I was pulling my hair out for this precise latency problem. Then YT recommended this 4 year old video (as of August 2024) and it is Kenny to the rescue. Thanks so much! Brilliant stuff.
OK, I think I figured out how to do this without having to duplicate your FX chain on the 2 tracks. It will work on record, playback, and punch. You need 3 tracks. One for the actual recording, one for the input monitoring, and a 3rd as an FX channel. Set up the first 2 tracks as Kenny described. Then on the recording track, create a send to the FX channel. On the record monitoring channel, create a send to the FX channel AND take it out of the master parent send. On the FX channel, add your desired reverb, delay, etc. and set everything to 100% wet. Then change the level of the FX channel to taste. When recording, the input monitoring channel generates the FX, with the direct monitoring providing the dry sound. When playing back, the recording channel handles both. Using an FX send like this also is useful when you need to record multiple vocal lines. Then you don't have to have the same FX chain on all channels, saving CPU.
Well, the wet signal will still be delayed. That's obviously not a problem for simple reverb stuff on vocals, but for timing specific stuff like delay effects on guitar, I don't think this will work very well.
If you _need_ specific delay timing for tracking, a delay pedal might be worthwhile. EDIT: Another commenter mentioned using a Line6 interface with built-in amp modeling. Perhaps it has delay FX as well?
If it's a timing delay, you could just alter the FX ONLY track by reducing it's delay by the amount of latency you're getting. But don't do the same to the track you're recording to.
@@kennygioia7184 Yes, but my point is that it's physically impossible to get an accurate no-added-latency signal from the FX-track if said effects cause any form of delay on their own. I am being a bit of a stickler for semantics, here. Practically speaking your example is a really good way of working around the problem. And if you really need that accurate real time representation of the signal, it's probably best to invest in dedicated gear so that your input signal is pre-processed :)
In the FX chain window, near the bottom, there are two numbers that indicate latency with the individual plugins. Is it safe to say that as long as that number is 0/0 you’re only limited to interface latency? I’m successfully recording and monitoring fairly heavy FX chains and software instruments, all using plugins that are 0/0 on the ms latency. It’s a easy way to figure out what plugins cause latency. Some plugins can be put on low latency settings which reaper properly detects as 0/0. I hope this makes sense. Great video just trying to see if my method is going to cause some micro latency problems that I’m unaware of (for example: things recording at micro latencies of 0.015x or something slightly slower than than the grid, etc) Maybe there is a setting that optimizes recording even if the computer momentarily experiences a latency problem. One of my favorite parts of reaper is being able to effortlessly add and remove things without any hiccups but it can happen theoretically
With the no-latency FX-only track approach, the DAW reverb would only apply on the "wet" signal from the delay FX (dry fader is at 0, so no dry signal passed to reverb), as opposed to the dry + wet mix. So the effects you hear back aren't "exactly" the same, in my view (to those a bit confused by this, as per comments); there'd be a noticeable difference. Still a very good idea though, of course, and better than nothing...
Wouldn’t the wet track you created just to hear the effects in real time have latency like before? I understand that you hear your input real time, but I’m confused at to how the wet effects have zero latency in the software.
I'm not expert but my understanding is that you're right, but I think the idea is that you can tolerate the latency in the wet effects if you're also hearing the source with zero latency. I've tried it with my guitar, and, it's not ideal if you're very bothered about your sound while you're playing, but it's sort of ok - and better than playing with either no effects or with latency on everything.
I think it's no biggie to have, say, 13ms latency in a Reverb (it would just add 13ms to the predelay, which is not much). What musicians go apeshit about is hearing their own DRY vocal with 13ms latency.
Very clear instructions and well executed visuals, thank you. As has been noted, the fx chain still has latency but it's still better than working with a dry signal. There's many benefits to working digitally in a computer, but sometimes I yearn for a good ol' analogue record chain!
ya, i figured out the hard way, to listen to the recorded tracks dry and mute as many tracks as possible, while i sync the next track i am recording from the input monitor. i'm glad you have come to a similar conclusion. I have a scarlett 2i4 which has that mix knob. it's 1st gen and that pot is getting worn out because after level-setting, i dont touch anything else but back and forth with the mix knob as i create the song. Also, I definitely use the ASIO drivers. they are by far the fastest on my windows PC.
This has helped me a lot. I've been struggling as a new guy to the DAW world with latency. I have drums playing in reaper and trying to record guitars in sync has always had me playing behind the drums. Great method.
wow that sounds like a great trick but I can't understand how these effects being sent back to the monitoring headphones would not be delayed? or it doesn't really distract the singer / guitarist, as long as they can hear dry without latency + reasonably delayed effects?
