These forums are read only, please use our new forums here.

Main :: POD Farm / POD Studio / TonePort



ASIO4All lower latency than Line6 driver for UX1?
by JN99 on 2013-01-09 15:50:32

I just got a new PC for audio (i5-3330 quad core, 6GB RAM, Windows 8) and ran into some latency issues.  Using UX1 and Reaper I'm getting about 18ms round-trip at the lowest buffer setting of 128.  Tried several tweaks and adjustments in Windows but couldn't get any better latency numbers.  I decided just for the heck of it to give the ASIO4All driver a go.  I was surprised (and a little disappointed) to find it outperforms the Line6 driver, even with the buffer set as high as 512.  Drop it down to the same 128 and I get 7.2ms round-trip.  That's less than half of what I get using the Line6 driver.

This is good news on the one hand since it tells me I don't have any real latency issues with the PC but disappointing on the other that it's the Line6 ASIO drivers that appear to be the source of my latency issues.  The problem then becomes that the ASIO4ALL driver doesn not recognize/support the 4 inputs/sends availabel from the UX1 so using it improves performance but reduces featues.  No more recording guitar and vocals simultaneously for instance.

My question is, why/how is it a generic ASIO driver able to outperform the Line6 native driver, and by such a wide margin?  Is this an issue with using Windows 8 and we can expect updated Line 6 ASIO drivers soon to rectify this/improve performance?  IS there anything else to consider here?  I just find it odd that Line6's own drivers for their hardware are so much poorer wrt latency than a generic ASIO4ALL driver.



Re: ASIO4All lower latency than Line6 driver for UX1?
by TheRealZap on 2013-01-09 16:27:06

the bad news is that ASIO4ALL can't be trusted... it's a hack workaround of the real ASIO specifications... you can't believe anything it tells you, because it's not within specs.



Re: ASIO4All lower latency than Line6 driver for UX1?
by pandashakejr on 2013-01-10 01:44:33

   I think that is a very ignorant statement. ASIO4ALL has been around and used for many years(10) and works very well, in fact I've witnessed some very great engineers use it when in a pinch doing field recording, granted it was for playback on a laptop to get reference. What you failed miserably at explaining to the OP, is the fact that ASIO4ALL is not even ASIO at all and sounds like you are unaware of this as well. ASIO is just a written program, just like WDM and the like, that communicates audio across your computer, but ASIO has some limitations like only being able to use one instance by architecture. Without getting crazy indepth, what ASIO4ALL does essentially is tricks your software and hardware into thinking it's using ASIO, when it's actually using WDM to communicate.

   The only bad news for ASIO4ALL is if it doesn't work for you. The numbers aren't always right on, but it works very well. I've used it with my on-board soundcard to mix huge projects that were otherwise unplayable without it, when I was away from my studio and wanted to start on some mixes, granted I would only go through and clear up general frequencies, but still, it worked very very well.

   Sure ASIO4ALL isn't a fix it all, but to dismiss it, well that's just plain wrong. I mean just do a Google search and you'll see hundreds of posts on how well it works. Sure you'll probably find some negative ones too, but 9x out of 10 when someone is posting about software, it's because of an issue, just imagine if I posted every single time my stuff worked....lol

   Anyways, JN99, glad it's working for you, and hopefully this cleared up why your not getting the other sends, because it's simply using a different language so-to-speak to communicate the software to hardware. If it works, great. You can always switch drivers, and have both installed, when you want to get your other channels back. HTH



Re: ASIO4All lower latency than Line6 driver for UX1?
by TheRealZap on 2013-01-10 05:09:59

apc3 wrote:

   I think that is a very ignorant statement.

well you're wrong....

i've used ASIO4ALL many times in those years to get around cheap soundcards that have no native ASIO drivers...

my statement is 100% fact.

it should be dismissed in all cases where native drivers exists....

the whole reason ASIO4ALL was created was to fill the gap for missing drivers when ASIO support was not common.... and it does that, and is acceptable for that.

to use it, when you have fully compliant drivers provided by the manufacturer, is like using kerosene in your car because it's kind of like gasoline....

