Latency/Delay is KILLING ME.

So for some time I've been having some serious problems with latency/delay issues and it has finally left my computer basically worthless for recording music. There has always been some delay, but it was never too difficult to just line up the regions where they needed to be in relation to the metronome or other instruments, but Garageband has now taken to trying to speed up in the middle of recording. So sometimes the beginning of an audio clip will be at the right speed but it will speed up a little into it and cause it to change pitch, which is how I know it's not just a mistake by the musician. This renders the clip worthless. And it's beginning to do this every time. I need help. Any ideas? Thank you so much.

It is near to impossible to record into one session and paste pieces into a new one. Even a small discrepancy could mess off your timing.
It is better to record one large session with multiple tracks. Even on my G4 iBook I have done up to 20 tracks without difficulty. Some pointers:
1. If timing is exact through the song use a drum loop as a click track. You can use a metronome but a drum loop helps you 'get in the groove.' When all track are done you can delete or mute the click track.
2. Record dry (no effects) so your timing can be exact. Delays and reverb can throw off your timing as well as be a strain on your processor if They are activated for many tracks. Some effects are heavy processor hitters
3. Watch your playhead (the moving triangle) as you record. If it is always turning orange or red you are pushing your processor. It should remain white.
MacBooks and iBooks have special energy saver settings that drastically effect Garageband performance. Make sure your energy saver is not set to the 'best battery life' setting. You need the high performance setting to get the best from Garageband which is a processor hogging app.
Other ideas to maximize performance:
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?path=GarageBand/4.0/en/6567.html
Kurt

Similar Messages

  • Latencies / delay in live streams

    I'm doing some tests with FMS and live streaming, but I observe quite long delays.
    When the stream is first accessed, the latency is around 3-5 seconds, which is acceptable.
    But as we watch the stream for about 30 minutes or more, the latency grows to around 20 seconds, which is just too much.
    What settings should I look at to keep the latency / delay minimal?

    You're going to want to look at the bandwidth that you're pushing into your FMS system and the bandwidth you're getting out.  Usually when you see evolving live latency it's because there's a bandwidth bottleneck somewhere and you're dropping frames and falling behind as FMS attempts to deliver a stream that's too big for the destination.  If not then perhaps it's something else, but you'll want to eliminate that possibility first as it's the most common.
    Asa

  • Latency Delay X

    I have a SERIOUS problem. I run a recording studio, a small one. I have an artist who has recorded 2 out of 8 songs for an album that I have been paid to produce. I use Sonar 4 (cakewalk) for recording. I now have out of nowhere a delay in my sound that is about .5 to .0 second behind the actual sound input. This is not limited to the microphone, as this delay is also in my midi keyboard as well. I had an Audigy 5. sound card, after replacing my soundsblaster li've 5. card. This did not solve the problem. I re-installed windows and my applications nothing changed. I replaced my audigy card with a $200 X-fi sound card in hopes that it would improve .... nothing changed. I upgraded from gb to 2 gb ram (ddr) and still no luck. **side note** with my X-fi card now my mic plays out loud all the time. I had never before been able to hear the voice going into the mic, now i can, and i dont like it like that.**? I finally again re-installed windows and tested the mic with only the audio drivers and none of the software installed, not even the extra creative sofware... nothing improved. I then installed the creative software thinking perhaps it was needed, ... still bad. I AGAIN re-installed windows and installed EVERYTHING other than windows on another dri've not the primary OS dri've, and not a partition but a separate physical dri've. still no change. ASIO drivers have not helped at all!!! If there is something I havent done please let me know, because I have work to do, and bills to pay. So i need to get back to work, and this problem is giving me more days off than I desire. HELP!?Pentium 4 - 3.2 Ghz w/ Hyper Threading2-GB RAM (DDR)250 GB serial ata60 GB IDE20 GB?USB external320 GB firewire externalWindows XP Media CenterX-fi Fatality SoundcardGeForce 7300 GS PCIexp Videocard350W PowerSupply

    Oh hey, since I'm here maybe you guys can help me. I also have a small home studio and I'm having some trouble with the sound quality. My specs are below
    Pentium 4 3.4Ghz
    2Gb DDR2 Ram
    Sound Blaster X-Fi Platinum
    Now, heres my studio setup. I have a mixer. I run my guitar, keyboard and mic through that and then into the X-Fi. But my problem is whenever I get finished recording with distortion the quality is really chunky, like its really heavy on the bass and loses some clarity. I have the mixer and sound card adjusted properly so I'm thinking its just how its being transferred. I was thinking of buying and Analog/Digital converter. have any ideas? I would really appreciate it.

  • Garageband, Edirol, Sound Latency / Delay Problem

    Anyone have experience with Edirol UA-25 connected to a Macbook? Problem I'm having is with sound delay.

    i'm having the same issues. on 2 separate machines. imac with OSX 10.6.8 and MBP with 10.8.3 it happens maybe 3 mins into playing or if i swap out amps. i usually have to reboot the whole machine to get it working.

