I paid for my education. Why don't you pay for yours?

If you knew what you're talking about, you'd understand why your test
is a joke.
I explained things to you the best way they can be explained, but you
keep missing the point.

As much as I would like to, I can't make you drink...



Horst wrote:
>>How is that NOT a test?
>>
>>Isn't that what we're all concerned with? If I play tracks and pipe
>>them to a musician in an iso booth and then record what he plays,
will
>>what he plays be in sync with what was already recorded? And if not
>>how far behind will his tracks be?
>>
>>You claimed that Vegas CAN't produce low enough latencies with ANY
>>sound card to make the Multi track recording process feasable with
>>Vegas. You then issued a challenge to find a card that would get
6ms
>>or less. I did! I could care less what kinda numbers get generated
>>in the lab I only care about real world scenarios and what results I
>>can get from those. I now know that when I set up a multi track
>>session with vegas I can expect my new tracks to be about 2ms
behind,
>>well within acceptable latency limits for multi tracking. Even if I
>>get delays 3 times what my test generated I'm still within your
>>acceptable limits.
>>
>>How do you measure your latency? Educate me oh enlightened one that
I
>>might strive to be the guru of latency that you are.
>>
>>As for DX on input you just admitted that Peter NEVER said it
couldn't
>>be done, but the whole point of your rant was that you claimed Peter
>>said it couldn't be done. Once again arguing for the sake of
arguing.
>>Fine Vegas doesn't support DX on input...I can live with that. I'll
>>just have to use outboard gear like everyone does in the analog
world.
>>I don't recall a piece of 2 inch supporting DX either and no one
>>questions its use as a multitracker. Its job is to record and
>>playback tracks in sync which it AND Vegas both do.
>>
>>If you think I'm full of it then tell me why don't just say "you're
>>wrong" and leave it at that. Why am I wrong and what do YOU have to
>>support it. What numbers have you generated and how? Since you're
>>convinced that techs are in the habit of lying (or at least SF
techs)
>>then clearly the only numbers you can trust are your own. I've
given
>>you mine and how I got them and have gone on to defend why my test
is
>>valid. Balls in your court.

What part of "please explain WHY I'm wrong" didn't get through. If my
test doesn't show latency then what does it show? You're telling me
that playing a file, sending it through the entire signal path and
rerecording it in sync with itself, and then comparing the delay
doesn't show latency? Then what does it show? (don't bother with
"that you're a jackass")

So far you haven't actually explained anything. You've ranted that
ASIO is the only way to go and said that I don't know what I'm talking
about, but you have yet to say WHY I'm wrong. Please tell me WHY my
test is a joke. How do I test for latency then? More to the point
how do YOU test for latency?

Humor me. Give me a concise argument as to the error of my ways and
I'll drop it. Since I don't know what I'm talking about it should be
easy for one of your experience and expertise. I've read every one of
your posts and you have yet to explain jack. If i can't get 6ms with
Vegas and ANY sound card how does that problem manifest itself?
Wouldn't my test show upwards of 10-15ms of delay between the source
and the rerecorded track? Why won't you give me a rebuttal that goes
beyond insults.

Your point seems to be that Vegas exhibits latency issues that make
its use as multitrack recorder impossible and that no sound card with
Vegas can exhibit acceptable latency. Then how am I getting delay of
only 89-93 samples (2ms)with my little B.S. test? Isn't that the
latency we're trying to minimize? If that doesn't measure it then
what does? and how do I set up a test for it?

Help me Obi-Wan you're my only hope.

Victor Harriman wrote:
>>HORST:
>>I paid for my education. Why don't you pay for yours?
>>
>>If you knew what you're talking about, you'd understand why your
test
>>is a joke.
>>I explained things to you the best way they can be explained, but
you
>>keep missing the point.
>>
>>As much as I would like to, I can't make you drink...

Horst wrote:
>>What part of "please explain WHY I'm wrong" didn't get through. If
my
>>test doesn't show latency then what does it show? You're telling me
>>that playing a file, sending it through the entire signal path and
>>rerecording it in sync with itself, and then comparing the delay
>>doesn't show latency? Then what does it show? (don't bother with
>>"that you're a jackass")


YOU SAID IT, NOT ME.


>>So far you haven't actually explained anything. You've ranted that
>>ASIO is the only way to go and said that I don't know what I'm
talking
>>about, but you have yet to say WHY I'm wrong. Please tell me WHY
my
>>test is a joke. How do I test for latency then? More to the point
>>how do YOU test for latency?


THE SCOPE OF THIS FORUM DOES NOT ALLOW FOR ME TO FILL IN ALL THE GAPS
IN YOUR KNOWLEDGE. SORRY, REQUEST DENIED.


>>
>>Humor me. Give me a concise argument as to the error of my ways and
>>I'll drop it. Since I don't know what I'm talking about it should
be
>>easy for one of your experience and expertise. I've read every one
of
>>your posts and you have yet to explain jack. If i can't get 6ms
with
>>Vegas and ANY sound card how does that problem manifest itself?
>>Wouldn't my test show upwards of 10-15ms of delay between the source
>>and the rerecorded track? Why won't you give me a rebuttal that
goes
>>beyond insults.
>>


I SAID IT EARLIER, horst: I CAN EXPLAIN, BUT YOU CAN'T UNDERSTAND.

>>Your point seems to be that Vegas exhibits latency issues that make
>>its use as multitrack recorder impossible and that no sound card
with
>>Vegas can exhibit acceptable latency. Then how am I getting delay
of
>>only 89-93 samples (2ms)with my little B.S. test? Isn't that the
>>latency we're trying to minimize? If that doesn't measure it then
>>what does? and how do I set up a test for it?
>>
GO TO 1st. PARAGRAPH.


>>Help me Obi-Wan you're my only hope.


JUST WHAT I FEARED: I'M YOUR ONLY HOPE, BUT I'M NOT AVAILABLE. THAT
MAKES YOU HOPELESS. SORRY.
>>

It's a good thing neither of you are the type of person who has to
get the last word in...

Please give it a rest. I think that most people here are aware that
Vegas doesn't use ASIO drivers, and that if it did it might be
possible to audition effects while recording. Let's also admit that
monitoring effects in this way may introduce latency that in some
situations might be unacceptable, even with ASIO.

For effects while tracking I use outboard gear. It doesn't bother me,
and it doesn't make Vegas "suck". Please let's get on with the rest
of our lives and bury this thread.

Not that this type of post ever achieves the intended goal, but those
who offend others easily and those who are easily offended should
take a deep breath before posting.

I can't imagine that if I'm so full of shit, Victor is the only one
who sees it.

Would someone else care to explain the error of my ways. In all
honesty if I'm wrong I REALLY DO want to know why.

I'm a big boy and can handle being corrected I just ask for an
explanation. For whatever reason Victor seems content to insult me
rather than help.

What DO I know for certain? That when I play back tracks with Vegas
to a musician and then record him playing to those tracks with Vegas,
the tracks are in sync. Contrary to what Victor asserts I am not
experiencing huge horrific amounts of delay (ie. "latency")with the
new tracks. Which leads me to only one conclusion (since he refuses
to defend himself with an actual argument beyond "you're an idiot"),

Victor is full of it.