ASIO is not a "written program" it's a standard/protocol developed by steinberg for low latency audio. (developed by... is a way of saying not public/open source write your own....)

i do know what i'm talking about through personal experience as well as technical knowledge despite your attempts to make it seem otherwise....



Re: ASIO4All lower latency than Line6 driver for UX1?
by silverhead on 2013-01-10 06:46:08

I won't get into a debate about any technical comparisons - but it is indisputable that ASIO4ALL is not a true and compliant implementation of the ASIO protocol. But that doesn't really matter - what matters is performance, and in the context of this forum we're talking about performance with Line 6 products.

I know two things in that respect:

- I have seen many problems reported in this forum traced to the use of ASIO4ALL. As soon as the user removed it and used the correct Line 6 ASIO driver the problem disappeared; and

- ASIO4ALL is not supported by Line 6. That means anybody who uses it and has problems cannot expect to get solutions from Line 6, or even in this forum. They might get lucky and find someone who can help with a workaround of some sort, but for the most part very few people here use it. The official Line 6 response, as well as the unofficial but common response from forum users, is: don't use ASIO4ALL because it is not a true implementation and is not reliable or supported with Line 6 products.

So, my answers to the OP's questions:

My question is, why/how is it a generic ASIO driver able to outperform the Line6 native driver, and by such a wide margin?  Is this an issue with using Windows 8 and we can expect updated Line 6 ASIO drivers soon to rectify this/improve performance?  IS there anything else to consider here?

1) because it is not a compliant ASIO driver

2) No

3) No

If you feel strongly that Line 6 should support their ASIO-compliant products when used with a non-compliant ASIO driver you can make a feature request here:

http://line6.com/company/contact/productfeedback/

">http://line6.com/company/contact/productfeedback/">http://line6.com/company/contact/productfeedback/



Re: ASIO4All lower latency than Line6 driver for UX1?
by pandashakejr on 2013-01-10 09:09:22

   I do understand what you guys are saying, but that's not always the case. Should someone use it if there are no problems, no, why would they. Someone who it's working for is not going to post that they're having a good time recording, that's not how it works and we all know it, people report and post problems, not when everything is working plain and simple. Sorry, but the Line 6 drivers have some issues right now when watching Youtube and a few other  video sites, look at the reports on this forum and I have experienced this as well just recently. I have been using recording software since the mid 90's and am very aware of setting up my systems for performance and trouble shooting them as well. This problem was mimicked on 3 separate computers, 2 running Win 7 x64 and one running Win 8(did clean installs on both starting with Line 6 stuff). Kind of weird that so far ASIO4ALL seem to be the fix. No, I'm not going to use it through my DAW, as that part has been stable, but there are other problems, and I doubt Line6 even cares really.

   I still stand my ground on your ignorance, although it may have been an issue for some, the are chipsets and such that just don't play nice with audio driver, and not just from Line6, it's accross the board. ASIO4ALL is still continually supported and for good reason. Sometimes it feels as though these companies get their $$ and run, there should be constant support and fixes on our drivers, especially when it is for a fact that the driver is to blame for issues.

   Again, ASIO4ALL isn't something everyone should go out and grab, but when you've tried everything else and no one can help any more, then, like the OP, you try something that allows you to record without have cracks and pop or driver instability, then ehy the hell not. Yeah I guess your right, don't give something that might work when all else fails a try, just keep on struggling, that's awesome advise. Yes, 80-90% of audio problems can be resolved through tweaks and setup, but for anyone to say ASIO4ALL is has never helped anyone, needs to do some research on the matter first.



Re: ASIO4All lower latency than Line6 driver for UX1?
by silverhead on 2013-01-10 09:20:38

apc3 wrote:

  ...

   I still stand my ground on your ignorance,....

How exactly did my reply demonstrate ignorance? Of what am I ignorant?