  • Voxendo Latency Delay plug-in

    Hi Guys,
    Would anybody be able to help me install this plugin on my G5 please?
    I'm running Logic 8 and after I clicked on the icon was asked what application to open the plug-in with. I tried Logic but it didn't work.
    Any assistance greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.
    Cheers,

    Is it an AU plugin? That is when it has the suffix .component. You should place it in the Library/Audio/PlugIns/Components folder first, then start Logic and it should appear in the Plug In list.
    Never doubleclick a plugin, as it is not autonomous software, it only works inside a host (Logic, in this case).

  • Jabber 10.5.2 Chat Interface Latency Delay Poor Performance High CPU

    Several users within my organization reported slow response when sending instant messages in Jabber.  The interface response was very sluggish when opening chat windows, sending, typing messages etc.  Response was almost as if the typing was buffered.  Pressing enter after the message s could take 2 seconds before the message was delivered.  We noticed high CPU when using the chat interface.  
    Restarting the Jabber client did not resolve the issue.  
    I closed Jabber and renamed the history files on the affected clients then re-opened.  This restored the application / interface performance in every case.  One of the chat history files was only 1MB so I am confused as to why a  chat history db that small would adversely affect the interface so much.
    =================================
    4/23/15 Additional Information: 
    Installed Jabber 10.6.2 59142 on a client experiencing the issue in an attempt to resolve. The issue still persists until the history file is renamed/recreated evern after the upgrade.

    We had the same issue here and did find a fix.  It seems that the new IE11 cumulative patch KB3038314 was the root cause for us.  We always QA Microsoft patches before release and all QA personal reported the issue.  After removal of that patch the issue was resolved!  A reboot was required but not needed to see the change in performance.  Can one of you guys give it a shot and see if you have the same result.  Right now I am just attributing it to our environment but it would be great to get other feedback from others.
    wusa.exe /uninstall /kb:3038314 /quiet /norestart

  • Is there any way to decrease latency other than changing the I/O buffer

    Hello,
    I'm recording with two presonus firepods linked together. which allow for me to record up to 16 track at a time. I'm noticing some latency that makes it somewhat hard to record with. I do not want to lower the buffer for fear of intruducing distortion. is there any other way to lower latency levels in logic? If not would switching to a different interface help? if so, which one can you recamend?
    thanks

    After you've determined the smallest possible buffer setting for your system to run properly, the easiest way to achieve a minimal latency system from that point on is to have an external mixer for monitoring the audio you're recording. This way you're don't have to monitor audio thru your DAW software.
    Apparently, software monitoring latencies are getting better (see the extensive thread/debate about the Symphony system on this forum -- search for "Symphony"). The only reason you'd need to use software monitoring is if you use plug-ins on the input channel(s) of what you're recording. Otherwise, software monitoring of audio thru your DAW does nothing but add latency (delay) to your monitored signal, as well as cause you to go prematurely gray in trying to deal with it.
    I believe the Firepods are FW devices, and if so, there could be not only an increased amount of latency over, say, PCI-based systems, but the amount of latency might be variable every time you boot your system (there are extensive threads about this phenomenon on this forum -- do a search and you'll find them). If you're experiencing this, it is probably due, in short, to problems with the way the FW drivers are written.
    I have a PCI-based system (MOTU, PCI-e 424) and putting arguments over whether MOTU stuff sounds the same, better, or worse than any other audio interface, this kind of system never experiences random changes in latency.
    The other thing you must do is calibrate your recording delay. Again, with certain FW systems you might have to do this each time you boot your system. But I can tell you that with the card-based system I'm using, my latency and hence my recording delay settings never change, and I can be assured that what I record plays back in exactly the right spot every time.
    BTW, the recording delay can be adjusted by using a simple looback test (again, there are numerous threads on this forum which explain how this is accomplished).

  • Multi-instruent problem - latency issues?

    I have set up a multi-instrument in the logic environment to use Triton sounds with Logic. I have the 'local setting' on the keyboard off, and the sounds are coming through to Logic on their MIDI channels correctly. It sounded fine but i couldn't capture the sound as it was not going out of logics 'Stereo Out'. So i sent it through an Aux and to Logics 'Stereo Out'. The sound now comes through twice, a fraction of a second apart.
    I thought routing the multi through an Aux to the 'Stereo Out' would have just routed the sound there, but it seems to have just split the path, and the sound goes down both. Is this correct? Im guessing the sound coming out of Logics 'Stereo Out' is the sound thats a fraction of a second late.
    It has just occurred to me that when i bounce, i should only get one sound, with a small latency delay. But with regards to writing music, its not really workable. Particularly with short punchy sounds, it sounds awful.
    I suppose I could not send it to the 'Stereo Out' until Im ready to bounce. Does it sound like ive done something wrong, or is there a way to silence the sound that is not going through Logics 'Stereo Out'?
    Message was edited by: Sam Lyons

    M-Audio interfaces have a questionable reputation for so-so drivers. MOTU, Presonus, Focusrite, Apogee, Roland, Edirol, Lynx, RME, TC Electronics and E-MU have better reputations.

  • Why are object alloc delays occuring outside of GC?