The latter would be correct. Reverb usually has pre-delay, so it likely won't be noticeable, and pre-delay settings can be adjusted to compensate if need be.
This defo works for vocals, because you inevitably get a delay with either the reverb or delay effect Vs the dry signal. For Amp sims this is a bit awkward, especially heavily distorted guitars. If you have any suggestions or wanna make a video for that, would be most welcome to a lot of users! I cant think of any viable solution other than a DI box with splitter, having one signal going to a Pocket POD for example, which you feed to one input and use that as the direct monitoring, and then have the 2nd output as pure DI signal straight to audio interface. But this is a bit of a faff. And some users out there might only have 1 input on their audio interface.
I have used a pod xt live. There is no latency if used with a usb cable and you can choose to record only the direct dry signal but here all of your effects such as distortion and etc... while recording. Then use amp sims to run on the dry guitar sound. Or if you really like the effected signal with the pod xt just record the effected signal. It works a lot better than recording a DI signal through an audio interface such as focusrite or others...
I went to try this today and when I did the test, it was already perfect lol. Guess I got lucky but I really appreciate your videos. Just scratching the surface with Reaper and I am loving it the more I find I can do
There are still latency issues if the vocalist wants to hear real time fx while singing. The zero latency shown here only really works after a piece of audio has been recorded. No latency in between the dry track, and the fx track being monitored. I might just need a better system
Nice! Maybe I don't get it, but doesn't this trick still suffer from latency? It's just hidden by the fact that the main voice sound is using the interface's hardware zero latency. But the FX from Reaper are still played back to the singer with the added latency. But because it's a combination of delay and reverb, it will hide the latency. You say you can also use this for guitar. I always record my guitar directly into Reaper, using amp modeling, etc for creating the sounds. But doing it this way will playback my raw guitar sound without FX (the hardware zero latency sound) and mix that with the guitar FX (amp sim, chorus, etc.) I set on the track in Reaper. That's a sound I don't want. I only want the processed FX sound. But if I disable the hardware zero-latency signal, I'm back at the start and suffer from the latency on the FX track. For that reason I often use a dedicated modeling audio interface, like a Line6 UX1, that can actually do amp modeling with zero latency in the interface. I wished you had mentioned this option in the video.
it doesn't, this is handled by the audio interface on hardware level. it works even if you are not recording, on my UMC204HD it works even if i plug the interface to just a powerbank, not a computer
If you're using amp simulator plugins than this trick won't work because your direct signal will be dry. For that, you need to reduce the latency and record thru the track.
Yes, I also really enjoy them. Just a hint: Wouldn't it make sense to rename this video to Live Perfomance/recording or Direct Monitoring? Guess.. that would be easier to search for, since I was looking for such a scenario myself and was coincendentally stumbling over this one here :D Keni to me is the lord of Reaper. Unbeliveabe what he das done!
Great video as always, Kenny. Your knowledge has been invaluable to me... Question: If using the above steps for zero latency, does the recorded track (direct monitoring) print the effect, and if does, am I able to turn off the effects later during post processing? In other words have the track dry to process further.
Kenny thanks! I had this problem today and found this vid, I was so lucky. Please can you explain how it works? the effect also uses the signal that goes in and out the daw, how is it that there is no latency monitoring this way?
The effects will still have the same latency, but it will be easier to time vocal recordings as the dry vocal will have no latency at all, only the FX. Otherwise your entire vocal take would have been delayed with xx ms, making it harder to time when to start singing/rapping. I agree that this works perfectly when recording vocals, when recording instruments it might be problems with timing.
During direct monitoring, bypassing the computer, does the sound go to the digital-to-analog and vice versa converters, or, bypassing them, goes directly to the headphones? That is, direct monitoring is a completely analog path, or are DACs and ADCs present here?
With monitoring the wet FX on the second track, are you still not going to have issues due to latency, where the singer hears their voice via direct monitor followed by a slight delay with the web FX track?
Hi, I don't need virtual fx, I use hardware fx for monitoring vocals. Does REAPER support ASIO Direct Monitoring? I can't find anywhere in reaper the same "direct monitoring" option as I see in CUBASE.
Interesting idea. I am wondering if it would be the same (and maybe easier) if we use direct monitoring and also track monitoring and simply remove the dry signal from the delay during recording. I mean without using an extra track.