Re: ASIO4All lower latency than Line6 driver for UX1?
by pandashakejr on 2013-01-10 10:02:12

   Sorry, I was referring to the ignorance of TheRealZap and should have worded it so, I am sorry that really wasn't directed at you. But to just dismiss it without any actual reasoning to me is very ignorant and even though I really do agree with the two of you, if you scare someone away from something that may just be their last chance of getting their Line 6 device to behave, than that is where I felt the need to say something. Yes, ASIO4ALL should be the very last resort, but I though we were here to help support a product that we believe in. Your post stated all facts, except that ASIO4ALL is not ASIO at all and they state that on their site, it's for WDM supported devices. ASIO is by far the best driver for many reasons, but doesn't work in every scenario with every setup, which includes almost every audio card manufacturer out there. Sorry again, I really didn't word that correctly and will leave it to show my ignorace....lol



Re: ASIO4All lower latency than Line6 driver for UX1?
by silverhead on 2013-01-10 10:16:14

OK - thanks for clarifying.

I don't need to defend The RealZap - he's quite capable of doing that for himself. But for the record, everything he said in his first post is true; nothing ignorant about it.

Note also that I expressed no opinion on what I think about ASIO4ALL in general, or Line 6 non-support of it. I said three things, and I stand by them:

- ASIO4ALL is not a compliant implementation of the ASIO protocol

- Line 6 does not support the use of their products with ASIO4ALL

- many problems reported here have disappeared when users remove ASIO4ALL and use the Line 6 ASIO driver

Users will decide for themselves whether they want to use it, but I won't recommend using it with Line 6 products for the above reasons.



Re: ASIO4All lower latency than Line6 driver for UX1?
by TheRealZap on 2013-01-10 10:18:03

apc3 wrote:

    But to just dismiss it without any actual reasoning to me is very ignorant

i gave you reasoning....

it works sure... and when there's no other option... its better than nothing...

but just because it works doesn't make it as good as the real thing...

regardless of what you think about ASIO4ALL... it's simply not compliant with the specs...

why do you think companies bother making their own drivers? it's not because they want to spend the money....

now go play with your ASIO4ALL....



Re: ASIO4All lower latency than Line6 driver for UX1?
by TheRealZap on 2013-01-10 10:20:09

apc3 wrote:

but for anyone to say ASIO4ALL is has never helped anyone, needs to do some research on the matter first.

i actually said i used it and it worked for me.... (on a non-ASIO card with no ASIO drivers made... probably before you were born, and a few times since.)

maybe your research on the matter should involve reading the words that i'm posting before you discredit what i'm saying.



Re: ASIO4All lower latency than Line6 driver for UX1?
by Triryche on 2013-01-10 10:32:41

Did I miss the part where somebody said  "ASIO4ALL is has never helped anyone" ?

btw, the OP is from the future and probably has stable Line6 drivers by now.



Re: ASIO4All lower latency than Line6 driver for UX1?
by pandashakejr on 2013-01-10 11:47:06

bad news, hack, can't be trusted.......I guess I misunderstood you positive reaction to the OP. way to help. As far as before I was born, don't let you thread count go to your head, I've been around for 36 years and been recording in Studios and using DAW's since DOS. I really thought the point was to help others here use their equipment, seems to me that is not the case here anymore.



Re: ASIO4All lower latency than Line6 driver for UX1?
by pandashakejr on 2013-01-10 11:48:29

TheRealZap wrote:

apc3 wrote:

but for anyone to say ASIO4ALL is has never helped anyone, needs to do some research on the matter first.

i actually said i used it and it worked for me.... (on a non-ASIO card with no ASIO drivers made... probably before you were born, and a few times since.)

maybe your research on the matter should involve reading the words that i'm posting before you discredit what i'm saying.

and again, ASIO doesn't always work for everyone and thus a workaround/hack may be needed.