    Hi
    I'm currently tuning an application which has a low latency transaction requirement (sub 5ms ideally), hence we're using JRockit RT with an 8ms deterministic strategy (we're not achieving 8ms GC pause, but some time ago we experimented and found this was a good setting for us).
    I'm currently focused on addressing latency spikes which we're hoping to bring down from many hundreds of ms to the order of 10-20ms. Many of the spikes are occurring during GC activity as one would expect, but I'm currently looking at some spikes outside of GC which I'm struggling to understand the cause of. What I seem to be seeing is object alloc delays which are occuring and then being resolved, but outside of any GC activity.
    For example, see the following snippet from the log. Cmd line params include:
    -Xverbose:memory,memdbg=debug,gcpause=debug,compaction,gcreport,refobj
    -Xgcprio:deterministic
    -Xpausetarget=8ms
    Version=
    java version "1.6.0_05"
    Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.6.0_05-b13)
    BEA JRockit(R) (build R27.6.0-50_o-100423-1.6.0_05-20080626-2104-linux-x86_64, compiled mode)
    [memory ][Wed May 26 12:31:38 2010][23134] Pause 'OC:Cleanup' took 0.179 ms (ended at 1545.738649 s).
    [memory ][Wed May 26 12:31:38 2010][23134] 1539.900-1545.738: GC 13279297K->11726889K (14680064K), sum of pauses 386.637 ms
    [memdbg ][Wed May 26 12:31:38 2010][23134] Page faults before GC: 1, page faults after GC: 1, pages in heap: 3670016
    [finaliz][Wed May 26 12:31:38 2010][23134] (OC) Pending finalizers 0->0
    [memdbg ][Wed May 26 12:31:38 2010][23134] Restarting of javathreads took 0.257 ms
    *[gcpause][Wed May 26 12:31:38 2010][23134] Thread "pool-1-thread-1" id=217 idx=0x36c tid=25388 was in object alloc 75.397 ms from 1546.387 s*
    [memdbg ][Wed May 26 12:34:04 2010][23134] GC reason: Other, cause: Memleak Request Data
    [memdbg ][Wed May 26 12:34:04 2010][23134] Stopping of javathreads took 0.817 ms
    [memdbg ][Wed May 26 12:34:04 2010][23134] old collection 38 started
    [memdbg ][Wed May 26 12:34:04 2010][23134] Alloc Queue size before GC: 0, tlas: 0, oldest: 0
    [memdbg ][Wed May 26 12:34:04 2010][23134] Compacting 1 heap parts at index 44 (type internal) (exceptional false)
    The above log segment shows the tail of a GC which has just completed, then an object alloc delay for 75ms for thread "pool-1-thread-1", and then a subsequent GC kicks in much later which I believe is unrelated. I have a JRA trace from the test which shows that the object alloc latency event occurred almost a full second after the completion of the GC activity - something you can't see from the above trace which has second resolution in the timestamp.
    What I'm unsure of is exactly how the object alloc delay can occur and then be rectified by the JVM outside of a GC. I understood the main cause of an object alloc latency event was that memory wasn't available (i.e. TLA does not have enough free space and a new TLA cannot be allocated) and that a GC would be required to free up memory to allow either a new TLA to be allocated or free up enough space in an existing one. We see an "object alloc" latency delay which follows the above pattern after every GC so I'm guessing it must somehow be related to the GC which has just finished, but I can't figure out how. My hope is to eliminate this kind of latency delay completely or at least down to single-figure ms delays.
    Perhaps the deterministic GC means some memory reclaim is happening in parallel outside of the reported GC activity, but I'd be very surprised if this was the reason as surely the collector would be reporting it's activity more fully. It's been a while since I've looked this closedly at GC so I may have forgotten something.
    Any help you can provide in working out how to address such latency spikes would be very helpful!
    Thanks
    Stuart

    I think the extra time is due to the compaction of the heap (which occurs after a garbage collection).
    Note also that a very low pausetarget can stress the garbage collector to less appreciated behavior, when the application and the hardware or not appropriate. If you look at the application about 30% live data or less at collection time is something your application should strive at. Running with more live data might break the deterministic behavior (depending on the hardware of course).
    You can tune compaction with the determistic collector as follows,
    MEASUREMENT_ARGS="-Xverbose:gc,gcpause,memdbg"
    export MEASUREMENT_ARGS
    USER_MEM_ARGS="${MEASUREMENT_ARGS} -Xms512m -Xmx1000m -Xns256m -Xgcprio:deterministic -XpauseTarget=30ms -XXgcThreads:2 -XXtlaSize:min=2k,preferred=16k -XXcompactSetLimitPerObject:500 -XXinitialPointerVectorSize:40 -XXmaxPooledPointerVectorSize:8000 -XXpointerMatrixLinearSeekDistance:5"
    export USER_MEM_ARGS
    The last four options are used to tune compaction for the deterministic collector. In optimizing compaction try to reduce object references, because when a object is moved during compaction its references must be updated. So moving an object with a lot of references is more costly than moving an object with a few references.
    Refer to http://otndnld.oracle.co.jp/document/products/jrockit/jrdocs/pdf/refman.pdf for more information.

