Virtual Inputs + VB-CABLE(s) buffer latency to ms
Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 9:38 pm
Hello,
I am currently using the voicemeeter potato beta version. For now Im just using it as an audio repeater for my mic, virtual inputs, vb-cable and vb-cable a+b.
Now what I am wondering is what kind of latency in ms I am getting when using voicemeeters virtual inputs together with the vb-cables. I read about how to optimize latency etc. but I didnt quite understand everything written.
And I dont understand if the buffers in voicemeeter applies to both hardware and virtual inputs or just the hardware inputs, meaning that virtual inputs would have a slightly lower latency?
Im also wondering if its true that if I double the sample rate and also double the buffers I will get the same latency but with higher quality?
I have set all playback and recording devices to 48khz/24bit and the max latency on all vb-cables to 2048 smp. If I have calculated it all correctly the maximum possible latency I could receive with my current settings is 47,66 ms because (80+160+2048)/48000 = 0,04766. But correct me if Im wrong.
I am currently using the voicemeeter potato beta version. For now Im just using it as an audio repeater for my mic, virtual inputs, vb-cable and vb-cable a+b.
Now what I am wondering is what kind of latency in ms I am getting when using voicemeeters virtual inputs together with the vb-cables. I read about how to optimize latency etc. but I didnt quite understand everything written.
And I dont understand if the buffers in voicemeeter applies to both hardware and virtual inputs or just the hardware inputs, meaning that virtual inputs would have a slightly lower latency?
Im also wondering if its true that if I double the sample rate and also double the buffers I will get the same latency but with higher quality?
I have set all playback and recording devices to 48khz/24bit and the max latency on all vb-cables to 2048 smp. If I have calculated it all correctly the maximum possible latency I could receive with my current settings is 47,66 ms because (80+160+2048)/48000 = 0,04766. But correct me if Im wrong.