My setup:
I run it as a slave in “All Tracks” mode. It’s solid enough to have a blast, and I keep it locked in with my other gear. But that’s only doable ‘cause I’ve a E-RM multiclock providing 4 shiftable MIDI clocks. It’s about 53ms behind my other machines like the 909, TR8S, Cirklon, Modular, etc.,
2 Likes
Makes sense… the Nome can’t shift individual clock signals which is exactly what’s needed. I have a cirklon at my other studio and I heard the new beta firmware allows for individual clock shifting per tracks or something to that effect.
I thought there would be some workaround with Ableton and track delays but I’m not thinking that will work. SyncGen II works great but no indi clock adjustments there either… maybe ERM time or just run the TR as master until they fix stuff which will be fine in the meantime. Thanks for letting me know about your setup
2 Likes
You would think with 4 years of development and loads of producer feedback involved - someone would have noticed it does not sync correctly with the DAW?
6 Likes
Doesn’t ableton let you shift midi clocks individually anyway? If you are sequencing the tr-1000 from its internal sequencer you can send that clock early compared to other clocks in the rest of the setup. If you are sending notes from ableton then you may need to adjust the tracks further since the latency from midi in notes has been reported to differ between sample and synthesis based gens.
A similar approach is working well here. But you’re right living with it for now is an option since if Roland do make any moves in firmware updates then it will all need to be re-measured in the future.
1 Like
Other workaround is to just forget about DAW sync until it’s time to record (I’m just using Ableton as a multitrack tape machine anyway until I’ve printed audio and and mixing) and just nudge by +50 at the beginning of a take while it’s running and punch in once it’s sync’d. Not a terrible solution for now
1 Like
Who says they didn’t? It’s in the manual.
So i could buy the TR-1000, read the manual and i would get perfect sync slaved to Ableton? And not spend £2.3k and have to then look at spending £200 on a Nome or something other sync box?
Im just used to buying boutique gear and usually you get direct contact with the dev on forums and lobby/harrass lol a firmware to address issues. Roland its different - is there someone from dev working for them on the forums? I remember even TE had someone at one point addressing concerns.
1 Like
Definitely, I do this all the time - especially for overdubs because quite often the DAW latency is misreported / wrongly compensated on a busy project with lots of in the box plug ins anyway.
ableton lets you shift midi clocks so yeah, you could get it working.
There are other solutions at various prices but these are really for those who have more complicated clocking setups, eg those who want an external sequencer clocking the all their equipment, including a TR. It’s also worth noting that some daws (e.g. Cubase) won’t let you shift their own midi clocks and here third party hardware or software solutions might be useful.
2 Likes
Well I was trying to get my clock device to do the job but when I just set the midi out of the Model 12 to -55 (instead of having all the clock to through the Nome) in Ableton it did the trick just fine! Slight delay on the first beat but not a big deal at all. I’m not sending any note data from Ableton, just want the print to be on grid. Everything else is playing nice. Won’t work DAWless but there’s the nudge workaround in the meantime. Thanks for the suggestion I had a bit of tunnel vision…
All this being said I assume this will all get sorted out with some software updates or at least improved
2 Likes
Sounds good, it’s by far the simplest way to do it and easily changed when needed. I dunno about ableton but in Cubase a short pre-roll sorts out the first beat or two potentially being not clocked right. And for recording a track I usually have a short silent ‘intro’ pattern of 4 beats to allow for stabilisation anyway.
1 Like
You’re shifting the goal posts, reframing the issue. The issue you raised was that it didn’t come up in testing. That the testers didn’t know. That’s an assumption. And I’m saying that it was known because the different sync modes are listed in the manual. The sync improvements are listed in the change log.
Are you a user? This thread is for users.
6 Likes
Did you try All tracks mode, set u-sync to -50 ms and then clock the rest of your gear from the midi output of the TR-1000?
In the meantime, I do hope the Nome will get a firmware update for clock output shift, so you can set one of the outputs to +50 ms and clock the rest of your gear with that output.
1 Like
Yeah i broke all of that down earlier on the thread and shared the exact same things. So now you are set up right.
It’s not a huge problem. The tr1000 is a drum machine so get that groove laid out and perform it and record it. Then adjust for the 7ms and record everything else. They are also trying to fix it still and make it tighter. But hardware is about really learning how to use what you have and making it work.
1 Like
Does this Nome thing have to be used with a computer or can you just use it with hardware gear?
With the Nome II you can only set the latency compensation in DAW using the U-Sync plugin. But it’s very simple and straightforward.
The JMK CLOCKstep:Multi is another mid-priced master clock that does allow you to set latency compensation without involving a DAW, but it’s a little involved / tedious to do.
I’ve been using the CS:M for about a year (mostly DAW-less to integrate my eurorack system with my other gear) and recently got a Nome II. I was actually just working on a mini-review of the two which I’ll post later. The TLDR from my perspective is:
-
CS:M is the more natural choice if you’re integrating with modular gear and don’t necessarily want to be tied to a DAW
-
If you’re DAW focused than the convenience of the Nome II + USync probably makes it a good choice
-
Neither of these mid-priced master clocks can currently do the trick of different latency compensation amounts per output.
4 Likes
Yep only the E-RM can do that trick. But it’s more finnicky with a DAW than U-Sync, which is just a beautiful thing, so I stick with that.
2 Likes
Hapax also does latency compensation per output.
I played around with this last night w/Hapax as master clock between DAW, Rytm MkII, and TR-1000 and got everything within 1-2 ms. of each other. For anyone trying this themselves, note that the compensation directions on the Hapax are opposite of what I’m used to.
In any case, now we’re getting into master sequencer territory.
Fancy Master Clocks Are Not Need (*YMMV)
Using Ableton Live 12 and the TR-1000 I get excellent sync over USB with Live as master clock.
On the TR-1000 I use Layered Gens and specify USB as sync source.
On the Ableton side I make a negative latency adjustment in the MIDI tab.
It’s as simple as that. I’ve tested with multi-hardware setups as well as with drum racks and a few plugins.
How well this works for you may depend on specs of your computer, your interface, load on your computer, etc. Here’s what I think is the key info about my setup:
- Mac Studio M4 Max running MacOS 15.7
- MOTU 848 interface at 48 Khz, 24-bit
- Ableton Live 12.2.6
- Buffer Size: 32 samples
As always, YMMV.
Good luck and hopefully we’ll see tighter external sync in the next FW update and all the messing around with compensation can be a thing of the past!
7 Likes