Thanks Kenny for this helpful video! Since the topic is related to recording on audio interfaces, do you have any advice on how to get rid of clicks and pops in the recording? I noticed that it doesn't happen when recording DI instruments like guitar and bass but always happens when recording vocals. Thanks.
Very useful! I have been struggling with guitar amp modeling software to work due to the high latency. It's great to know that there is a work around that allows me to use zero latency. Will try it out today with my steinberg ai. I wonder if this would help with the latency issues experienced by using handy zoom recorders like the H4NPro as an audio interface? The problem with those is that they do allow monitoring, but you can't change the levels. I'll try it out and comment.
i was watching this while on the toilet and the cellphone was on my lap, at 4:08 the transition kicked in and my brain tricked me into thinking the cellphone was about to fall into the toilet
@REAPERmania hey Kenny, what if you are playing a midi sound and when you turn on direct Monitoring you can’t hear the instrument? Is there a way to direct monitor and still hear your midi instrument? When I try to track midi it has that little bit of latency and then when I direct monitor, you can’t hear the sound.
I know it's been over 3 years, but... I have a question: Doesn't using a track for fx only still use up some CPU? Direct monitoring is generally for folks like me who have an older pc and need to use our resources as wisely as possible. Doesn't it make sense to instead use an outboard fx unit and/or mixer that might be laying around?
Awesome idea, and advice...I do see a weak point - if you wanted to use a guitar amp sim w/distortion, it would HAVE to include clean guitar w/dirty....maybe that can be overcome, I dunno. I'd rather record direct out from my tube preamp anyway, so there would never be a 'clean' guitar to worry about...
Wouldn't the FX ONLY track be subject to the half of the round-trip latency? Even though you're direct monitoring through the interface, the input still needs to go into the CPU and get processed into the FX track, then blended along with the direct monitor... right?
I'm going to try this, but I can't understand why there's no discrepancy on the timming of the recording file against the previous tracks. Direct monitoring vs the printing time..
The problem with the direct monitoring on the Scarlett 2i2 is that it's extremely quiet, and therefore unusable. The other problem is that the direct monitoring on reaper has 187ms of latency, so it's also unusable. Is there a way to use direct monitoring in reaper with 0 (or close to 0) latency?
What to do when obs is recording and can’t hear reaper? Audio from reaper records fine but can’t monitor at all, it might be obs settings. I can get reaper to be heard only by switching from my audio interface back to default speakers, after turning off the reaper asio which is inconvenient as heck. Any suggestions so I don’t have to switch back and forward all the time just to do a sound check of reaper?
Quite interesting...Would it work by setting a send from the track actually being recorded to the second with FX only (pre-fader eventually)? Wouldn't that avoid having two identical fx chains and just use the one on the FX only track?
I'm still looking for the holy grail of only one FX chain to change, zero latency monitoring, and identical sound between playback and recording without needing to change any settings. The issue with the 2 FX chains is that for example if you want a different slap back delay or reverb size, you have to change it in both places. I guess it would be pretty quick to delete one and drag over all the FX from the other. Not quite the holy grail. Ideas?
I just bought a Scarlett 2i2. I followed this video exactly and nothing worked at all. First, I can get anything to play back or record that doesn't have popping and cracking in it. second, I can't monitor the fx like this video shows. When i set up the 2 tracks, I should be able to hear the full fx just like if I was playing the track back with fx enabled right? Well I can't hear any fx. In fact, I can barely hear my voice at all. I have no idea what's going on.
So it records the wet signal? I want to record a track. Have the reverb i the phones during record but i only want to record the dry sound. Is that possible?
2:12 good picture with several parts of latency. How to solve last two parts of it in direct monitor mode? I mean the latency of backing track coming to headphones, the latency which appear from DAW to headspeakers (in opposite direction).
but isnt the only wet FX heard with the latency since the signal is returned from the daw? sure, the dry signal from her is in her ears. and when the fx come with the latency it isnt that bad as when both dry and wet were with latency, right?
hi, know you why i've no sound in my headphone when i choose ASIO ? But even without choose ASIO, i've no sound when i turn off direct monitoring in Reaper and turn on in my soundcard
The best thing about Ubuntu Studio and Reaper (using ALSA, rather than JACK) is that I have never even looked at the latency settings. It's so small that I never worry about it. The occasional input (my Korg Kross) has a tiny bit of noticeable latency, easily fixed by moving the whole item by a minute touch. Of course, Windows and Mac have a lot of advantages when it comes to plugins etc, but for latency, my OS and Reaper work like a perfect marriage. (I assume my audio interface and my USB mic both have a part in this too.)
