Pure analog IEM systems have near zero latency, while those with some DSP processing have small latency, usually well under 1.0 ms. The Duet system, from analog input to analog output has 1.8ms of latency. This is generally well below the audible level, with the often quoted figure of below 5ms "round trip" (from mic to in ear) being acceptable to most listeners.
@@lectrosonics From my research: It's not far off the analogue systems and the analogue systems aren't perfectly 0 latency either. 0.15ms latency on the PSM1000 pack receiver. 0.06ms on the PSM1000 headphone out. 1.44ms from the front panel of the M2. 1.88ms off of the belt pack of the M2. 1.60ms latency over Dante with the M2 (I think this was the belt pack also, can you confirm?) Also keep in mind this was Dante coming from software, I think it was slightly lower as it cut out some A to D conversions. It would be good to get some numbers for maybe AES or MADI? I'd imagine they might lower it further as they typically have lower latency. Also more tests with Dante using hardware would be good also.
I'm surprised at how much background hiss the T1 has. It sounds a lot worse than even a 'cheap' ew300. BTW is the 11.5kHz limit a big problem live? That feels really low compared to an analog system.
Thank you for reviewing our Duet digital IEM system!
awesome video Mark
Thanks!
Great video, but I would love a deep dive into the Latency vs the best Analog systems. This is one very very important factor.
Pure analog IEM systems have near zero latency, while those with some DSP processing have small latency, usually well under 1.0 ms. The Duet system, from analog input to analog output has 1.8ms of latency. This is generally well below the audible level, with the often quoted figure of below 5ms "round trip" (from mic to in ear) being acceptable to most listeners.
Noted!
@@lectrosonics From my research: It's not far off the analogue systems and the analogue systems aren't perfectly 0 latency either. 0.15ms latency on the PSM1000 pack receiver. 0.06ms on the PSM1000 headphone out.
1.44ms from the front panel of the M2. 1.88ms off of the belt pack of the M2.
1.60ms latency over Dante with the M2 (I think this was the belt pack also, can you confirm?) Also keep in mind this was Dante coming from software, I think it was slightly lower as it cut out some A to D conversions.
It would be good to get some numbers for maybe AES or MADI? I'd imagine they might lower it further as they typically have lower latency. Also more tests with Dante using hardware would be good also.
A 400 system, even a 200 system has superior audio to a T1, but it does show the difference. Nice video.
Good video
I'm surprised at how much background hiss the T1 has. It sounds a lot worse than even a 'cheap' ew300.
BTW is the 11.5kHz limit a big problem live? That feels really low compared to an analog system.