Rosetta 200 and latency

Discussion in 'Converters / Interfaces' started by ILOVESOUND, Mar 2, 2005.



    Not fully understanding how latency issues are resolved I hesitate somewhat to ask this question, but my hope is that someone can help clarify what I'm not understanding.

    I have a 001 and am planning on purchasing the Rosetta 200 which is 2 channels of both AD and DA. I'll run a 2 channel pre through it. the configurable to acheive zero latency monitoring - or do I need a mixer? If that's the case, does the mixer affect sound quality? And is there a mixer (with only the minimal channels needed) someone would recommend for this purpose?

    So is it the play back track that is late to my ears, thus when I sing to it my vocals are ahead? or is is the other way around? Can you tell I'm confused (or at least stupid:)?

  2. Dave62

    Dave62 Guest

    Latency is the amount of time it takes the analog to digital proccesor to digitize your audio. And when monitioring more latency is noticed because for you to hear your own voice it goes in A to D and then Thru the audio software and then out to your phones D to A and all three processes take a certain amount of time which you hear late as latency.

    You will not get true zero latency unless you monitor a send from before the a/d process which sounds great but you have to send out a music only mix to an analog mixer and then mix in an analog send from the mic. This makes punching in a pain but it will sound the best to the singer. That being said the 001 can be set to 128 samples and the amount of latencey is minimized enough for tracking as long as you don't add a lot of plug-insat this point. I track like that usually and I don't get too many complaints. I can set my 002R at 64 samples and still track with it however it is right on the edge and sometimes over and that is with a G5 Dual 1.8 2 gigs ram and the processor set to 99%. At mix I set it to the 1024 setting to get the most mixing processor headroom. You can relieve your processor a bit by setting video colours to thousands instead of millions, and also make sure journalling is disabled on both the system and work drives. Good Luck


    Dave, thanks for the reply. I think I'm tracking (no pun). Can you elaborate? How specifically would I configure PT and connect the 001 when using an analog mixer? And, what makes punching in a pain - you have to anticipate it or something?

    And, how would an external AD/DA fit into the set up?

    Any cheap mixers you would recommend that would do the trick?


  4. Dave62

    Dave62 Guest

    For tracking a band bed with a guide vox I would still go with monitoring the output of your Protools with the inherent latency because punching in is seamless as far as the mix to the band goes. Set system latency at 128 or 64 if it will do it, take headphone send from the monitor outs on the 001 and set Protools to low latency.

    For tracking vocals however a pre digital send is best and gives the singer true no latency. To do this you need to send all the instruments in your protools session thru a bus and then to your mix outs.
    To do this you,
    shut off low latency
    route all instruments output to bus 1&2
    create an aux stereo input with input set to bus 1&2, output set to your control room outs outs, with volume at 0.
    Create a stereo send in the aux stereo bus, set at 0 and output out of channel 3&4 on your 001
    take the 001 3&4 outs and route thru an analog mixer in stereo with the output of the mixer going to the headphones
    take a send from your mic before it gets to the 001, you will need an outside preamp to do this, or split the mic input with a decent splitter.
    then plug the mic send into the mixer and mix it with the stereo music send from Protools which allows the singer to hear his voice with the mix.
    the vocal track being recorded in protools does not get routed thru the bus so it is only monitored in the control room
    Here is where punching becomes a problem, as you have to send out the recorded vocal thru a send to outputs 3&4 while prerolling and you have to shut if off once you punch in or the singer hears the latent vocal. I usually get the singer to resing the whole verse or chorus to get around doing this and then comp the line.

    This can all be done with one mixer, like a mackie 1604.
    mic input goes to channel 1 which is not routed to a bus and the direct out of that channel is fed to a Protools input
    A send from channel 1 is patched to the line input of channel 16
    Channel 14 and 15 are the stereo inputs from channels 3&4 on the 001, all three (14 15 16) routed to the main outs.
    Another send from the mackie can feed an outboard reverb or you can route a reverb in Protools thru Bus 1&2 as the reverb latency will not be a problem at 128 (think of it as predelay).
    The stereo out (or a sub if you want) of the mackie is the headphone mix.

    Cheap mixers (used Mackie1604 is very flexible with the subs and all)

    Re ADDA/
    Behringer makes the cheapest,the ada8000, an 8 channel device for $300 us which gives you 8 mic pres, 8line inputs and 8 outputs all connected to the 001 via lightpipe.
    next up is the Alesisi AI-3 which is a 8 channel balanced ins and outs via light pipe,(no pres) for about $500. I have one of these and it works great with my 001 and my 002R
    At the top end is the Rosetta 800 at 3K but gives you better system clock and the ability to monitor and record thru apogee converters. I am waiting for it to get here. I will probably have an AI3 for sale after I test it.

    Hope I didn't overload you, Dave



    Thanks so much. That's just what I needed - a step by step. Art makes the "Power Mix I" for $25 and the macro mix for $49. 4 channel personal mixer. Would this be sufficient for taking care of the latency? I'd rather not spend $800 for a mackie when all i'd use it for is this purpose. however, would such a low end mixer compromise sound quality when used for this purpose or does it not really affect the sound?


  6. Dave62

    Dave62 Guest

    Any small mixer will work (minimum 3 inputs), or if you are already have a mixer you may be able to do it all thru that via sends and subgroups. Quality is not really an issue as this is only for monitoring.
    I take a send out of my Drawmer 1960 or M-80 insert and feed it to a Mackie 1202 which is also receiving a music only mix from Protools. The vocal input goes direct from the 1960 main outputs to my Rosetta 800 and into Protools.
  7. Groff

    Groff Active Member

    Jul 18, 2004

    Hope I'm not too late

    I need some more advice about signal splitting and mixer routing for less latency.
    Signal goes from D/A to analog mixer (stereo channel) for monitoring previously recorded tracks. That's O.K. Now, if preamp has just one output (for feeding A/D stage) how to send the preamp signal to mono channel (analog mixer) and to A/D stage in the same time, without using some kind of splitter? If I first send preamp (outboard) signal to analog mixer and then through direct out of analog mixer to A/D, I could only involve onboard mixer preamp in the recording path, which I won't.

    How to resolve this?
    Y- cabel?
    Any pro splitter without impact to signal?

    Thank's for your time.
  • AT5047

    The New AT5047 Premier Studio Microphone Purity Transformed

Share This Page