I'm on the same setup. now with Linux kernel 5.16, the latency has gone even lower on ALSA + Digital Interface (you can basically uninstall Ubuntu Studio) I use FocusRite 2i2, and I also use Mooer GE200 as Digital Interface sometimes when I record the guitar only. but I'm leaning towards the FocusRite because now I also have digital piano, and it allows me playing the guitar over the piano track being looped back to the FocusRite. PS this is super cool: use ReaInsert plugin, and 1. record MIDI from your piano as MIDI track (and make some adjustments as needed) 2. ReaInsert Send recorded MIDI track to the piano 3. piano will play back the Audio from the MIDI instructions, using the piano actual sound samples (which is what I want, NOT the VSTi virtual instrument samples) 4. piano will send back the real Audio back to ReaInsert plugin in Reaper, 5. freeze / record the actual audio played by the piano (without sitting in front of the piano) then you can record your guitar overdub on top of that piano Audio. how cool is that?
Okay but, if i wanna record my guitar using a VST amp simulation and i have latency on my monitor, i've tried but can't make it work so, just dont know how you do it as you say in the video that you can do it with guitar
So I have been unable to find a video to help me. I have around 22ms of latency but I cant do the loop recording method to fix it. How else can I eliminate the latency or delay from my mic?
Wow, I don't know about this lol, Im starting to love Reaper more. I never used my audio interface HP this way, I always plug via laptop audio out. Thanks!
Hello, everything's cool untill it comes to the " 0% DRY ". I want to apply this technique using Antares Autotune Pro but I can't find a way to use your trick with this pluggin. Any Suggestion ?
Hi Kenny pls can you tell me how to adjust same latency in multi effects guitar processor nux mg 30 in Reaper, while trying to record the guitar parts.
The real RTL is what you measure with impulse test... my MOTU adds around 1ms to the calculated value on analog inputs and outputs and the SPDIF adds only 0.3ms :)
![เปิดใจ "อาจารย์เบียร์ คนตื่นธรรม" อดีตเคยสุดทุกทาง ถ้าใช้หนี้หมดไปบวชแน่ l [Nickynachat]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/IxeE0xVhy08/mqdefault.jpg)
I was pulling my hair out for this precise latency problem. Then YT recommended this 4 year old video (as of August 2024) and it is Kenny to the rescue. Thanks so much! Brilliant stuff.
Kenny Gioia is one of Reaper's best features.
I've used Reaper for six years and most of the time when Kenny posts a new video I learn something new. You're the best!
really!
@@phitoman6964 ;)
I really EnGioia these videos.
oh....I see what you did there.... :-)
🤣
🤣🤣🤣👏👏👏
@@mikemartin6554 stahppppp 😂😂😂
OK, I think I figured out how to do this without having to duplicate your FX chain on the 2 tracks. It will work on record, playback, and punch. You need 3 tracks. One for the actual recording, one for the input monitoring, and a 3rd as an FX channel. Set up the first 2 tracks as Kenny described. Then on the recording track, create a send to the FX channel. On the record monitoring channel, create a send to the FX channel AND take it out of the master parent send. On the FX channel, add your desired reverb, delay, etc. and set everything to 100% wet. Then change the level of the FX channel to taste. When recording, the input monitoring channel generates the FX, with the direct monitoring providing the dry sound. When playing back, the recording channel handles both.
Using an FX send like this also is useful when you need to record multiple vocal lines. Then you don't have to have the same FX chain on all channels, saving CPU.
Well, the wet signal will still be delayed.
That's obviously not a problem for simple reverb stuff on vocals, but for timing specific stuff like delay effects on guitar, I don't think this will work very well.
If you _need_ specific delay timing for tracking, a delay pedal might be worthwhile.
EDIT: Another commenter mentioned using a Line6 interface with built-in amp modeling. Perhaps it has delay FX as well?
If it's a timing delay, you could just alter the FX ONLY track by reducing it's delay by the amount of latency you're getting. But don't do the same to the track you're recording to.
@@kennygioia7184 Yes, but my point is that it's physically impossible to get an accurate no-added-latency signal from the FX-track if said effects cause any form of delay on their own. I am being a bit of a stickler for semantics, here. Practically speaking your example is a really good way of working around the problem. And if you really need that accurate real time representation of the signal, it's probably best to invest in dedicated gear so that your input signal is pre-processed :)
In the FX chain window, near the bottom, there are two numbers that indicate latency with the individual plugins. Is it safe to say that as long as that number is 0/0 you’re only limited to interface latency?
I’m successfully recording and monitoring fairly heavy FX chains and software instruments, all using plugins that are 0/0 on the ms latency.
