MHansen
Hey!
How do I find the best latency fit?
If I set it to 'auto' it makes a horrible cracking/clicking noise, the same happens if I set the latency to low. The noise disapers if I choose 'Safe Mode' but VDJ becomes very slow. If I choose a high latency 1024 or 2048 the noise also disapers. Will something happen if I mix a long djset with this high latency?
Regards
Mads (EMH)
How do I find the best latency fit?
If I set it to 'auto' it makes a horrible cracking/clicking noise, the same happens if I set the latency to low. The noise disapers if I choose 'Safe Mode' but VDJ becomes very slow. If I choose a high latency 1024 or 2048 the noise also disapers. Will something happen if I mix a long djset with this high latency?
Regards
Mads (EMH)
geposted Wed 22 Aug 07 @ 10:43 pm
Rune (DJ-In-Norway)
MHansen wrote :
Hey!
If I choose a high latency 1024 or 2048 the noise also disapers. Will something happen if I mix a long djset with this high latency?
Regards
Mads (EMH)
If I choose a high latency 1024 or 2048 the noise also disapers. Will something happen if I mix a long djset with this high latency?
Regards
Mads (EMH)
Nothing will happen, and many low-end consumer soundcards need that hight latency setting.
If you are on a laptop, you can try using OverClock in VDJ settings, and try a lower latency.
But 1024 is fine for normal use....
Or if you want to try a better driver, www.asio4all.com can do miracles for soundcards (emulated fast asio drivers)
geposted Wed 22 Aug 07 @ 10:48 pm
MHansen
I tried ASIO4all - but I'm not clever enough to make it work :-)
I'm using Hercules mk2 as sound card, but I will just put the latency at 1024 and see if I can live with it..
Thank you! :-)
I'm using Hercules mk2 as sound card, but I will just put the latency at 1024 and see if I can live with it..
Thank you! :-)
geposted Wed 22 Aug 07 @ 10:59 pm
Rune (DJ-In-Norway)
Hercules have a bit of "slow" drivers, and works better with asio4all.
If you are on laptop try switching on overclock. Works good for my hercules
But 1024 latency with Hercules is pretty normal for the device
geposted Wed 22 Aug 07 @ 11:29 pm
sbangs
check my blog for a detailed mk2 and asio for all setup guide
it is so much faster the herc drivers are so slow:(
it is so much faster the herc drivers are so slow:(
geposted Wed 22 Aug 07 @ 11:46 pm
Andrew87
If VirtualDJ supported 48khz you would do fine with the Hercules drivers. The asio4all method falsely makes you believe it's being more responsive because you can get away with very small buffer sizes (try using hardware buffers with tcv to see what I mean!). My U46 SE is more responsive in 512 than the Mk2 was with 256 through asio4all.
Edit: I think it's important to add to my above statement that it could just be VirtualDJ's new timecode engine or that I'm using gen3 vinyl now with better pre-amps.
MHansen, if you're not using timecode inputs, you could try the wdm driver and maybe enable safe mode.
Edit: I think it's important to add to my above statement that it could just be VirtualDJ's new timecode engine or that I'm using gen3 vinyl now with better pre-amps.
MHansen, if you're not using timecode inputs, you could try the wdm driver and maybe enable safe mode.
geposted Wed 22 Aug 07 @ 11:54 pm
sbangs
in my usage experiance and many other users on the forum
the responsiveness of the unit vasty improves when using asio for all , we have used i for many hours and have, trash tested it
and the sound quality can be set much higher too on performance options
it recived many good feed backs here
http://www.virtualdj.com/forums/68291/Hardware_Technical_Support/Some_general_info_about_Hercules_DJ_Console_MK2.html
not sure why it dint work so well on yours
supporting 48hz perhaps should be investigated as the mk2 is a big seller
the responsiveness of the unit vasty improves when using asio for all , we have used i for many hours and have, trash tested it
and the sound quality can be set much higher too on performance options
it recived many good feed backs here
http://www.virtualdj.com/forums/68291/Hardware_Technical_Support/Some_general_info_about_Hercules_DJ_Console_MK2.html
not sure why it dint work so well on yours
supporting 48hz perhaps should be investigated as the mk2 is a big seller
geposted Thu 23 Aug 07 @ 12:53 am
Andrew87
Definitely asio4all can help you with better sound quality. I experienced that myself too. However, when I was running it with a buffer of 256 (6ms) and using tcv, there would be the occasional hiss now and then. I'm not sure there was actually any difference in terms of reactivity between using it set like this, or Hercules' own driver. Asio4all did a much better job with VirtualDJ's pitch stability and pushing the card to its limits in terms of VirtualDJ's performance settings, although sometimes over them. However, when running 48hkz at 288 buffer size (6ms) with djDecks, none of this was an issue.
geposted Thu 23 Aug 07 @ 1:20 am
discjockeydoc
I also use the ASIO4ALL setup on my MK2. It works VERY well!! In fact, I'm using a puny 2ms latency in my setup - great for scrathin' with the wheels =D
~Vast improvement over the native drivers for sure ;-)
~Vast improvement over the native drivers for sure ;-)
geposted Sat 25 Aug 07 @ 9:06 am
Andrew87
The thing I've not understood about people using asio4all with the mk2 is that not everyone requires low latency inputs, i.e. timecode cd/vinyl. For outputs I don't think anyone could really tell the difference between 2 and 6ms. Many muscians have their midi instruments set to output at 256 (6ms). Asio4all makes use of the installed wdm driver, it provides a wrapper (perhaps not the best terminology) which allows programs which require asio input/output to use the device. Seeing as it makes use of the wdm driver and VirtualDJ accepts wdm input, perhaps you can see my line of thought? djCel's latency checker is a good plugin which lets you see your actual latency.