  • Sound latency in Director 11.5

    My project utilizes brief (< 1 second) sound files in close succession. Sound latency (delay between files) must be very low, and all versions of Director from 6 through MX 2004 have provided excellent performance. Now that I've "upgraded" to 11.5 I find that latency has increased to unacceptable levels. Does anybody know what has changed and what--if any--solutions exist?
    Thanks,
    Bruce
    Mac PowerBook 2.26 GHz Core 2 Duo
    4 GB Ram
    Director 11.5
    OS 10.7.1 (Lion)
    quickTimeVersion(): 7.7062
    the soundDevice: "CoreAudio"

    Talking about Director Shockwave and sound latency, the order is the following:
    MacroMix > QT3Mix > DirectSound
    So if you set _sound.soundDevice = "DirectSound", you'll get the best latency (1-2ms).
    Of course, you'll need a decent sound card (Creative Audigy for example).
    The main problem is that DirectSound is available on Windows only.
    cheers

  • USB AUDIO latency

    Hi,
    I just received the new MBP 15" 2.42
    I purchased an M-audio mobile usb interface to record live instruments.
    Incredible latency (delay), it wavers. I change the settings in system preferences, it corrects the problem, but slowly begins delaying, meaning the transfer is inconsistent. Impossible to record music.
    I've changed settings in battery/ac adapter settings to increase performance, keyboard sensitivity, etc., but still, I don't know if it's my mbp, or the Mobile USB device. I even updated the software for the preamp.
    Any help would be appreciated!~
    Cory

    1. Does it make any difference which USB port you use ?
    2. Has the M-audio box got an external power option ?
    FWIW: I use a MacMice MicFlex USB Microphone and get great input quality/performance.