It’s a easy way to figure out what plugins cause latency. Some plugins can be put on low latency settings which reaper properly detects as 0/0. I hope this makes sense.
Great video just trying to see if my method is going to cause some micro latency problems that I’m unaware of (for example: things recording at micro latencies of 0.015x or something slightly slower than than the grid, etc)
Maybe there is a setting that optimizes recording even if the computer momentarily experiences a latency problem. One of my favorite parts of reaper is being able to effortlessly add and remove things without any hiccups but it can happen theoretically
In that case going to need a better computer, or just drop your latency insanely low.
With the no-latency FX-only track approach, the DAW reverb would only apply on the "wet" signal from the delay FX (dry fader is at 0, so no dry signal passed to reverb), as opposed to the dry + wet mix. So the effects you hear back aren't "exactly" the same, in my view (to those a bit confused by this, as per comments); there'd be a noticeable difference. Still a very good idea though, of course, and better than nothing...
Very useful vid for people doing vocal recordings in Reaper and struggling with too high latencies. Very well explained, as always. Thank you Kenny !
But i still have latencies
thanks kenny, you´ve saved me, in three days I have to record some demos of singers in an old laptop and you just upload this tutorial today.
same :)
You are always saving us and teaching us that there is nothing we can't do in Reaper. Thanks a lot, sir!
Kenny, your lack of BS is proverbial. Thanks
I have been searching for a way to put effects on the direct monitoring signal. This is the best solution I have seen. Thank you!!!
This is one of THE greatest learning tools on youtube
This is the absolute best video explaining direct monitoring and work around thank you so much.
Wouldn’t the wet track you created just to hear the effects in real time have latency like before? I understand that you hear your input real time, but I’m confused at to how the wet effects have zero latency in the software.
I'm not expert but my understanding is that you're right, but I think the idea is that you can tolerate the latency in the wet effects if you're also hearing the source with zero latency. I've tried it with my guitar, and, it's not ideal if you're very bothered about your sound while you're playing, but it's sort of ok - and better than playing with either no effects or with latency on everything.
I think it's no biggie to have, say, 13ms latency in a Reverb (it would just add 13ms to the predelay, which is not much). What musicians go apeshit about is hearing their own DRY vocal with 13ms latency.
Very clear instructions and well executed visuals, thank you. As has been noted, the fx chain still has latency but it's still better than working with a dry signal. There's many benefits to working digitally in a computer, but sometimes I yearn for a good ol' analogue record chain!
Jesus man, I've been racking my brain trying to figure this out. Seriously thank you so much, and I'm so glad I found your channel.
ya, i figured out the hard way, to listen to the recorded tracks dry and mute as many tracks as possible, while i sync the next track i am recording from the input monitor. i'm glad you have come to a similar conclusion. I have a scarlett 2i4 which has that mix knob. it's 1st gen and that pot is getting worn out because after level-setting, i dont touch anything else but back and forth with the mix knob as i create the song. Also, I definitely use the ASIO drivers. they are by far the fastest on my windows PC.
Kenny, you're a lifesaver! Without these tutorials, I'd be totally lost. Many thanks!!
This has helped me a lot. I've been struggling as a new guy to the DAW world with latency. I have drums playing in reaper and trying to record guitars in sync has always had me playing behind the drums. Great method.
Absolutely brilliant.
Many thanks, Kenny.
Thanks! Very helpful, I have a question - what if the plugin doesn't have dry/wet slider< how can I use this trick with it?
OH MY GOSH! I struggled with this for the past 5 yrs!! THANK YOUUUU!!!
wow that sounds like a great trick
but I can't understand how these effects being sent back to the monitoring headphones would not be delayed?
or it doesn't really distract the singer / guitarist, as long as they can hear dry without latency + reasonably delayed effects?
The latter would be correct. Reverb usually has pre-delay, so it likely won't be noticeable, and pre-delay settings can be adjusted to compensate if need be.
This defo works for vocals, because you inevitably get a delay with either the reverb or delay effect Vs the dry signal. For Amp sims this is a bit awkward, especially heavily distorted guitars. If you have any suggestions or wanna make a video for that, would be most welcome to a lot of users! I cant think of any viable solution other than a DI box with splitter, having one signal going to a Pocket POD for example, which you feed to one input and use that as the direct monitoring, and then have the 2nd output as pure DI signal straight to audio interface. But this is a bit of a faff. And some users out there might only have 1 input on their audio interface.