Re: ASIO4All lower latency than Line6 driver for UX1?
by JN99 on 2013-01-10 12:07:04

Yes, weird that I have posted since 43462 - LOL

Now, as for all the replies and in-fighting.  Interesting, but not particularly helpful or useful.  And for the record Silverhead, I did not ask that Line6 support their products' use with non-compliant drivers nor did I ask for any support on using my UX1 with ASIO4ALL.  What I asked was why/how I'd be getting better perfromance (lower latency) and if it's something to do with the current Line6 drivers that might be addressed with a future update, thinking it could be Windows 8 specific for example.

So again, while all the posts here are interesting (or entertaining at least), none really address explain the poor performance of the native drivers from Line6 vs. the ASIO4All drivers, nor answer the other questions.  "Because it's a hack" doesn't answer the question about why the native drivers are putperformed for example, but they are.  And "no" there won't be drivers released (not sure how you know that unless you work for Line6) to improve latency is I guess an answer but not really an explanation or in any way helpful.



Re: ASIO4All lower latency than Line6 driver for UX1?
by TheRealZap on 2013-01-10 12:07:40

...and ASIO4ALL is a workaround not a real deal....

my point exactly.



Re: ASIO4All lower latency than Line6 driver for UX1?
by TheRealZap on 2013-01-10 12:12:56

actually it was addressed....

ASIO4ALL is not reporting accurate numbers to you, because it's not within spec....

the numbers it gives you are unreliable... and likely no better than the drivers provided by line6.

it's also of note that the line6 drivers report the numbers accurately per the ASIO specification... BUT....

those numbers don't account for the line6 technology on top of their ASIO drivers known as "tonedirect monitoring"

which lowers the latency in realworld by providing hardware pathways for the monitoring sound that aren't measured within the ASIO specifications....

by the way... tonedirect monitoring is bypassed when you use drivers other than line6 provided.

basically the numbers don't tell the whole story....

are you having a real issue? or just fixating on the reported numbers?



Re: ASIO4All lower latency than Line6 driver for UX1?
by silverhead on 2013-01-10 12:22:14

JN99 wrote:

...What I asked was why/how I'd be getting better perfromance (lower latency) and if it's something to do with the current Line6 drivers that might be addressed with a future update, thinking it could be Windows 8 specific for example.

....  And "no" there won't be drivers released (not sure how you know that unless you work for Line6) to improve latency is I guess an answer but not really an explanation or in any way helpful.

The question you asked was: "can (we) expect updated Line 6 ASIO drivers soon to rectify this/improve performance?" I don't work for Line 6 and I have no idea whether/when new drivers may be released. But if/when they are, the reason for it won't be to rectify this (namely, what you purport to be poorer performance than ASIO4ALL) - that's what I said. And while that's only my opinion, I think it is well-founded; why would line 6 release a new driver to rectify an issue that only exists in an unsupported environment?



Re: ASIO4All lower latency than Line6 driver for UX1?
by Triryche on 2013-01-10 13:03:06

I used ASIO4ALL in the past as a workaround.

Not sure if ASIO4ALL has been improved since, but when I used it all seemed good at first, untill I was 4 or 5 tracks deep in my DAW and things starting going out of synch. At first I thought I was going crazy, I spent hours trying to nudge tracks back into synch.

To Zaps point, is the 18ms latency reported causing an issue?

If you use ASIO, Reaper is usually pretty much nuts on as far as synching.

Are you multi-tracking and things aren't lining up?



Re: ASIO4All lower latency than Line6 driver for UX1?
by JN99 on 2013-01-10 13:16:30

I noticed the latency I was hearing was gone; that's when I looked at the numbers but the numbers themselves I know don't tell the entire story.  I can hear the difference though; the latency is no longer noticeable (to my ears) when using the ASIO4All drivers.

I also don't understand the tone direct - I have a support ticket open looking for more explanation on this.  When using the UX1 via reaper I get no sound unless I select to monitor the guitar track but I thought the whole point of tone direct was that it output sound without going through the recording chain.  To get around this I have to run Pod Farm stand alone, which maybe is the intent but I thought if it was running, it was running and there should be the tone direct output regardless of whether running stand alone of as plugin.



