testing results
Hello,
So I bought a gateway laptop last year and after many problems with vista I made It a Dual boot system. Any program I have problems with in vista gets reloaded in XP. Anyway I am using ntrack 1.1 and tried it using vista. My laptop has only a mic input so I bought a ederol ua 25 USB input.
My ntrack 1.1 was crashing alot and record/monitor latency was totaly unacceptable with vista. I plan on remixing and and adding tracks to old recordings. So I loaded ntrack on the XP side and latency is no longer a problem. Although the ederol is 24 bit and 96khz capable when I checked in vista no problem but XP only likes 16 bit.
From my perspective Vista is a pain and I don’t want to waste any more time on trying trying to get it to function properly. I think I can live with 48khz and 16 bit. I am interested in what other people have experienced in this situation. I am tempted to upgrade to ntrack 5x but if 1.1 does what I need then I will wait.
Quote: (ewingengr @ Apr. 04 2008, 1:53 PM)
Hello,
So I bought a gateway laptop last year and after many problems with vista I made It a Dual boot system. Any program I have problems with in vista gets reloaded in XP. Anyway I am using ntrack 1.1 and tried it using vista. My laptop has only a mic input so I bought a ederol ua 25 USB input.
My ntrack 1.1 was crashing alot and record/monitor latency was totaly unacceptable with vista. I plan on remixing and and adding tracks to old recordings. So I loaded ntrack on the XP side and latency is no longer a problem. Although the ederol is 24 bit and 96khz capable when I checked in vista no problem but XP only likes 16 bit.
From my perspective Vista is a pain and I don't want to waste any more time on trying trying to get it to function properly. I think I can live with 48khz and 16 bit. I am interested in what other people have experienced in this situation. I am tempted to upgrade to ntrack 5x but if 1.1 does what I need then I will wait.
V1.1 Wow! I'm surprised that it even runs on XP.
Other than suggesting that you make sure you have the most appropriate drivers for the Edirol, I don't know what else to suggest.
Actually, why don't you download the V5 demo and try that. There have been so many tweaks, fixes and enhancements over the years that it might give you want you want.
I don't want to join the Vista-bashing tirade because I think it's easy to criticise Microsoft for things when in reality when I look at where there have taken us from DOS days I can't complain. I have Vista on some PCs and find it OK - annoying in a few places until you get used to it or turn it back to "classic". I only have XP on my DAWs though.
WRT latency, does the Edirol give you a hardware monitoring capability?
Yes edirol has a monitor output capability. The problem is when recording a new track it must be of coarse in synck with the other tracks. With vista when I hit my keyboard I hear the reponse from the output card on my laptop about 1 second later. I can see ntrack respond instantly but delay seems to be getting to sound card port. Same test on XP has no delay. Have not tried adding any tracks yet but I have been stressing on the time delay issue.
Yep, that delay is latency. It’s the time taken for the the bits of software and hardware to get around to processing your audio. It’s made worse by larger buffers, but smaller buffers can cause skips because the PC can’t keep up.
You could be using different driver models between the two OSs - (WDM, ASIO, MME, etc).
If you monitor via hardware you shouldn’t need to worry about latency at all. I’m not familiar with the Edirol and any software mixer applet that may come with it, but ideally your input audio should be routed straight back out of the Edirol to your speakers/headphones without having to go through the PC. The only time you would want to monitor via the software is if you are using a VSTi with a MIDI source or maybe want to use VST effects while recording.
I’ve just looked at the spec for the Edirol. I see it does analogue and MIDI. Are you using MIDI or analogue inputs on the Edirol to record your keyboard.
My key board has midi capability but I am not using it. I am using the analog inputs via a mixer and a couple of sound processors.
Yes the Edirol can send sound bypassing the PC but the problem arises when I am adding a track. I need the PC track output in synch to my edirol input. Thus I cannot have any latency. All drivers are up to date.
Have not really messed with any settings and have no clue about diff in WDM, ASIO, MME.
But the fact that ntrack goes belly up a little to often in vista and works much smoother in XP helps my choice. This reminds me of the IBM OS2 system I was using about 15 years ago. I spent so much time fixing OS system it was a waste of time and came crawling back to Bill Gates. I need ntrack to work reliably and all parts and pieces to work without having to tweak. Vista could not even recognize edirol output some of the time.
You may have noticed since I have version 1.1 I have been using ntrack a long time. Maybe got with windows 95. I remember speed and memory being limiting factors on making signifigant sound recordings. Maybe 8 tracks was the limit.
Just a last note here. I finaly got ntrack 1.1 to work with vista and to synch tracks. I used the edirol in and output for the ntack interface. All work in vista and I am laying tracks. Advantages in Vista are I get full 24 bit support, in XP only 16 bit. Edirol good to 96 khz sampling but this version of ntrack only good to 48Khz. I can live with that.
The saga continues. While multi tracking last night I am putting down one track of key boards first then two tracks of guitar. While recording guitar I see lag window running -1000 to -2000. On play back my supposed tracks 2 and three are off synch. I checked on previous tracks recorded a few days ago and they sound OK. I want to try aiso setting but not sure ntrack 1.1 supports it. I doubt it.
So to recap I have xp and vista on my laptop. On Vista I took a song I did last night and added another track. Edirol not used, just sound card settings. Everything else sound related disabled. New track still had lag of -1000 to -2000. Even went back to 16 bit on all settings.
Then I went to XP with the same song and added a track same way lag values were -200 or less.
Comments?
Quote:
I am tempted to upgrade to ntrack 5x but if 1.1 does what I need then I will wait.
I am faaar from being a resident software expert, but it may be time to upgrade - I dunno who might be familiar enough with Ver 1 or remember it well enough to help out.
I use ver 5+ with Vista and I'm very happy with it. Be patient though Rich, someone here will get to you sooner or later. Always great heppers here.
I will tell you one thing about Vista - strip it down to performance based over visual candy, it took me a while to get mine locked in.
I would have to go along with what Pop Willis says…upgrade at least to 3.3
I’ve been using Vista since last November. Turned off the extra stuff and have NEVER had any problem of any sort.
Again, maybe its not the OS. I would suspect your N ver. 1.1
cliff
Thanks for the input. I did infact purchase the latest ntrack 5.1 and from what I can tell so far the lag is now a non issue. As far as vista is concerned I did disable all the junk microsoft added as soon as I got it, so it almost works normally. I still plan on trying the new version on the XP side to test stability and features.
Final note: Bought n 5.1.1 had nothing but trouble. I wanted 24 bit upgrade but purchasing option was unclear. Links not identified? There are about 5 places to configure sound. What??? Tried reaper and will soon be removing ntrack. I should have just stayed with n1.1.