I have used a pod xt live. There is no latency if used with a usb cable and you can choose to record only the direct dry signal but here all of your effects such as distortion and etc... while recording. Then use amp sims to run on the dry guitar sound. Or if you really like the effected signal with the pod xt just record the effected signal. It works a lot better than recording a DI signal through an audio interface such as focusrite or others...
KENNY is the Most Informative Guy on You Tube Great job your doing there Man !
Always look forward to your posts. Awesome tutorials!!
I went to try this today and when I did the test, it was already perfect lol. Guess I got lucky but I really appreciate your videos. Just scratching the surface with Reaper and I am loving it the more I find I can do
you and Reno Mellow are the best Reapers. The guy in Reaper Blog is very instructive too.
I never thought Christopher Walken would be telling me how to use Reaper
@labedincoln lost it
😅😅😅😅😅
Sounds nothing like him
TBH he sounds like Christopher Walken going through puberty
@@DohBoi863 Not at all. That's like saying Joe Pesci sounds like Shaquille O'Neill
These videos are lifesavers! Thank you.
There are still latency issues if the vocalist wants to hear real time fx while singing. The zero latency shown here only really works after a piece of audio has been recorded. No latency in between the dry track, and the fx track being monitored. I might just need a better system
Thank you for the information. Very useful to a newbie of Reaper.
Nice! Maybe I don't get it, but doesn't this trick still suffer from latency? It's just hidden by the fact that the main voice sound is using the interface's hardware zero latency. But the FX from Reaper are still played back to the singer with the added latency. But because it's a combination of delay and reverb, it will hide the latency. You say you can also use this for guitar. I always record my guitar directly into Reaper, using amp modeling, etc for creating the sounds. But doing it this way will playback my raw guitar sound without FX (the hardware zero latency sound) and mix that with the guitar FX (amp sim, chorus, etc.) I set on the track in Reaper. That's a sound I don't want. I only want the processed FX sound. But if I disable the hardware zero-latency signal, I'm back at the start and suffer from the latency on the FX track.
For that reason I often use a dedicated modeling audio interface, like a Line6 UX1, that can actually do amp modeling with zero latency in the interface. I wished you had mentioned this option in the video.
it doesn't, this is handled by the audio interface on hardware level. it works even if you are not recording, on my UMC204HD it works even if i plug the interface to just a powerbank, not a computer
If you're using amp simulator plugins than this trick won't work because your direct signal will be dry. For that, you need to reduce the latency and record thru the track.
@@cURLybOi why use a powerbank? Just curious.
Yes, I also really enjoy them. Just a hint: Wouldn't it make sense to rename this video to Live Perfomance/recording or Direct Monitoring?
Guess.. that would be easier to search for, since I was looking for such a scenario myself and was coincendentally stumbling over this one here :D
Keni to me is the lord of Reaper. Unbeliveabe what he das done!
Kenny your a life saver, I always learn something different when I watch your tuts. Thanks a bunch!!
Great video as always, Kenny. Your knowledge has been invaluable to me... Question: If using the above steps for zero latency, does the recorded track (direct monitoring) print the effect, and if does, am I able to turn off the effects later during post processing? In other words have the track dry to process further.
Excellent I've been looking for this for so long
Again dude, you come up with what I've been looking for for weeks. I'm so glad I bought Reaper. :) Great job dude.
I learned stuff I can use, thanks Kenny
This channel is gold!
Pure gold from Kenny... Pure gold.
From one Kenny to another Kenny..... THANK YOU 🙏🏼
Kenny thanks! I had this problem today and found this vid, I was so lucky. Please can you explain how it works? the effect also uses the signal that goes in and out the daw, how is it that there is no latency monitoring this way?
The effects will still have the same latency, but it will be easier to time vocal recordings as the dry vocal will have no latency at all, only the FX. Otherwise your entire vocal take would have been delayed with xx ms, making it harder to time when to start singing/rapping. I agree that this works perfectly when recording vocals, when recording instruments it might be problems with timing.
During direct monitoring, bypassing the computer, does the sound go to the digital-to-analog and vice versa converters, or, bypassing them, goes directly to the headphones? That is, direct monitoring is a completely analog path, or are DACs and ADCs present here?
Everytime I watch one of Kenny's videos, I wanna hear the full song!
really needed this tutorial. thanks so much Kenny G.
With monitoring the wet FX on the second track, are you still not going to have issues due to latency, where the singer hears their voice via direct monitor followed by a slight delay with the web FX track?
Hi, I don't need virtual fx,
I use hardware fx for monitoring vocals. Does REAPER support ASIO Direct Monitoring?