Re: ASIO4All lower latency than Line6 driver for UX1?
by JN99 on 2013-01-10 13:19:26

I'd say if they don't have a Windows 8 driver (and they don't - just one that is this far reported to work with Windows 8) it's reasonable to ask if they have one in the works and if that might improve performance under Windows 8.

You're missing the point entirely...  It's not about releasing a driver to recify an issue that "only exists in an unsupported environment" it's to rectify one running in a supported environment obviously: Lone6 UX1 with Line6 ASIO in Windows 8



Re: ASIO4All lower latency than Line6 driver for UX1?
by JN99 on 2013-01-10 13:21:14

It's just an issue with monitoring the guitar and hearing the delay.  So for now, my workaround is to run Pod Farm standalone (see above post) since that is the only way I can hear the guitar without monitoring the track in the DAW.



Re: ASIO4All lower latency than Line6 driver for UX1?
by TheRealZap on 2013-01-10 13:27:44

you pretty much want to turn monitoring off in your daw... run standalone while recording dry... then add the plugin to the track with the same or tweaked tone after the fact for mixing....

of course there's no set workflow... if something works better for you.



Re: ASIO4All lower latency than Line6 driver for UX1?
by TheRealZap on 2013-01-10 13:28:10

you do have the speakers plugged directly into the UX1 right?



Re: ASIO4All lower latency than Line6 driver for UX1?
by JN99 on 2013-01-10 13:34:51

Yes, and that is the confusing part - I thought if I ran PodFarm as the plugin I'd still have the tonedirect monitoring output to the speakers but I don't.



Re: ASIO4All lower latency than Line6 driver for UX1?
by TheRealZap on 2013-01-10 13:39:02

pod farm (plugin) is essentially a post production tool... not really supposed to be used "live" so to speak.... and yes i've used it that way... and yes the latency sucks! but that's just not what it's supposed to do.

i usually record wwet and dry to different tracks using standalone pod farm, so that i have a reference... but i would mute the wet track and go to the plugin\dry track when tweaking the track... render that to a new track eventually... and then mute the dry/plugin track....

of course that's a lot of effort, but if you like to revisit things like i do from time to time it's nice to have the reference and the ability to adjust without re-performing.



Re: ASIO4All lower latency than Line6 driver for UX1?
by Triryche on 2013-01-10 13:57:34

If you want you can record the wet and dry while monitoring the wet and thgen add the [lug-in to the dry.

I usually do this just to remind myself the tone I was going for.

If you had Monitoring On in your DAW, that is likely the latency you are hearing.



Re: ASIO4All lower latency than Line6 driver for UX1?
by Triryche on 2013-01-10 13:58:35

That is the the typical way to run it.

You can record wet and dry (see above reply)



Re: ASIO4All lower latency than Line6 driver for UX1?
by JN99 on 2013-01-13 17:00:48

Another question.  Is the UX1 supposed to have output to the monitors w/o Pod Farm running i.e. guitar sound out?  On my new PC it is behaving that way, or at least it is sometimes and I cannot figure out why or what the behavior is supposed to be.  Usually that is how it behaves on this PC but there have been occasions where it has not (requiring Pod Farm to be run to get sound).  No documentation that I can find on this and now repsonse to the support ticket I opened several days ago so any help here is appreciated. 



Re: ASIO4All lower latency than Line6 driver for UX1?
by Triryche on 2013-01-16 08:55:05

Without running POD Farm you UX will output sounds from your computer to the UX's analog outs and headphones as the UX becomes the soundcard (unless you set it otherwise). On most PC's plugging in the UX will take over as the default soundcard.  And if configured in the Line6 Audio-MIDI control panel it will pass the unprocessed signal to your DAW if you have Line6 ASIO selected as your device.

It will not pass the input (instrument, mic or line ins) to your analog outs or headphones. One exception would be if you turn on "record monitoring" in your DAW, but you will experience the latency of the signal going thru the DAW.




The information above may not be current, and you should direct questions to the current forum or review the manual.