geposted Sat 25 Aug 07 @ 5:17 pm
sbangs
asio for all uses a combination of hardware virtualisation and software virtualisation osi , layer 6 and 7 technologies
somthing i have had alot training in recently as i have to virtualise servers for my organisation , fun fun!
somthing which can save you alot of time and money :)
anyways,
hardware virtualisation is a mind bogling notion which was created by Vmware for their virtual server enviroments where a computer is Emulated so software can acess hardware which doesnt actualy exist , , a simple explination of it to save you a year of bordem is , its when a small os called a hypervisor usualy based on unix , is used to act as an intermediatary , between the host systems hardware abstraction layer and a virtualised hardware device which can be used by aplications , managing the irq interupts and dma , acess and transalating messages sent by the virtual hardware to the virtual os to the phsucal hardware ,
asio 4 all uses a sub technology P2V , to create the virtual enviroment which is when the hypervisor or virtualised enviroment draws drivers and files from the host os to build emulated drivers.
this diagram isnt the best but i hope helps to show what i mean
hypervisors can be a bit slower than real hardware thats true ,
but asio4 all uses another technology created by Virtuozzo and some other companies
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtuozzo
to compensate for this
called software virtualisation where any binaries which can be used for both will be imported into the virtualised enviroment and instead of using a hypervisor , it will use files from the host hardwardwares drivers to reduce the delay and strain instead of using a hypervisor to transalate irq interupts and dma requests , it uses the hardware direct , saving time
so it can potentialy read as fast as an actual driver could , any delay would be hard to notice,
it aslo uses memory caching, data encapuslation and virtual data pipelines to speed up the process as much as possible
so it is possible to get very good results from using it if you configure it well ,
when personaly i have run the latency checker it remained in the green and performed well,
ultimately its not the ms latency optiom isnt that important , aslong as it is responsive its the quality of audio which is important
which at the end of the day is what DJS customers care about :)
asio gets good reviews across the internet and in alot of music magazines ,
at the end of the day even though it is all virtualised , it runs better than the mk2s driver , and its not that complciated and its free :)
so its the better solution for most :)
somthing i have had alot training in recently as i have to virtualise servers for my organisation , fun fun!
somthing which can save you alot of time and money :)
anyways,
hardware virtualisation is a mind bogling notion which was created by Vmware for their virtual server enviroments where a computer is Emulated so software can acess hardware which doesnt actualy exist , , a simple explination of it to save you a year of bordem is , its when a small os called a hypervisor usualy based on unix , is used to act as an intermediatary , between the host systems hardware abstraction layer and a virtualised hardware device which can be used by aplications , managing the irq interupts and dma , acess and transalating messages sent by the virtual hardware to the virtual os to the phsucal hardware ,
asio 4 all uses a sub technology P2V , to create the virtual enviroment which is when the hypervisor or virtualised enviroment draws drivers and files from the host os to build emulated drivers.
this diagram isnt the best but i hope helps to show what i mean
hypervisors can be a bit slower than real hardware thats true ,
but asio4 all uses another technology created by Virtuozzo and some other companies
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtuozzo
to compensate for this
called software virtualisation where any binaries which can be used for both will be imported into the virtualised enviroment and instead of using a hypervisor , it will use files from the host hardwardwares drivers to reduce the delay and strain instead of using a hypervisor to transalate irq interupts and dma requests , it uses the hardware direct , saving time
so it can potentialy read as fast as an actual driver could , any delay would be hard to notice,
it aslo uses memory caching, data encapuslation and virtual data pipelines to speed up the process as much as possible
so it is possible to get very good results from using it if you configure it well ,
when personaly i have run the latency checker it remained in the green and performed well,
ultimately its not the ms latency optiom isnt that important , aslong as it is responsive its the quality of audio which is important
which at the end of the day is what DJS customers care about :)
asio gets good reviews across the internet and in alot of music magazines ,
at the end of the day even though it is all virtualised , it runs better than the mk2s driver , and its not that complciated and its free :)
so its the better solution for most :)
geposted Sat 25 Aug 07 @ 11:35 pm
Andrew87
Good explanation sky, previously I was going by the assumption that VirtualDJ could do what I'm about to state (just what is the simplified low latency option for, it always gives me an error?). I do agree that asio4all allows for lower latencies (when your card has bad asio drivers at least - but definitely don't use the hardware buffering, this is what I meant by falsely makes you believe you've obtained lower latencies), but the fact remains that wdm drivers are required for a kernel streaming application such as asio4all to function. Ideally, if this sort of output system was built into VirtualDJ itself it would save users using onboard sound quite a bit of effort, but most importantly, like you said, higher sound quality and lower latency.
I made a thread over here if you wish to put some input into the post, you seem like the ideal guy to explain these things!
I made a thread over here if you wish to put some input into the post, you seem like the ideal guy to explain these things!
geposted Sun 26 Aug 07 @ 1:46 am