  • My personal gripes with the N8

    Hi guys. I've owned my N8 for around 2 months now, and having used it extensively, I just wanted to share my own gripes with this device.
    The N8 is Nokia's flagship device. The device that was supposed to rejuvenate Nokia's ever declining stance in the smartphone arena. Delayed multiple times until released just a few short months ago. Like most of you guys here, I couldn't wait to get my hands on this smartphone and the constant delays were killing me. I've always been really fond of Nokia and Symbian, ever since owning an N-Gage many years ago. Nokia have always been ahead of the times, and knew that phones were far more capable than just making calls. I've owned many smartphones from most all manufacturers but always seem to find my way back to Symbian.
    So with the ongoing delay of the N8, I was thinking to myself because they're taking so long to iron out all of the problems, it's going to be amazing! And so I thought when I first opened the box. But as time has gone by, like all of the Symbian devices I've owned, I've just found more and more about this device to complain about than to actually enjoy.
    First let me start with the marketing campaign for this device. It was nice to see the N8 being heavily marketed. It was on almost every billboard I could see, every bus stop I could see, and in most every magazine and newspaper. But then I saw the TV adverts once the device was released..... they sucked. They had barely any emphasis on what the phone could actually do in everyday use, or even how to do it. It had a general emphasis on what people could do with their smartphones. It was a mediocre attempt and they sure didn't draw my attention to the N8. It was as if Nokia was saying "Hey, we've released this new smartphone called the N8.... now look what you can do with phones these days". Anyway, on to the phone itself....
    The Hardware
    I have hardly any complaints about the hardware. The phone looks fantastic and feels great in the hand. The screen is crisp, vivid and looks outstanding (one of the best I've seen on a mobile device). The gorilla glass really does live up to its name. The device is solidly built, as usual Nokia style. Buttons are well placed (with the exception of the menu button, which I would have preferred to be in the centre. It's not so great pressing the menu button left-handed with your thumb). The addition of HDMI and USB OTG make for a powerful and feature-rich device. I can't say any more about the camera than what's already been said. It's the best, and it lives up to the hype. My only other minor niggle apart from the menu button is the non-replaceable battery, but it's not really much of an issue considering the build style of the device. I suppose it makes more sense having it the way it is. The only major problem I can think of is its underpowered processor, which means further software optimisation, which means more time is wasted. If applications are developed for other platforms that have better processors, that means developers have to spend more time optimising their software for less powered hardware, which ultimately means shoddy ports. A prime example being Asphalt 5.
    The Symbian^3 OS
    Now this is where it starts to become fun. After reading and watching many reviews, I had a brief idea of what to expect. The OS didn't look perfect, but it looked like a big improvement from S60 v5, and already being fond of Nokia and Symbian, I decided to take the plunge and give this device the chance I thought it deserved.
    Inconsistent UI
    The user interface is extremely inconsistent. The clock, connectivity and notifications jump from the top of the screen to the bottom on screen rotation, and the clock doesn't appear at all on the homescreen except via a widget. Furthermore, there are 3 buttons on the homescreen at the bottom, but 2 in the menus. There are 3 when you rotate the screen. It looks a mess.
    The notification bar at the top of the screen is fairly slim on the homescreen, but increases in size in the menus and applications. Why can't it stay the same size throughout?
    Screen real-estate - When in the calendar, in text messages, in most applications.... most of the screen real estate is consumed by the large notification bar at the top, and 2 layers of buttons at the bottom, altogether consuming about 1/3 of the screen's real estate.
    Kinetic scrolling - When browsing the Ovi store, the kinetic scrolling is as smooth as butter. As is the photo album, it scrolls through like a dream. Absolutely nothing to complain about in that respect. But in other places such as contacts, text messages, the web browser and Social Networking client, KS can be very choppy. Why is this? Why can't they use the same KS algorithm throughout the device? Is there a lack of communication at Symbian/Nokia?
    Text messages consist of a tone, and an on-screen notification which is non-obtrusive and is very well done. Mail notifications consist of a tone, and that's it. No on-screen notification. Why couldn't this be integrated the same way as text messages?
    The ability to click the camera button to view a search bar in the file manager was a great idea. Why couldn't this have been implemented throughout the OS?
    Integrated applications such as the Ovi Store and Social Networks client have their own themes which change the colour of the menu buttons. Why? Why not leave them the same colour as the theme you have chosen? It means that the application has to consume more time and resources changing the theme.
    Most menus will draw up from the bottom of the screen to display options, but then you have menus like the Ovi store which display in the centre.
    When scrolling though album arts in the Music Player, why is there a full screen button which shows menu buttons that don't even get in the way? It's not necessary. Furthermore, why are the menu buttons not in big boxes like everywhere else in the OS?
    The homescreen you have chosen is the active one. The others seem to stay in some sort of freeze-state until you scroll to them, which means widgets don't update until you select the home screen they're on. This is stupid.
    The menu buttons at the bottom change in size depending on screen orientation. They're a little slimmer in landscape mode.
    There are probably many more inconsistencies to be found, but all-in-all, they make the OS feel unprofessional, user-unfriendly, and generally a frustrating experience having to jump all around the screen to access the same thing dependent upon where you are in the phone.
    Unresponsiveness
    As already mentioned, the Ovi Store's KS is very smooth, but then you have the top and menu buttons which can become unresponsive and can take multiple presses for them to respond. This seems to be a recurring theme throughout the entire device.
    Screen rotation can be a pain. It just feels as though there is some sort of struggle to rotate the screen. It's not fluid, and there's a minor delay.
    Typing on the keypad can be also be a pain. Using regular text entry, there's no auto-correction, no space between keys, and just no improvement from its predecessor. It looks aged and can be a struggle to use with even fairly small fingers. Not forgetting the fact that text entry consumes the entire screen.
    Sometimes, when just locking and unlocking the device, it feels as though there's some delay. Sometimes I'll have to do it multiple times for it to respond.
    There's absolutely no excuse for this unresponsiveness. It existed in S60 v5, and still exists to this day. The N8 was delayed long enough for all of this to have been straightened out. A massive let down.
    Bugs and crashing
    A few days ago I was playing around with my N8. I went to lock the device, but the screen refused to turn itself off. I restarted my phone multiple times but to no avail. After about 15 minutes it decided I was frustrated enough and turned itself off.
    The web browser still does the same as it has always done on Symbian. It just randomly closes. I don't want to go too much into the browser since there is an update due, but this is now, and this is what we have now. But this also seems to be a recurring theme throughout the device. There are many applications that will just randomly close.
    My N8 has automatically restarted itself a few times since I've owned it. Sometimes it feels like it's running slow, and a restart usually cures it. However that just leads me to believe there's some sort of memory leak, or poor memory management in the Symbian OS.
    Again, absolutely unacceptable, for the same reasons I've mentioned. Except these problems are more frustrating when taking into consideration how much time Nokia have had to straighten all of this out, and the seriousness of these flaws.
    Lack of interest
    The Ovi store simply sucks. There are no two ways about it. Developer support is abysmal. There are a few good games on there, of which most are pooly ported. It feels as if the Ovi Store has stagnated, for example, I've seen just 2 Web TV applications added since I've owned the phone. Everytime I visit the Ovi Store it feels as if I see nothing new, just rehashes of the same old applications found on S60 v5.
    Symbian doesn't have that "Ooooooh" factor. I previously owned a Palm Pre, and the UI just blew my mind. It's outstanding. Symbian just doesn't have that.
    When I show my friends my phone, they like it, but nothing about it makes them want to run to the store and buy one. There's nothing about the user experience that's unique, or done well enough for people to feel they could spend long periods of time using.
    Nokia apparently had 400,000 new developers jump on board over the past year. Then where on earth are they?
    Conclusion
    People might think that I'm just nitpicking, but having paid outright for this device, with the ongoing delays, and with the ever increasing and bettering competition, I feel that I have the right to complain.
    I acknowledge that no device is perfect, but if even half of the problems I've listed didn't exist, I'd accept the device for what it is. I know that improvements are on their way, but why should we wait any longer? We waited long enough for the phone to be released, let alone wait longer for it to be of the same standard that competing smartphones were at 12 months ago. Symbian itself is many years old. Nokia should be masters at it, yet every time a new phone is released, the OS feels extremely immature.
    Nokia's development roadmap might as well not exist. They are extremely unreliable with release dates. Their development takes far too long. They're falling further and further behind.
    Most of the time, I find myself just constantly checking the device updates, in hope of something. I'm sure many of you guys do that too. That's a bad sign. It just shows that what's already in place is not adequate. We want more. We deserve more. We should have had more when the device was released.
    The emphasis of this phone seems to be solely on the camera, USB OTG, Bluetooth 3.0 and HDMI. If I wanted a feature phone I wouldn't have paid half of what I paid for this phone. A smartphone needs to add more to the table than solely features. If the UX was improved, I'd be happy to sacrifice any of the mentioned features. The UI is something I use every day - USB OTG is something I've used once.
    My personal opinion and credibility of Nokia is forever declining. The market seems to feel that way too. Time is ticking. The competition is becoming more dominant, making it harder to break into an already over-saturated market. The market seems to be shifting to tablets. Nokia can't even get their phone OS right, let alone think about releasing a tablet. Another potential market that Nokia will struggle to enter if they so desire.
    If the next update doesn't iron out most of these problems, I'm going to be getting rid of my N8. I wouldn't recommend this device to the average consumer. There are better alternatives out there.

