> On my win2K box, I run csound5 with ASIO to a m-audio > quattro USB with lowest latency setting and low settings > of -B and -b. The best latency in town as far as synthesis > systems on Windows are concerned. > > Victor :) I know - as you've said, and I am jealous, because it's not working as well on my machine. There are more than a couple of permutations I have not yet tried, but it really should work with the same buffering settings as I use with CSAV, shouldn't it? I have heeded Istvan's advice, and have tried all combinations of -b and -B one might think of, and monitored the control panel of my soundcard/interface as the case may be, to see that -B (samples per hdwr buffer) settings are reflected, and still no improvement. I'm a fulltime programmer and have been using csound actively since 97, so I would THINK I'd be able to track it down by now, but I'm at a loss. :) Things I still need to try: 1) I have a suspicion that the ASIO stuff installed with Cubase is conflicting somehow with csound. I obviously don't know enough about ASIO/VST to articulate that accurately - part of the problem. I need to take a day, uninstall Cubase and anything associated with it, as well as all csound stuff, and see if performance changes with ONLY cs5 and drivers for my soundcard. 2) I don't understand why changing the ksmps to 1 (kr=sr) makes things so much worse in CS5. If I have kr=sr, the crackling from latency is really bad. It improves somewhat with ksmps=10, but not much. Here's my test orc/sco orc: sr=44100 ksmps=10 nchnls=1 instr 1 ;untitled ain1 inch 1 out ain1 endin sco: i1 0 3600 3) I may have a stray portaudio dll on my machine that is introducing the latency. =-=-=-=- Also - just to be clear - RT output of _any_ orc/sco I've written is fine. It's input that is the problem. I would expect to hear the signal produce by the above orc/sco to hit the output clearly with less than .1 sec of delay. Am I expecting too much? Viktor: Are your pieces always processing RT input? I could see that if your music is not rhythmically active, you might not notice the latency we do. Thanks for the feedback -- and thanks, Bill, for piping up! b