I can't find anywhere in reaper the same "direct monitoring" option as I see in CUBASE.
Interesting idea. I am wondering if it would be the same (and maybe easier) if we use direct monitoring and also track monitoring and simply remove the dry signal from the delay during recording. I mean without using an extra track.
Very cool Kenny. Thank you.
How do you then sync up the late vocal recording with the other tracks then?
This is a life saver! Thank you Kenny
Thanks Kenny for this helpful video! Since the topic is related to recording on audio interfaces, do you have any advice on how to get rid of clicks and pops in the recording? I noticed that it doesn't happen when recording DI instruments like guitar and bass but always happens when recording vocals. Thanks.
The best youtube channel of the universe. Thanks mate!
Thank you the latency was driving me nuts. I have just about taken care of it. 👍
Very useful! I have been struggling with guitar amp modeling software to work due to the high latency. It's great to know that there is a work around that allows me to use zero latency. Will try it out today with my steinberg ai. I wonder if this would help with the latency issues experienced by using handy zoom recorders like the H4NPro as an audio interface? The problem with those is that they do allow monitoring, but you can't change the levels. I'll try it out and comment.
That's a neat trick. Thanks Kenny!
Awesome video. But what about if you want to hear your voice being equalized or compressed in real time, is that possible?
i was watching this while on the toilet and the cellphone was on my lap, at 4:08 the transition kicked in and my brain tricked me into thinking the cellphone was about to fall into the toilet
@REAPERmania hey Kenny, what if you are playing a midi sound and when you turn on direct Monitoring you can’t hear the instrument? Is there a way to direct monitor and still hear your midi instrument? When I try to track midi it has that little bit of latency and then when I direct monitor, you can’t hear the sound.
3.5 minutes in, and my problem is already solved!
I know it's been over 3 years, but... I have a question: Doesn't using a track for fx only still use up some CPU? Direct monitoring is generally for folks like me who have an older pc and need to use our resources as wisely as possible. Doesn't it make sense to instead use an outboard fx unit and/or mixer that might be laying around?
Just what I was looking for and more. This will save me alot of nerves. Thaaaaanxxx
Awesome idea, and advice...I do see a weak point - if you wanted to use a guitar amp sim w/distortion, it would HAVE to include clean guitar w/dirty....maybe that can be overcome, I dunno. I'd rather record direct out from my tube preamp anyway, so there would never be a 'clean' guitar to worry about...
Great job Kenny...
That's really amazing...
Thanks bro..
Wouldn't the FX ONLY track be subject to the half of the round-trip latency? Even though you're direct monitoring through the interface, the input still needs to go into the CPU and get processed into the FX track, then blended along with the direct monitor... right?
You're the best Kenny! I've been struggling with latency issues using my Zoom H6 as an interface. I will give these tips a try. :D Thank you!
-JoJo
Thank you, Kenny. This was exactly what I needed to know.
Would you use this same method for a guitar using say Helix Native as the fx? I hate latency.
I'm going to try this, but I can't understand why there's no discrepancy on the timming of the recording file against the previous tracks. Direct monitoring vs the printing time..
The problem with the direct monitoring on the Scarlett 2i2 is that it's extremely quiet, and therefore unusable. The other problem is that the direct monitoring on reaper has 187ms of latency, so it's also unusable. Is there a way to use direct monitoring in reaper with 0 (or close to 0) latency?
What to do when obs is recording and can’t hear reaper? Audio from reaper records fine but can’t monitor at all, it might be obs settings. I can get reaper to be heard only by switching from my audio interface back to default speakers, after turning off the reaper asio which is inconvenient as heck. Any suggestions so I don’t have to switch back and forward all the time just to do a sound check of reaper?
Thanks Kenny! Great tutorial!
This is AWESOME! Many thanks Kenny!
I love that view you’re using to monitor the vocal level. What is that?
The REAPER 6 theme?
kenny gioia I don’t even have that listed as one of my theme options in Reaper
@@robgroden You need to upgrade to REAPER 6. It will just be called "default"
Thank you, this helped me a lot. I can't even stand 10ms latency when recording. :)
Quite interesting...Would it work by setting a send from the track actually being recorded to the second with FX only (pre-fader eventually)? Wouldn't that avoid having two identical fx chains and just use the one on the FX only track?
That was my first thought. But you can't send from the first track if input monitoring is turned off.
I swore I've done this??
Yes, exactly you can turn down the Fader on the main track with live monitoring on, then because the sends are all prefader, you will hear only the FX
@@assasin06soul Wouldn't you then need to turn the fader back up to play back the vocals? Kind of a hassle, and even more so if you are punching in.