    crazyfan wrote:
    People might think that I'm just nitpicking, but having paid outright for this device, with the ongoing delays, and with the ever increasing and bettering competition, I feel that I have the right to complain.
    Actually, I'm sorry to say that what I've highlighted in bold there is exactly the words that occurred to me when I was reading your entire section entitled "Inconsistant UI" - absolutely none of what you raise in there is a bug. It is natural that the screen usage varies according the the activity currently being undertaken and screen orientation. Most people who have criticised the home screen are upset that it isn't as customisable as they'd like - you are the only person I've suggesting it should be much more strictly regimented.
    I've used S^3 in N8 and C7 models, and I haven't noticed the issues that you describe with scrolling and rotating.
    The Ovi Store UI being different is not an issue with the phone, it is something that is increasingly common in many Nokias - Nokia seem to have divided their development of devices and services into two separate organisations, which is why the separate services (Ovi Store apps for all phones are created by the Ovi people, not the same ones who design the phone UI); so where they really ought to be issuing the direction to stay in line is in the Ovi department. As for this app changing the theme, it doesn't - it simply has (for better or for worse) its own UI distinct fromp the phones, just as any software written for a PC may have its own look-and-feel distinct from the PC's OS.
    crazyfan wrote:
    Typing on the keypad can be also be a pain. Using regular text entry, there's no auto-correction, no space between keys, and just no improvement from its predecessor. It looks aged and can be a struggle to use with even fairly small fingers. Not forgetting the fact that text entry consumes the entire screen.
    I'm no fan of virtual qwerty (or in my usual case azerty) keyboards on touch-screen phones because I have never yet found any that I really like to use.
    One issue that I do have here is that the availability of accented characters varies according to the phone language, which isn't very helpful to those of us who have cause to write in several languages. I much prefer to type on portrait mode on the traditional phone keypad, because you always have access to all accented and special characters. I have even been able to type messages using the portrait keypad quicker than I can using a normal physical keypad, which impressed me a lot.
    I've been using N8 and C7 models through work, I have just got my own N8 which I bought whilst travelling because it is still quite hard to find (and therefore more expensive than it needs to be) in my own country - consequently I don't even have one of my two primary languages in the phone, but whist I can't access some necessary characters at all through the landscape qwerty I can get absolutely everything in the portrait keypad. Definitely room for some improvement there.
    crazyfan wrote:
    Lack of interest
    The Ovi store simply sucks. There are no two ways about it. Developer support is abysmal. There are a few good games on there, of which most are pooly ported. It feels as if the Ovi Store has stagnated, for example, I've seen just 2 Web TV applications added since I've owned the phone. Everytime I visit the Ovi Store it feels as if I see nothing new, just rehashes of the same old applications found on S60 v5.
    This is a consequence of the fact that Nokia is in the midst of a change in OS support, S60 will (I imagine) not be much longer for this world as S^3 is phased in, and Maemo development stalled when Nokia got into bed with Intel to develop MeeGo (which would otherwise have been Maemo 6) which still hasn't made it to the market. These delays getting the new operating system established is affecting app development because the developers are caught in a catch-22 whereby there is no point developing extensively for the 'almost obsolete' S60 and Maemo 5, but there isn't likewise much to gain in developing for S^3 or MeeGo because one is only just launched and one not even here yet. None of  this is a fault of the N8, and unlike certain fruit-flavoured devices we would mention, with the N8 at least you have the choice to shop for apps elsewhere.

  • Using VST plugins and ASIO for everything?

