Advice/Help : Cubase ASIO .... Now figured out!

snoopy4ever · Post by **snoopy4ever** » Mon Dec 06, 2004 10:09 am

Thanks to all of you who help me.. I'm very gratefull...
Now after all this atempts to find the cause for this strange behaviour.. passing from buffer lost through GigaStudio suspicion, to XTC mode vs Standard mode.. I've finally found it!.

All these years I've been using Cubase VST on their different versions , my OLD computer never had problems with it, and I was able to multitrack smoothly. But a month ago I started to use Cubase SX2, wich of course, is a more robust version and so its requeriments.

Long Story short..: the old Cubase VST 24 never showed the waves for every track as I was recording them.. it showed them when I hitted stop, then I was able to see them. The new SX is allways displaying the interpolated waves on each track as they are being recorded.. , my computer now has problems calculating those waves fast enough to display them on the computer screen on time (remember 16 tracks at once), so that leads to general problems regarding the recording process... it's kind of funny cause the Hard Disk and memory subsystems don't show any "fatigue", even the CPU indicator in Cubase is barely at 27% most of the time.

I get rid off the problem just by minimizing the tracks window and I keep recording without any problem!.

But the big picture here is that I need a better mobo and cpu, sadly to say but it's the truth. (kind of broke these days

)

Again thank you all for your help

Snoopy.

------------------------------------------

Friends..,
I'm kind of puzzled with the ASIO multimedia Setup for Cubase SX 2. When I try to run a simulation with the ASIO DEST 24 with more than 2 channels I have constantly lost buffers on that simulation test.. If I get back to 2 channels the simulation works fine.

Have you tried this with several channels? How can I resolve that?

I've got to that because I was frustrated with something I've not had before, last weekend I tried to record 10 channels and all of them seemed to have this strange behaviour, I had no clicks nor pops.. but it was like if some ghost had edited my tracks and cut small pieces of it randomly but left no blank spaces on the tracks. That was the problem that leaded me to my first buffer test on ASIO setup in Cubase.

The only different I've done on the last weeks was installing the TASCAM GigaSampler. I was not using it on the recording process but it's only the thing that could be blamed for.

I have 512MB, PIII 800, firewire Glyph HD.

Any advice/help would be most appreciated.

Snoopy

[ This Message was edited by: snoopy4ever on 2004-12-10 13:53 ]

Counterparts · Post by **Counterparts** » Mon Dec 06, 2004 10:24 am

snoopy4ever wrote:

I'm kind of puzzled with the ASIO multimedia Setup for Cubase SX 2.

Are you using the ASIO Multimedia drivers, or the ASIO Scope drivers, by the way?

Royston

snoopy4ever · Post by **snoopy4ever** » Mon Dec 06, 2004 10:35 am

Roystone, thanks..

I'm using ASIO SCOPE

On 2004-12-06 10:24, Counterparts wrote:

Are you using the ASIO Multimedia drivers, or the ASIO Scope drivers, by the way?

Royston

Counterparts · Post by **Counterparts** » Mon Dec 06, 2004 10:47 am

Ah, it's not that then.

Presumably things were working OK before? Have you tried uninstalling Giga completely and seeing whether the system then works OK?

snoopy4ever · Post by **snoopy4ever** » Mon Dec 06, 2004 11:03 am

Well.. with Giga.. It's been allways kind of unstable when I try to run that software you know... , so that was the first thing on my mind when I've got this problem.
And yes.., it did not happend before..., but before I've never test the simulation.
That's why I'm clueless.
I followed the CPU level and the Harddisk level, the HD was at its lowest .. and also the CPU with the exception that once in a while it clipped half a second every time the problem showed.

[ This Message was edited by: snoopy4ever on 2004-12-06 11:04 ]

at0m · Post by **at0m** » Mon Dec 06, 2004 11:09 am

You do not have to run that test when using ASIO Scope IMO - it's only when using Dx/wav drivers in ASIO MM or Dx mode... Amongst others, this test determines the latency of your MME driver. You don't need that, you set the latency from within SFP and ASIO tests can do nothing about that...

