In which I rediscover the existence of latency

7704A

7704A

Well-known member
Mostly just venting/ranting. I've been going down a rhythm/timing rabbit hole as of late, and right now I'm focusing on nailing the click to the wall. A few days ago I realized that a big issue was that I didn't know what dead on sounded like, so I dug around the internet and found some advice on hearing it. Great. Now I'm largely within 10ms, with a significant fraction of hits being within 6ms or less of the click transient. Improving beyond that has proved challenging though. I think I hear things one way, and when I check the recording of me and the click, I'm off. So the last day or so I've been trying to learn how to hear the difference between the click and me for differences below 5ms without a whole lot of luck. I'll practice to the metronome, feel like I've locked things down tight, then when I measure with the computer, I'm off by a couple milliseconds. This has made it harder to train too since the difference in what I hear and what I measure makes it hard to know if I've actually hit the click.

So far I've been assuming that the latency in my recordings is the same as the buffer on my 1st-gen Scarlett 18i20, about 1ms, so I've been expecting a 1ms difference but not more than that. I actually switched to a different click noise with a sharper transient because the old one peaked several ms into the sound, and my hits were sorta centered several ms late. So I figured that I was tracking with the peak of the transient, not the start, and that it would be easier to sync to the start of the click if the wave form was more like a brick wall.

I finally decided to check the latency for my headphones that I'm using to both listen to the click on and to record myself during tests. Note that I'm not using the 18i20 at all for this, I'm just going into my computer's headphone jack. Because I couldn't get the headset mic right next to the headphone speakers (about 6" away) my measurement is probably about 0.5 ms longer than the actual delay. What I got is about 3 ms of latency between the click being recorded, and the click traveling through the headphone speakers, into the mic, and back to the DAW. Bigger than I thought.... I started playing around with some recordings of myself and the click, shifting things back and forth by 3 ms. Yup, definitely enough to change how I hear things. I then do a couple recordings of a few clicks each, noting how they sound to me than comparing my prognosis to what the DAW says after latency correction, which confirms that there is a definite difference in how dead-on actually sounds, and how I've thought it sounded based on my prior measurements. Great. Because of this, I've been trying to play a few ms early while at the same time trying to play what I hear as dead-on, which obviously doesn't work. That explains my confusion over hearing the click...

The last thing I did was double-check the old metronome click sound. I pull up those takes and check the spots where I was centered over the peak and not the start of the transient and... the peak is 3 ms after the transient. So I was syncing to the start of the transient.... And my head's just been getting screwed over by not accounting for the latency when measuring. Gah!

Well, back to the woodshed. I got some unlearning, relearning, and a lot of practice to do. While it appears that I'm more accurate than I thought, consistency is still not where I want it to be.

Moral: Check latency.
 
Recording guitar tracks can be such a damn pain in the ass. I have done live performance for years and never struggled as much as recording at home solo. So wild
 
I thought I was going to be all badass. and record some tracks for a friend that is a hip hop producer. I sounded like a bag of ass, the latency killed me. They are not setup to record direct guitar at all. He managed to salvage stuff, but I will never go to a place like that again without my amps amps and a mic.
 
Last edited:
I don’t believe a human being can consistently detect accuracy to within 3 ms, much less play with that level of consistent accuracy. At that time resolution, the small movements of your head while you play will impact your perception of the lag, meaning if you did something like kept your body perfectly still but turned your head so one of your ears moved, say, six inches, then that would mean your reference would change by almost 20%.

Either way, I’d imagine you should be able to setup your DAW to account for any lag in the system plus whatever other arbitrary amount you want so your recordings are ultimately exactly in time, right?

Also, whatever the lag, always monitor direct from the source being recorded if possible.
 
Last edited:
I thought I was going to be all badass. and record some tracks for a friend that is a hip hop producer. I sounded like a bag of ass, the latency killed me. They are not setup to record direct guitar at all. He managed to salvage stuff, but I will never go to a place like that again without my amps amps and a mic.
Hahaha! I have done that for years! You get used to it. The guitar tones are gonna be trash but they don't care, just do catchy stuff. By the time it's mixed all in, it'll be fine. These aren't rock tracks. If they say it sounds good, just roll with it.
 