    Just a thought. Oh how much I'd like this!
    To be able to use universal VST plugins and ASIO for everything directly from Windows would be ideal. To put this simply, making the Creative Windows "mixer" a true equivelent of a pro-software mixing app (Ableton, ProTools, Sonar, Cubase, or any other) in terms of absolute control for all Audio effects and I/O.
    If Creative won't ever do this even on their next gen cards, somebody or some company that knows a decent mixer setup should write such a replacement mixer soon offered at a fair price (if not free) that will do so with easy, complete, reliable integration.
    Long and specific
    VST related:
    - Use X-Ram to cache inserted VST plugins. Now theres a potential great reason for it since it obviously doesnt use any to cache the I/O bus like ALL OTHER periphials that have Ram caches. Its use is dictated by software, so why not?
    - Allow setting some tiny but likely necessary amount of X-Ram as an additional plugin audio I/O buffer. This should be much less than what mixing software needs for this setting since that would all have to pass the CPU.
    - Use Creative's processing hardware directly instead of the CPU so VST plugins won't increase CPU usage (within reason of course).
    - Yield overhead when using lots or higher-demand plugins if set in bit-match mode. Why waste all that power for SRC when Voxengo R8Brain or plenty of other pro software can do that a million times better and way faster in non-real-time? OK, only Creative could work this one in.
    - Why VST plugins? I'd trust my favorite EQ, digital limiter or whatever that has 64-bit float internal precision and oversampling vs. a 24-bit (rounding-error heaven) with no oversampling like the built in Creative ones.
    - If Creative has confidence in the quality of their own propriety effects, doesn't have to be VST but simply making them usable as a ReWire bridged devices into most any host with parameter automation controls and all. Obviosly these could have much lower latency than VST that normally relies on CPU processed software code.
    - The only argument against this is that some VST plugins have huge latencies. Optional latency delay to keep tracks
    - Allow Creatives hardware to insert as a ReWire slave or otherwise bridged device to ASIO-based apps so VST's can be outsourced from demanding more CPU when mixing. I could also add MIDI plugin effects as well.
    ASIO related:
    - Allow changing any and all audio I/O routing for individual channels on the fly for Windows and ANY software (not just ASIO compatible stuff). Just like in Ableton, Pro Tools, and every other WELL designed "mixer".
    - Treating XP itself and any software that normally goes through DX/MME/etc to use this ASIO mixer by making it appear as an insert send/return in the mixer so it can get routed and processed individually to my liking.
    - Can insert send/return signals for any DX/MME/etc program to/from any track or #tracks in any combination up to some reasonable limit with pre/post gains. At least several send/returns slots per channel.
    - A game that uses ASIO would be sweet. 0% FPS drop. IMO DX/MME/wave-mapper sound sucks. No control, many wasted CPU cycles, and horrible latency.
    - Ability to save/load PROGRAM-specific routing chains. Having it so simly running a certain program will automatically insert it how/whereever I specified, if not default, with all relevant I/O settings, including plugins and related settings that were put in the insert send/return path series to that program of course.
    - Put real-time SRC, compression encoding/decoding, or any Creative effects as well whereever I want in the signal chain, whether universal to a track I/O or program insert send/return I/O.
    - Ability to record tracks or the master likewise.
    - No digital feedback possible caused by monitering/recording/routing configs that would be possible in any decent mixing software. Surely not ever from a default setting or made sometimes impossible to prevent like on the Audigy series. Well unless I do something stupid that SHOULD cause feedback. Speak of a truly worthless mixer, this BTW is the ONLY reason I couldn't just go the manual route and run my host all the time, forcing ALL sounds through it for real-time playback with my Audigy. I'm assuming XiFi's Audio-Creation Mixer doesn't have this horrible problem.
    - Imagine putting any combination of sounds in 7.1 surround, monitering specific channels to any physical output, or up/downmixing 5.1 as it plays in real-time, etc. any thing like this possible instantly with a few mouse clicks! This would be SO EASY and completely possible to implement, most of the above right onto existing XiFi's as is.
    It's not like it would be competing with pro-interface rackmount products so no harm to Creative. I sure as h*ll wouldn't record with any soundcard's analog pre's or unbalanced connections for that matter. Guess I just love the interface and control of a REAL mixer that can do it all.

    cusis wrote:
    But would it be possible to somehow use the power of the card to take on some of the load of the cpu, users would surely then see alot more benifits from these cards.
    I don't see why this isn't possible with enough X-RAM. Why no host apps support offloading VST plugin cache buffers and rendering threads to it? I'm probly returning my XiFi and sticking with my old Audigy 1 until either I blow it up or Creative makes a REAL upgrade with most the aforementioned features that literally COULD'VE been implemented in XiFi's current hardware.
    If they do, they'll have my business and many others I'm pretty sure. Creative, if your listening and you want to like triple your sales - PLEASE get a clue and get the software end right. Microsoft or any audio host software developers, heres your (fat) chance if Creative wont do whats really their responsibility.
    If ALL apps were forced to pass through ASIO as I mentioned, this could force all apps and games to use part of X-RAM as an I/O buffer no matter what specific support is. The same way a video card can offload ALL video including Windows, not just when running certain games, or even worse, certain audio apps lol that specifically support video RAM and DX performance controls! That would be the stupidest, most worthless idea and why Video Cards don't waste their hardware this way. And yet this is what XiFi currently does regarding audio. Somebody change this SOON.
    This would be SO cheap and easy for Creative toss together and implement and would solve EVERYONE's problems and make ALL games at least get SMOOTH AUDIO. He!! Creative could charge $30 extra for it or just push out a new line of cards and itd still be worth it. Creative, did you read that part? More profit$$$ Like a video card upgrade, I EXPECT a night vs. day improvment but as it stands, XiFi is simply a glorified Audigy that costs more but much LESS likely to work right.
    More importantly, its use of ASIO (the real deal) remains no less limited than an old Creative card from way back when. If Creative wants their soundcard to integrate with software better, learn from Nvidia/Ati and deliver the goods as they've done it all along.

  • Bad audio connection on P-35 Platinum moBo, while capturing analog video?

