Best components for a music computer?

Monkeyface

New member
Hello everyone,
I plan on buying a new computer, or rather, buying components to build my own. But I'm not sure which ones are best suited for a music computer. Are there things to keep in mind when I choose amongst for instance motherboards and processor brands etc.?
 
ok dude

thats easy just do a little home work

cpu----- INTEL PENT III or 4

motheboard----- ABIT BE6II or better

soundcard ---- echo darla

hardrive IMB deskstar

now lets make some kick ass music!!!!!
 
It depends on what you want to do.

The Darla is fine if you will only use 2 inputs...but will you record drums? Will you need 4, 8, 16 inputs? I use the Delta44, which gives me 4 inputs and 4 outputs. Thats all i need right now. Look at your requirements and pick from there.

Max your system with RAM. 256MB at the local shop is going for $70, so max the board out.

Get a decent video card. They will take the job of graphics rendering away from your processor. I have a Phophet II using the Nvidia Geforce2mx chip, and that does just fine. Keep in mind some video cards dont play well with audio cards. Mostly the older stuff though. I had a Diamond Stealth3 that sucked.

Oh yeah, I agree with sticking with Intel chips.
 
For OS, seriously consider Win2000 if the soundcard manufacturer (and other components) have RECENT drivers for it.

For instance, the Delta series has kickass Win2000 drivers that hugely increased the stability and decreased my latency significantly vs win98

That was using n-track, but should be similar for other ASIO capable proggies.

ASIO rocks.. :)

Definitely pick up a CDR burner... being able to burn a CD is just a hugely cool thing :). Plus, you can use it for backup purposes as well.

In general stay brandname for components, but don't bother with a brand-name PC...
 
hard2hear said it

max out your ram.

you can get 256 for $50 on pricewatch.com sites, so if your system can go up to 768 mb or more, get it. Thats the starting point for trouble free, high count tracks.

get pentium 3 or 4 as smptecrew said: it will save you a lot of headaches in the future.

a 7200 rpm drive is minimum. Nothing slower will do

at the cost of harddissks now adays, throw in an extra 20-30 gig (7200 rpm) drive just for audio.

Finally, when you get the whole deal together, defragment often. It can noticeably improve performance
 
The Larsonist 666 that I helped clayton build contains:

Abit BX133 RAID motherboard
256MB PC133
Celeron 600 running at 900Mhz (pretested off ebay)
2 Maxtor 15GB drives running in RAID0 configuration
Matrox G-400 series AGP video
A couple hard drive fans, good CPU & case fans
300W power supply (try sparkle)
Windows 2000
Gadgetlabs Wave824

That's all I can remember off hand.

Of course gadgetlabs is gone, so I'd recommend something from m-audio such as the Delta series.

This is basically the system I'd build today, except if I had the money I'd replace the overclocked Celeron with a PIII. He got the Celeron off of eBay...somebody was selling them PRETESTED. You really must buy pretested if you plan to overclock.

An Intel chipset is a REQUIREMENT for a good DAW. Don't rely on luck just to save yourself a few bucks, or to get a few neat features that you don't need. The most stable intel chipset is still a modified BX which several companies are still selling (Abit for one)....however, I think most of the kinks with the i8xx series are going away and it should be workable.

Get your memory from crucial.com ... get a stick of 256MB PC133 CAS2 unbuffered non-ECC and it'll keep you going for a very long time. If you don't want to order from crucial (free shipping hey!), then stick with name brand shit like Viking, PNY, Simple, and so on. I recommend CAS2 (CL2)...even though it doesn't provide much of a performance gain, this faster memory is of better construction. If you can afford it, look into CAS2 buffered (registered) ECC, especially if you plan to add 512MB or more at some point.

Do not purchase an IBM hard drive if you get anything with a Highpoint controller (abit motherboards). There is a serious incompatibility that is very difficult to track down (data corruption once every several months in my case). Lots of people blame Highpoint, I blame IBM. I actually spotted this trend several months before it became a well-known fact. (hooray for me)

Consider a motherboard with a built in ATA/66 or ATA/100 controller like the Abit boards....or purchase a controller from somebody like Promise (promise.com). The big reason for this is to add IDE channels.

As far as CDROM drives go...get something decent like a Memorex 40X+ drive...don't get some total off-brand clanker, you'd be suprised at how frustrating a bad CDROM drive can be, even when you're not using it. For CDRW I totally recommend Yamaha and Sony, and both make nice entry level burners.... $170 or so for 8x8x32. If you were smart and got a secondary IDE controller (ATA/66, ATA/100), then you'll have your hard drive(s) on this controller, and you should stick your CDROM on the standard motherboard controller as master on the first port, and your CDRW as master on the second port. This will provide optimal performance. Do not put a CDRW drive on a fancy ATA controller...put it on the standard Intel controller that's on the motherboard for best compatibility.

Maxtor hard drives are great. I mentioned RAID above. RAID0 (there are many types of RAID) allows you to "stripe" data between two hard drives. Basically, you see both hard drives as one large volume, but some bits of data are put on one hard drive, and some bits are written to the second hard drive (all behind the scenes). Effectively, this allows for transfer rates 1.5 to 2X faster (I've seen them as high as 38-40MB/sec). The downside is that if one drive fails, you're el screwdo. But you should be backing up anyways! I won't confuse you any more with this topic, if you're truely interested, do some research.

The last critical component I'll mention is the power supply. Bad power supplies are responsible for all sorts of kookie problems that are hard to trace. Get a 300W power supply! Even though you don't need it, the idea is that a power supply operates better the farther away it is from its rated maximum delivery. Sparkle power supplies are nice & heavy and I recommend them.