I just reread your post. The latency was killing you. What I did to get around that was one of two things: Direct out from the amp to the input and throwing on headphones for immediate reference.

What did I actually do 90% of the time? Ask to be in a solitary room and listen to the electric guitar acoustical and rock it.

Yep. Not ideal.

Definitely bring an amp and mic if you want that feel!!
 
I just reread your post. The latency was killing you. What I did to get around that was one of two things: Direct out from the amp to the input and throwing on headphones for immediate reference.

What did I actually do 90% of the time? Ask to be in a solitary room and listen to the electric guitar acoustical and rock it.

Yep. Not ideal.

Definitely bring an amp and mic if you want that feel!!
Gonna keep that in mind, but amps and mic seems like the solution. i was straight up embarrassed. :aww:
 
Gonna keep that in mind, but amps and mic seems like the solution. i was straight up embarrassed. :aww:
Yeah, I know that feeling. All apart of learning/growing. Definitely sucks balls. Sorry man. I have a built in mini rock crusher recording unit in my Rivera. Idk how much they are on their own, but this little thing is amazing. Completely silent/no load needed. Headphones and direct out, etc.

You wouldn't need a cab OR a mic if you had one, and you could directly monitor your sound with zero latency if you wanted to go that route or something.
 
Yeah, I know that feeling. All apart of learning/growing. Definitely sucks balls. Sorry man. I have a built in mini rock crusher recording unit in my Rivera. Idk how much they are on their own, but this little thing is amazing. Completely silent/no load needed. Headphones and direct out, etc.

You wouldn't need a cab OR a mic if you had one, and you could directly monitor your sound with zero latency if you wanted to go that route or something.
hehe, I should know better at this age, I have more gear than I deserve. I've had some success with other producers, just my game sucks.
 
I don’t believe a human being can consistently detect accuracy to within 3 ms, much less play with that level of consistent accuracy. At that time resolution, the small movements of your head while you play will impact your perception of the lag, meaning if you did something like kept your body perfectly still but turned your head so one of your ears moved, say, six inches, then that would mean your reference would change by almost 20%.

Well, in a DAW when comparing the two recorded tracks I don't have to worry about moving my head since both signals go to my headphones. When practicing or initially recording then sure, moving my head makes a difference and that is something I've observed. If I move my head, it takes a few clicks for me to zone in again. I just keep my head still while practicing/recording tests to minimize that. At any rate, moving my ear 1 ft would only correspond to about 1 ms, so still within 3 ms.

As far as the limit on what we can play, I've been digging around drum forms and academic research on human timing to get a number for that. Among drummers, sub-5 ms seems to be the accepted target/threshold. For example, I found this video where the guy appears to be playing at that level:

As for the academic research, I'm still digging through it, but it appears to support the 5 ms threshold, possibly even a lower one. Not just for drummers either, I was looking at a study on high-level piano players and it looks like they are about the 5 ms level too.

In terms of consistency, I've been able to string a 60 bpm bar of clicks together (hearing and playing) at about the 3 ms level. Possibly longer than a bar, but I've been mostly looking at bars right now and forget if I've done any longer strings of 'em. It doesn't seem random either, in that a certain headspace seems to correspond to that level of accuracy and breaking out of that seems to be when I screw things up. Maybe I won't be able to reach that headspace consistently beyond a bar or whatever, but I'm not convinced of that yet and figure I'll just train until I've reached an obvious plateau.
Either way, I’d imagine you should be able to setup your DAW to account for any lag in the system plus whatever other arbitrary amount you want so your recordings are ultimately exactly in time, right?
Yes, however at the time of writing I hadn't so it was there and screwing with me.
Also, whatever the lag, always monitor direct from the source being recorded if possible.
I'll keep that in mind, thanks. Right now, for training, the "source" is just a table or something that I smack with a chopstick to get a nice transient with, and I can hear that even with my headphones over my ears. For actual recording purposes where I'm not actually in the same room as the "instrument" I figure monitoring direct is much more important.
 
Back
Top