Does ASIO Scope work well? Then keep using it

snoopy4ever · Post by **snoopy4ever** » Mon Dec 06, 2004 11:15 am

Interesting
I've never used the simulations before, but as the problem looks like buffer lost, I thougth it was a way to check that..

So I think I'll uninstall GIGA.. and start from there.

Is there another way you are aware to test the ASIO SCOPE to check if I'm losing buffer sync? or bring some light on the problem?

Thanks for your help

Snoopy

On 2004-12-06 11:09, at0m|c wrote:
You do not have to run that test when using ASIO Scope IMO - it's only when using Dx/wav drivers in ASIO MM or Dx mode... Amongst others, this test determines the latency of your MME driver. You don't need that, you set the latency from within SFP and ASIO tests can do nothing about that...

Does ASIO Scope work well? Then keep using it

Counterparts · Post by **Counterparts** » Mon Dec 06, 2004 11:30 am

Can you explain your symptoms:

"but it was like if some ghost had edited my tracks and cut small pieces of it randomly but left no blank spaces on the tracks"

a bit more? I'm not sure exactly what happens to your tracks after you record them. Are you recording multiple tracks at once? Is it only a problem playing back / recording many tracks, or does recording a single track also exhibit problems?

Royston

snoopy4ever · Post by **snoopy4ever** » Mon Dec 06, 2004 11:45 am

I'll explain more in detail gladly.

I was recording all 10 tracks at the same time, the drums (5 mics, 2 of them stereo), and base, guitar and singer.

I was monitoring them.. and all the sudden I could hear like a cut like this:

Normal Recording would be:

" AAAABBBBCCCCDDDD "

What I recorded was:

" AAAABBCCCCDDDD "

There are two "BB" missing, remember I hear no clip/click like when you have a drop out.

IF you are right about that the problem is a Playing problem.. then I think I'm lucky..

I did not tried to open the tracks say in Wavelab cause I thought they were recorded that way...

On 2004-12-06 11:30, Counterparts wrote:
Can you explain your symptoms:

"but it was like if some ghost had edited my tracks and cut small pieces of it randomly but left no blank spaces on the tracks"

a bit more? I'm not sure exactly what happens to your tracks after you record them. Are you recording multiple tracks at once? Is it only a problem playing back / recording many tracks, or does recording a single track also exhibit problems?

Royston

Counterparts · Post by **Counterparts** » Tue Dec 07, 2004 6:45 am

Thats...weird!

I take it that the 'BB' is missing across all ten recorded tracks?

Have you tried tweaking number of buffers / buffer sizes? The latency you're using (ULLI setting) may also have a bearing on this, perhaps.

Royston

snoopy4ever · Post by **snoopy4ever** » Tue Dec 07, 2004 9:19 am

Royston.

I've made an experiment, may be this brings some light here.

I've uninstalled GIGA, no enhance at all, same problem so that takes Giga out of the picture.

But I decided to try the XTC Mode and guess what?.. I managed to record those 10 channels without a problem!!!.., BUT I increased the number to 16 channels and problems started to show.. not as bad as with ASIO, but equally anoying.

I've try the ULLI.., did not get better so I suppouse now I'll have to change the buffers / buffers size... how can I do that?
I'm usin SX2 and I can't find the rigth place to do that.

On 2004-12-07 06:45, Counterparts wrote:
Thats...weird!

I take it that the 'BB' is missing across all ten recorded tracks?

Have you tried tweaking number of buffers / buffer sizes? The latency you're using (ULLI setting) may also have a bearing on this, perhaps.

Royston

Counterparts · Post by **Counterparts** » Tue Dec 07, 2004 11:32 am

If they haven't changed things too much, I think that the number of buffers & buffer size is set in the VST Mulitrack dialog.

Typically:

smaller buffers = lower latency, higher CPU useage
larger buffers = higher latency, lower CPU useage

There might be other things you can try too, for example disable any ASIO channels you're not using, make sure your system is up-to-date (service packs), tweak your system for good audio performance etc. (although you've probably already done most of that).