    Before I give up, I'm reaching out to MSI and any persons suffering from out-of-sync audio and video capture issues while using Pinnacle Studio Video editing software. Studio Ultimate HD v.14.
    I've posted numerous inquiries to the Pinnacle Support team, the Pinnacle Forum site, as well as the GrassValley (Canopus 110 or 300, I was thinking about trying that) and really never got anywhere.
    A few people had mentioned maybe the sync issue could be caused by a bad analog signal and it will drop video or audio frames hence the sync problem. Bringing the video into the capture mode in Studio is fine, but the audio has about a 6 second latency delay, which never recovers.
    Could it be the REALTEK HD Sound Audio on my P-35 MoBo, maybe bad? I play music, and everything else coming out of my speakers sound fine, it's just the syncing issues with a PCI device that never locks in both the Video with the audio, because there are two different incoming devices.  Analog camera video-out to PCI Video-IN, and audio out from analog camera to onboard, MoBo Realtek audio input.
    The PCI-500 capture that originally came with my first Studio product (Studio movieboard 12.1) has NO Audio RCA input, only FireWire, S-video, and Video IN and OUT)
    P-35 Platinum MS-7345 Mobo
    Windows XP  Home Edition SP3
    Intel Core 2 Quad CPU  Q6600 @ 2.40GHz (4 CPUs)
    2.4 GHz, 3328 MB Physical RAM
    NVIDIA GeForce 8600GT  512 Memory Size
    Realtek HD Audio Output Sound
    DirectX version: 9.0c
    Monitor: Viewsonic VX2035wm Series
    WD 500 GB HDD / WD 74GB RAPTOR HDD
    Pinnacle PCI-500 Capture card
    Nero9
    I use the MSI Live Update 4 to update drivers, BIOS, VGA,and Utilities. This system is about four years old.  I'm just afraid to flash or update BIOS, thinking I could screw things up.
    So I guess  my question here is to ask, if maybe the audio input jack on my P-35 Mobo could be defective?  Thank you!

    Have you try out with a standalone add on sound card? Sometimes, sync problem can be due to processing power or RAM space needed for rendering and merging.

  • There was an error opening this document. This file cannot be found

    An automation script on one of our QA environments kept tripping on the error: "There was an error opening this document. This file cannot be found".  The same script ran fine against our Production servers (hint, which were "whitelisted").
    It took a little time to resolve/trace what was happening (but with the aid of ProcessMonitor and tracing all "pdf"-related file activity...)
    The problem lies squarely between McAfee (75%), Adobe (20%) and Microsoft (5%):
    NORMAL WORKFLOW.  IE (Internet Explorer) when popping a PDF document, has to (1) write the document to the IE cache, then (2) launching and "handing off" the document reference to the Adobe viewer (which might then be able to open the document, et al) -- assuming largely a "synchronous" workflow.
    BUT "WAIT", HOLD THE HORSES -- McAfee takes ownership and decides infact "wait for us" (during the workflow), it wants to first perform a virus scan on the document (ahead of writing the document to cache) involving potentially large latency (delay) before making the document available to the system. However, instead of "fessing up"-that their scan may be taking too long, McAfee appears to have taken their work "off-line" in violation of the sychronous interface above. I'm guessing the developers at McAfee might have been trying to hide any extra processing overhead being incurred by assuming they could somehow convert this to an "asychronous" event.  (This may also have more reach than just PDF's.)
    Unfortunately, the browser's "PDF OPEN"-dialog box pops allowing Adobe to launch-and-open the "as-yet-not-virus-scanned-and-thus-not-yet-cached"-document. Thus clicking the OPEN-button will cause the related "...FILE NOT FOUND"-error to be seen (because the file is still in McAfee "limbo").
    Note: If you close the ADOBE reader (but don't yet close the popup-OPEN-dialog) you can click OPEN a second time and it will probably now open the document - which McAfee finally finished scanning!
    You can observe all these interactions with ProcessMonitor, and use the monitored file states to adjust the timings of events to reproduce both the failure and non-failure scenarios.
    - Best Regards, Ziggy
    ps. My assessed distribution of "ownership" of the problem is because ALL these parties should be aggressively resolving this for the customer-base!

    What, exactly, were you trying to do when you got it, and how?

Maybe you are looking for

  • Error while creating web service reference

    Hi, I have very limited knowledge of web services. we have a BPEL implementation and I have been handed location to 3 wsdl files for which I am trying to create a web service reference(under shared component->logic) in apex(3.1.1). I am successfully

  • Trying to speed things up...

    Hi I have a Macbook pro which was bought around Nov 2009 (Processor 2.8 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, Memory  4 GB 1067 MHz DDR3). I have recenlty upgraded to Lion. I am working as a professional photographer and I spend a long time editing photos in Apertur

  • Env Variable DISPLAY in ora user

    Dear all, I am installing Solution Manager 4.0 SR3 on Solaris 10 x64. I am in the middle of the installation when the installation for oracle is prompted. I opened a terminal then, su - oraslm After that with the prompted location i ran ./RUNINSTALLE

  • Mountain lion contacts won't sync with Yahoo

    Just upgraded and the option in Contacts > Accounts > On My Mac . Sync with Yahoo is missing. Also, sync with Yahoo is not working. Has anyone found a fix for this or is Apple responding with a patch?

  • Creating a two bit multiplexer

    Hello, How could two bit multiplexer could be created using labview.  That is there would be four inputs and one output. The control of this should be numerically i.e when the numeric select control has input 1, the first input goes to the output and