SOLVED! timing issue

[David Baay]

I'm still seeing the issue that audio is laid down one buffer late when Punch In starts at time zero. Punch in a measure later, and it's good. I have not yet tested to see what happens close to - but not at - time zero.

[Noel Borthwick]

@David Baay is that new to this release though?
FWIW Im not seeing any issue with a punch region starting at time zero. The recorded clip is placed exactly at time zero.
Please post a recipe if you are seeing it.

[John Vere]

All good here now, Thanks for the very, very quick fix. I'll watch for the official release for my main DAW now. 

[David Baay]

4 hours ago, Noel Borthwick said:

The recorded clip is placed exactly at time zero.

To be clear. The clip starts at time zero in my case as well, but the audio within it is late.  PM'd the recipe, and posting it here so others can repro:

- New project from Basic template at 125 bpm with ASIO buffer at 1024, 48kHz sample rate.

- Insert a send on the metronome bus to a physical loopback from an out to an in (lightpipe in my case so the big buffer dwarfs the hardware latency)

- Set the Input on the default audio track to that loopback input, and arm it.

- Record a couple measures of click with punch enabled from 1:01:000 to 3:01.

- Zoom in and note the click transients are all 1024 samples late = about 43 ticks at 125BPM.

- Disable punch and re-record, and the clicks are right on the money.

I have my Manual Offset dialed in so the recorded click on a phase-inverted track will null perfectly with the live metronome.

Same result if I use the correctly compensated click recording on another track as the source instead of the live metronome.

And same result at all ASIO settings - audio is one buffer late. 

[Roger Jeynes]

Noel

Do you know if this is likely to address the long-standing problem with the recording occasionally starting during the Count-in phase? (Also the problem where video playback starts during count-in - but this is much less important!)

[Base 57]

16 hours ago, David Baay said:

I'm still seeing the issue that audio is laid down one buffer late when Punch In starts at time zero. Punch in a measure later, and it's good. I have not yet tested to see what happens close to - but not at - time zero

Yep. Same here.

If punch is set one sample past zero it lines up perfectly. But Punch from zero is late.

FWIW this would never affect me. I always start recording at measure two or later.

.... Is this a bad place to whine about not having negative measures? ...

Edited May 4, 2021 by Base 57
exposition

[DeeringAmps]

19 minutes ago, Base 57 said:

.... Is this a bad place to whine about not having negative measures? ...

My thread, my rules, so No it’s a perfect place for us to lobby for negative measures!

t

[David Baay]

27 minutes ago, Base 57 said:

If punch is set one sample past zero it lines up perfectly. But Punch from zero is late.

Thanks for confirming. I suspected that might be the case.

As a 'MIDI guy', my most common use for punch is simply to define an end boundary when recording hardware synth tracks, so punch range is often from zero to end of the project.

I generally don't experience any issues starting projects at zero, and do it all the time, but I would like to be able to re-number measures from 0  for the case that a piece starts with a partial measure of 'pick-up' notes, or needs to give time for a synth to respond to initial controllers or patch changes.

[Noel Borthwick]

Thanks to @David Baay for helping isolate the punch issues. We have fixed all reported issues in the early access Update 1 released today.
We'd appreciate anyone who had the punch and record compensation issues to retest and check if they are solved.