Royston

Post by **hubird** » Tue Dec 07, 2004 7:34 pm

Typically:
smaller buffers = lower latency, higher CPU useage
larger buffers = higher latency, lower CPU useage

thanks CP, very clarifying for me this way, specially the buffer input

I wish I had some fist rules about the requirered RAM and the buffer sizes Cubase (v5)offers for the tracks, apart from daily experience.

[ This Message was edited by: hubird on 2004-12-07 19:35 ]

Post by **garyb** » Tue Dec 07, 2004 7:55 pm

if your computer is working right, i.e. all the software is properly installed and not corrupt, the stock settings will be flawless........

also, at0mic os correct, the test is not helpful or needed with the asio scope driver....

Counterparts · Post by **Counterparts** » Wed Dec 08, 2004 4:36 am

That's right, although I must confess to being somewhat out of my depth here as I can't say that I've ever tried recording multiple channels at once. (I can only play one guitar at a time

)

The fact that a slice of time goes missing across all recorded channels without any glitches is quite odd though.

Snoopy, how long is the missing 'BB' typically? Is it a few milliseconds, or half a bar or..?

Royston

snoopy4ever · Post by **snoopy4ever** » Wed Dec 08, 2004 9:07 am

Thanks to all of you guys...

I really need to get this solved, I'm really going crazy.

Yes the lost piece of audio information is no longer than half (or quarter) of a second.

Yesterday I increased my computer's memory with some friend's (good quality one) to 640MB..

The thing is:

In XTC mode where I direct the inputs directly from the card's Inputs in A16, I recorded 16 tracks (mono) at once without ANY PROBLEMS....

Later I tried with SCOPE ASIO and had problems again...

the same behaviour.

What is wrong with my SCOPE ASIO??..

in XTC mode I could follow the process with the recording bar moving in a clear steady way, showing the waves on every channel without a glitch (no distance between the bar and the grapichs). But in ASIO you could see the same Bar and sometimes it's like the waves are left behind that bar.

Please does someone knows if there are some settings that are different from XTC mode than the Standard???..

Thanks

Snoopy.

[ This Message was edited by: snoopy4ever on 2004-12-08 09:08 ]

Counterparts · Post by **Counterparts** » Thu Dec 09, 2004 11:20 am

snoopy4ever wrote:
What is wrong with my SCOPE ASIO??..

I'm getting more out of my depth now, as I don't use XTC mode, but I would have thought that the same ASIO drivers would be used to communicate between the Scope card and Cubase regardless of whether you're running in XTC mode or not.

Could it be due to some configuration difference between your XTC Scope set-up and your non-XTC one..?

snoopy4ever · Post by **snoopy4ever** » Thu Dec 09, 2004 11:38 am

Well Royston.. I thought the same as you do now..., regardless the mode (standard or XTC) there should be no difference..but.. as I can see in my case it seems different.

The problem I have if I keep on XTC instead of Standard mode is the routing for monitoring of each musician.. I've got a furman with 4 mini mixers HD6/H6 system, it's just a way to route 4 mono channels and a stereo bus for each musician to mix. If I use the standard mode the monitoring can be in Realtime with no latency and full fexibility.. but if I stay in XTC mode.. they'll notice the latency no matter how low it may be .

.. and God forbids if they want to modify that routing on the fly.

That's why I'm so into getting to solve this bizarre problem. At least I've found it's possible to get it to work with 16 channels, so it's not really a hardware problem but "possible" software configuration.

Thanks for your help so far.

Cross your fingers for me.

Snoopy

[ This Message was edited by: snoopy4ever on 2004-12-09 11:42 ]

Post by **garyb** » Thu Dec 09, 2004 12:52 pm

definitely sounds like a software issue.

snoopy4ever · Post by **snoopy4ever** » Fri Dec 10, 2004 1:56 pm

FIGURED OUT!! SEE TOP.

snoopy