Members Anderton Posted May 25, 2014 Members Share Posted May 25, 2014 PCIe basically provides the data transfer part, and DisplayPort the video. I think Thunderbolt has two main advantages. First, there's plenty of bandwidth for streaming lots of stuff into a computer. Firewire and USB interfaces can do only so many tracks, and you're certainly not going to have HD video going down the same bus. Second, additional hardware layers do add to overall latency. Although there's not much you can do once you get inside the computer, USB does add a delay of its own (as does Firewire) that Thunderbolt circumvents. For example I was trying some experiments at 96kHz and was able to use a 1ms sample buffer, but when all the other computer processing and external hardware issues were factored in, the roundtrip latency ended up being about 8 milliseconds. I bet Thunderbolt could have shaved something off of that. Thunderbolt is really something that seems video-oriented, with (as usual) any leftover crumbs going to the audio guys. The other big deal is that it takes laptops to a whole other level. As long as you have TB on your laptop, and you're taking it to someplace that's TB-friendly, you can expand the laptop's capabilities in multiple ways. There are aspects that I'm not too pleased about...to really reach the full speed potential it's got to go optical, but then you can't carry power over the cable unless it's a dual copper/optical cable...as if the existing active cables weren't expensive enough. The other thing is that TB is just plain overkill for so many applications it's hard to imagine it getting traction in consumer machines because of the cost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members WRGKMC Posted May 26, 2014 Members Share Posted May 26, 2014 On my Dual core DAW running M-Audio PCI cards, The reported latency in Sonar 8.5 under the audio properties is 6.2ms In at 299 samples5.9ms Out at 284 samples12.1ms at 583 samples That's not bad considering the M-Audio cards have been out a very long time.I believe sonar reports the lowest possible latency for the hardware and computer when it installs. I don't consider those numbers to be realistic however. Yes I can record a single track with those settings but who builds a DAW to record just a single track with no plugins? I have to set mine with allot higher to avoid issues using real world conditions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Living Room Rocker Posted May 27, 2014 Members Share Posted May 27, 2014 PCIe basically provides the data transfer part, and DisplayPort the video. I think Thunderbolt has two main advantages. First, there's plenty of bandwidth for streaming lots of stuff into a computer. Firewire and USB interfaces can do only so many tracks, and you're certainly not going to have HD video going down the same bus. Second, additional hardware layers do add to overall latency. Although there's not much you can do once you get inside the computer, USB does add a delay of its own (as does Firewire) that Thunderbolt circumvents. For example I was trying some experiments at 96kHz and was able to use a 1ms sample buffer, but when all the other computer processing and external hardware issues were factored in, the roundtrip latency ended up being about 8 milliseconds. I bet Thunderbolt could have shaved something off of that. Thunderbolt is really something that seems video-oriented, with (as usual) any leftover crumbs going to the audio guys. The other big deal is that it takes laptops to a whole other level. As long as you have TB on your laptop, and you're taking it to someplace that's TB-friendly, you can expand the laptop's capabilities in multiple ways. There are aspects that I'm not too pleased about...to really reach the full speed potential it's got to go optical, but then you can't carry power over the cable unless it's a dual copper/optical cable...as if the existing active cables weren't expensive enough. The other thing is that TB is just plain overkill for so many applications it's hard to imagine it getting traction in consumer machines because of the cost. Thanks for the common sense response to all this speculation and disparagement, Craig! The simple answer is, TB is a faster protocol than USB (3) and Firewire (800). The OP was not asking about how he can minimize latency in his system, he was just focusing on the latency with respect to one segment/part (the interface protocol) within the larger system. Can't a man get some peace?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members WRGKMC Posted May 27, 2014 Members Share Posted May 27, 2014 Thanks for the common sense response to all this speculation and disparagement, Craig! The simple answer is, TB is a faster protocol than USB (3) and Firewire (800). The OP was not asking about how he can minimize latency in his system, he was just focusing on the latency with respect to one segment/part (the interface protocol) within the larger system. Can't a man get some peace?! This is an open forum where people can discuss various aspects of a post if they want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members TimOBrien Posted May 27, 2014 Members Share Posted May 27, 2014 Type of pipe into the computer means nothing. Everything is up to the manufacture and how they made their hardware and drivers. You cannot just say "this uses port A so it's faster". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMS Author MikeRivers Posted May 27, 2014 CMS Author Share Posted May 27, 2014 Type of pipe into the computer means nothing. Everything is up to the manufacture and how they made their hardware and drivers. You cannot just say "this uses port A so it's faster". Well, it means something. When compared to USB 2 (there are only a couple of computer audio interfaces that can take advantage of the speed of USB 3) it's likely possible to eliminate the USB buffer that many manufacturers employ as part of their driver to assure that their hardware will be reasonably click-free on nearly any system. For some devices, that buffer is adjustable, for others, the manufacturer fixes the size, usually at somewhere around 6 ms. So if you can lose a 6 ms bottleneck, the system will most likely perform better. But take it from me, who just returned from an 8 hour road trip that took 9-1/2 hours - when traffic is moving at 25 miles per hour, it makes no difference that the speed limit on the highway is 65. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Anderton Posted May 28, 2014 Members Share Posted May 28, 2014 Type of pipe into the computer means nothing. Everything is up to the manufacture and how they made their hardware and drivers. You cannot just say "this uses port A so it's faster". No, but you can easily say "This port can deliver more throughput." I don't think anyone would dispute that TB can shove a lot more data down a pipe than USB or Firewire. Then again when it comes to port, I prefer a good armagnac Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members dboomer Posted June 7, 2014 Author Members Share Posted June 7, 2014 Ok ... At Gearfest all ready to check out the Resident Audio thunderbolt interface when I learn that it does not use core audio in a Mac. There is a PCI-E driver needed which didn't exist today so no can plug in and test. Apparently the UA Apollo same story. It doesn't use core audio either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMS Author MikeRivers Posted June 7, 2014 CMS Author Share Posted June 7, 2014 Ok ... At Gearfest all ready to check out the Resident Audio thunderbolt interface when I learn that it does not use core audio in a Mac. There is a PCI-E driver needed which didn't exist today so no can plug in and test. Apparently the UA Apollo same story. It doesn't use core audio either. Now that's interesting. Core Audio seemed to be the thing that everyone designed around so that it would be guaranteed to work with a Mac. Now, it seems, that's not good enough for some vendors. I don't know much about Resident - I think I saw them at the NAMM show or maybe AES, and was enthusiastic about their first products incorporating Thunderbolt, and at quite a reasonable price. I'm not surprised about UA's decision to write their own interface to the MacOS since it has to support the DSP expansion part of the Apollo as well as conventional audio I/O. I wouldn't be surprised if we don't see more of this in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members dboomer Posted June 8, 2014 Author Members Share Posted June 8, 2014 More discoveries today. Looked at the new Focusrite offering. It doesn't have a true thunderbolt connection. You use a FireWire to thunderbolt adaptor which essentially hooks you up at firewire400 speeds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMS Author MikeRivers Posted June 8, 2014 CMS Author Share Posted June 8, 2014 As I've said before, Thunderbolt for audio I/O is kind of slow out of the starting gate. Not enough chickens or eggs yet. Firewire is essentially extinct on Windows PCs now, as are external bus slots on laptops, so there's no way to add Firewire to use with an adapter. Manufacturers who want to sell to the low end of that market pretty much have to rely on USB 2 and take the hit with the real time throughput. Better drivers and faster computers have brought that into a workable range for most practical usage, but it would always be faster through a faster port. At the higher end of the market, Ethernet protocols such as Dante are starting to appear, but it's not yet cheap enough to incorporate into a $300 interface. PreSonus StudioLiveAI console users are still waiting for the projected Dante card so they can use it with their new PC laptops. You need to go to companies like Allen & Heath and the Focusrite Rednet series to get Dante I/O, and pay the price. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.