10ms and under is generally regarded as acceptable for everything including vocals, although some people will notice it in a vocal performance. For guitarists or bass players, a small amount of latency is something we deal with literally every time we pick up the instrument due to distance from the speakers. It’s probably still noticeable with a click a headphones or close-proximity speakers, but I’m not so sure it’s enough to disturb a performance in most cases.
But that’s just me. Back when I was first fiddling with digital models, I’d use my PC to load amp models and learned to be okay with closer to 50ms of delay because my laptop was a toaster and I’d play along with quite a few effects that utilized lookahead in the DAW. Dunno what led me to believe 10ms of lookahead on a compressor and another 10ms on a limiter while playing along was a good idea, but I digress. Just because I forced myself through that abysmal trench of a scenario doesn’t mean it’s a good idea and doesn’t mean it’s feasible in many cases.
Downloaded
In the weekend i’ll try to measure
My path Will be
Guitar-- analog splitter
Out 1 – cubase 12
Out 2 – qc with your preset with all on – cubase 12
I Will post my difference on two armed tracks
Edit…
Also i think that blocks on or off doesn’t introduce CPU load…they are Always loaded…then Better all off as you native patch to better compare
@BuffsOP hello, I believe that each one of us has his own needs, but there is one thing of which I am sure and I repeat, a latest generation pedal board with all this power (as advertised by the neural) cannot have all this latency !! ! it is unacceptable! and in addition with a patch where the processor is at 50% ! the neural must do something ! and I think we should all demand it! This is my thought! it is not enough to have a machine that plays and reproduces our amplifiers well or something else, it must also put us in a position to be able to work professionally without putting a spoke in our wheels! I personally bought this pedalboard to be able to use it on tour but I can’t because it has too many shortcomings (besides this latency problem and a thousand others, it doesn’t even have the preset swap let’s realize!!)
@DavideAru
I feel I’m in the same boat.
(BTW, my job has been and still is playing live and recording music for the last 30 years or so)
Got my QC in December and so far I’ve been compromising to get a giggable/recordable unit.
And so far my compromises have been :
avoiding Rows 3 & 4 (latency)
avoiding FXLoops (latency)
removing blocks if I need external pedals via FXLoop (latency)
having an extra iPad & forScore to call presets via USB for last minute setlist changes before a show (no drag/drop & swap/insert between on setlists)
Had the most horrible experience in January with a “do it all” preset that had 9.75ms latency (didn’t start to measure latencies at the time, I sincerely thought it could never happen with the power advertised)
It felt like I had smoked bags of w**d (which I don’t) and I spent the evening physically compensating and playing ahead of time (fucked up my brain)
Being the man I am, I wanted to have an explanation on that abnormal feeling (this is why I started measuring stuff)
And yes, I too am sensitive to latency.
Imagine playing with a drummer that has 10ms of latency !
Even if you don’t/can’t analyse the situation, you know something’s off !
It’s what I call sloggish or sloppy or lazy.
Sloggish or sloppy or lazy doesn’t get you called or recommended for gigs.
I’m still evaluating the pros and cons of the QC and I still can’t say for sure that it’s a keeper for me.
I love (I really do) that I can capture my gear and stack pedal and amp captures (only the QC does this with that quality of sound)
@thomasotto the thing that pisses me off the most is that the Neural is silent and does not admit the problem that must be absolutely solved! but it is not possible to implement a class act? everyone do something?! I am firmly convinced that people do not notice because they are focused (perhaps in their bedroom) to hear how good it sounds (and it is true) but if for a moment they shifted their focus to this problem or used it for work they would realize it ! just like we needed it! @Ringo …I hope the neural does something otherwise I’ll be forced to use it as a pasta strainer!
I am firmly convinced that people do not notice because they are focused (perhaps in their bedroom) to hear how good it sounds (and it is true) but if for a moment they shifted their focus to this problem or used it for work they would realize it
With all due respect for people who might be much more professional than me:
The reason why I am not voting for this request is not because I’m only playing in my bedroom.
The reason is that this request is not written in an understandable way.
Title says “latency solved” and the rest is mostly a rant about how bad Neural is.
If you would have a proposal like “Optimize latency: Latency should be below x ms using all rows and FX loop” I believe that more people would join your cause.
With all due respect to ANY musician (professional or not… hell, I know some amateur musicians that play better than some professionals),
The reason is that this request is not written in an understandable way
But you do know now what the request is about ?
Isn’t that putting form before substance ?
Title says “latency solved” and the rest is mostly a rant about how bad Neural is.
I don’t think it’s as extreme as you say.
It’s not that black & white.
Neural isn’t bad
Neural does some serious code & conception that a regular bloke like me couldn’t do in this lifetime.
I believe I have bought a potentially great piece of gear with some issues (that were mentioned nowhere at the time of purchase)
My honest point of view is : the QC is expensive (1849€) and is not a kickstarter project.
While you were concentrating on the facts and on the problems you face, there were a lot of toxic comments in this thread and even suggestions to sue Neural (for what?), which really held me off from supporting this request.
On the issue itself:
I think there are many QC users who don’t use FX loops and who’s presets’ latency is around 5ms or lower. This is the case for most of my presets and that’s why it is not an issue for me at all.
Having said that, I totally understand that if you have other use cases that cause more latency, it can be a showstopper for you.
Nevertheless, I give you my vote now because I think Neural should look at the issue and optimize latency in one of the next updates so that everybody can enjoy their QC again.
@Andyjcp hello forgive me my manner has certainly been abrupt in the last few comments! but I’m frustrated by the fact and I don’t understand how this problem (for me really huge and serious) can’t arouse in all those like me who have spent 1890€ a big pity to discover such a big bug! I apologize again but I didn’t want to be offensive to anyone but the fact remains that Neural must surely give explanations and solve the problem and not focus on the colors of the scenes which surely can wait!
@Niksounds c’mon ! is absurd !!!just send the link to the neural in the support email if we do it everyone will listen to us! they must listen to us!!!
No problem @DavideAru, no offense taken.
I sure hope the issue will be solved by Neural in future updates so that you can enjoy the QC as much as I do.
the fact that, using the row 3 WITHOUT increase the blocks numbers or Total CPU load, the sistem introduces additional latency (simply moving a block to row 3)
I think too that Neural Will solve this aspect, the team Is earing us