I'm still looking for the holy grail of only one FX chain to change, zero latency monitoring, and identical sound between playback and recording without needing to change any settings. The issue with the 2 FX chains is that for example if you want a different slap back delay or reverb size, you have to change it in both places. I guess it would be pretty quick to delete one and drag over all the FX from the other. Not quite the holy grail. Ideas?
Hello, I don't know why you put in -inf the dry fader only in readelay, but reaverbate is still in 0.00
Great video and so helpful. Thanks Kenny be safe.
I just bought a Scarlett 2i2. I followed this video exactly and nothing worked at all. First, I can get anything to play back or record that doesn't have popping and cracking in it. second, I can't monitor the fx like this video shows. When i set up the 2 tracks, I should be able to hear the full fx just like if I was playing the track back with fx enabled right? Well I can't hear any fx. In fact, I can barely hear my voice at all. I have no idea what's going on.
Thanks for the video. Just setup my 2i2 focusrite today
So it records the wet signal? I want to record a track. Have the reverb i the phones during record but i only want to record the dry sound. Is that possible?
2:12 good picture with several parts of latency. How to solve last two parts of it in direct monitor mode? I mean the latency of backing track coming to headphones, the latency which appear from DAW to headspeakers (in opposite direction).
but isnt the only wet FX heard with the latency since the signal is returned from the daw? sure, the dry signal from her is in her ears. and when the fx come with the latency it isnt that bad as when both dry and wet were with latency, right?
I still have latency on my FX track. What type of upgrades do i need in my computer to be able to record without latency?
Does this work with guitar if I am trying to hear my distorted signal from amp sim effects without latency?
Thanks for this, really helped me as a beginner.
You nailed the problem that I was having. Thanks. Definitely worth the like and sub.
hi, know you why i've no sound in my headphone when i choose ASIO ? But even without choose ASIO, i've no sound when i turn off direct monitoring in Reaper and turn on in my soundcard
The best thing about Ubuntu Studio and Reaper (using ALSA, rather than JACK) is that I have never even looked at the latency settings. It's so small that I never worry about it. The occasional input (my Korg Kross) has a tiny bit of noticeable latency, easily fixed by moving the whole item by a minute touch. Of course, Windows and Mac have a lot of advantages when it comes to plugins etc, but for latency, my OS and Reaper work like a perfect marriage.
(I assume my audio interface and my USB mic both have a part in this too.)
I'm on the same setup.
now with Linux kernel 5.16, the latency has gone even lower on ALSA + Digital Interface (you can basically uninstall Ubuntu Studio)
I use FocusRite 2i2, and I also use Mooer GE200 as Digital Interface sometimes when I record the guitar only.
but I'm leaning towards the FocusRite because now I also have digital piano, and it allows me playing the guitar over the piano track being looped back to the FocusRite.
PS
this is super cool:
use ReaInsert plugin, and
1. record MIDI from your piano as MIDI track (and make some adjustments as needed)
2. ReaInsert Send recorded MIDI track to the piano
3. piano will play back the Audio from the MIDI instructions, using the piano actual sound samples (which is what I want, NOT the VSTi virtual instrument samples)
4. piano will send back the real Audio back to ReaInsert plugin in Reaper,
5. freeze / record the actual audio played by the piano (without sitting in front of the piano)
then you can record your guitar overdub on top of that piano Audio.
how cool is that?
Okay but, if i wanna record my guitar using a VST amp simulation and i have latency on my monitor, i've tried but can't make it work so, just dont know how you do it as you say in the video that you can do it with guitar
So I have been unable to find a video to help me. I have around 22ms of latency but I cant do the loop recording method to fix it. How else can I eliminate the latency or delay from my mic?
Wow, I don't know about this lol, Im starting to love Reaper more. I never used my audio interface HP this way, I always plug via laptop audio out. Thanks!
Great video Kenny
Hello, everything's cool untill it comes to the " 0% DRY ". I want to apply this technique using Antares Autotune Pro but I can't find a way to use your trick with this pluggin. Any Suggestion ?
Hi Kenny pls can you tell me how to adjust same latency in multi effects guitar processor nux mg 30 in Reaper, while trying to record the guitar parts.
As usual he is here with great reaper hacks
Can you use direct monitoring with Scarlett 4i4 3rd Gen Focusrite?
The actual RTL is both those numbers up top
The real RTL is what you measure with impulse test... my MOTU adds around 1ms to the calculated value on analog inputs and outputs and the SPDIF adds only 0.3ms :)