While you're at it, treat yourself to a nice USB optical mouse, and a Microsoft natural keyboard.

Use pricewatch.com as a guide, but always look for the same components locally, or at the bigger online super stores. I've been screwed by a couple of the pricewatch.com companies, which are tiny little bastards.

Slackmaster 2000
 
You would have to pay me that 500 bucks to get me to use an eMachines.

I don't think price is a big factor in the Mac vs PC debate anymore. A barebones PC from scratch made from high quality components is going to run over $1200, assuming a monitor and PIII processor.

Slackmaster 2000
 
Cyan- You must not be educated in the differences between Macs and Emachines. A 400mhz PC is much slower than a 400 mhz Mac G4.
 
You are going to spend at least $1,500.00

P III 933mhz

20gig HD with at least 7,200rpm's

133 BUS

256ram

SB soundcard

that will hit you for at least $900.00

19" video monitor

that's another $250.00

Delta 66 soundcard

another $300.00

Our sub-total now is at $1,450.00. :)

you need some reference monitors...

Event 20/20... $300.00

cables, cords, adapters, etc... $150.00

Total= $1,900.00

spin
 
You can save some money by not getting the 933. Last time I checked it is pretty overpriced for the speed (compared to an Athlon at least). I could be wrong, but if I were you I would go for a 800 or around there and save some $$$.

Spinster- I think you left out the Mobo...
 
From a strictly hardware perspective a 400 Mhz Pentium and 400 Mhz 750 are going to do about the same work. If anything, a CISC processor (i.e. x86), which does more work per instruction, should actually be able to outperform a comparable RISC processor (i.e. PowerPC) at the same clock rate.

On the other hand, Windows is not the most efficient OS in the world and if the Mac OS is significantly more efficient it could very well outperform a comparable PC at the same clock rate. If it were me, I'd just assume a 400Mhz PPC750 based system is going to be roughly comparable to a 400Mhz Pentium III system, unless I had some serous benchmark data from an unbiased source to prove otherwise. I'd be much more concerned about how the two systems compared on the basis of stability, supported apps, upgrade path, expandability, etc.
 
David- I am not a super-smart computer techie but I am pretty sure that a 400mhz Mac chip is much faster than a 400mhz PC Chip. It is something to do with the Mac Chip having more cache. I believe a G4 400 has 1mb of L2 cache (I could be wrong) were as a P3 400 would only have 512k.
 
My first post was a bit off the cuff, without doing any actual looking into it. So I decided to actually try to dig up some numbers. Its hard to find comparisons of G4 vs Pentium III. Particularly at the same clock rate since Pentiums tend to have faster clock rates. Mac enthusiast sites have plenty of comparisons as does Apples site, but I wanted something a bit more unbiased. after some diging I did find two references.

www.cpuscorecard.com runs benchmarks on both Pentium IIIs and G4s. However, they didn't have any numbers for G4s as low as 400Mhz. Here are a couple numbers they did have:

733Mhz PowerMac G4 - 2826
733Mhz Pentim III - 2510

I also found some numbers on www.geek.com, they list specint59 benchmark numbers:

G4 450Mhz - 21.4
Pentium III 450 - 18.6

So, I guess you might consider the G4 "much faster" if that 15% was critically important to you. You can easily eek 15% more performance out of a system by getting a faster disk, faster DRAM or overclocking, so while I would probably describe the G4 (based on this limited info) as a little faster I would still stick to my original statement that same generation processors of the same clock rate will probably be roughly comparable in performance. Thats basically what I was trying to say, there are going to be differences, but it will be small enough that other issues would take precedence in my mind.

BTW, sorry for turning this into a processor debate.
 
ola said:
Avoid VIA chipsets in the motherboard

Bah Humbug!

I'm getting tired of this - two years ago, yes. The newer VIA chipsets are not only fine, they are among the best out there - especially for AMD processors.

Don't take my word for it, check out Tom's Hardware or any number of other sites.

My own system, set up last year -

Pentium IIIEB - 533 (133 bus)
256 megs RAM (you can never have too much)
ASUS P34VX Motherboard (VIA Apollo 133A chipset, ATA 66)
WD 8 gig system drive, Maxtor 40 gig audio data drive
Generic 40X ATAPI CD-Rom
TDK Velo 12x CDR
Gadget Labs Wave 824 Card (Love it, R.I.P. Gadget Labs)
SoundBlaster Card w/Roland daughtercard (for MIDI and the occasional game)
3DFX Voodo III 3000
Cakewalk Pro 9 / Sound Forge

Works great for me. The MB is obsolete now because its slot1 and all pentium IIIs now are flip-chip, but no problems.

If I were building/buying a system today on a budget I would pick a PIII 800, right now it is the best bang-per-buck chip out there.
 
RWhite-

You know I have always been curious abou that. I myself have a AMD/VIA Setup (T-Bird 800) and have always been skeptical about buying certain products (ie. Echo Products) cause of their known problems with older VIA Chipsets.....

Hell, if everything works just "peachy" with newer VIA Chipsets don't you guys think he would be better off getting AMD? Much more bang for you buck than INTEL.
 
Everyone here,
Cool thread!!! I've wanted to put together a pc myself, but get sensory overload when I start looking at numbers. I just bought a PIII 1000 on e-bay for a sweet price (stalked about twenty bids and sniped one when no one was watching), but when the 400 frontside bus speeds are more time tested I'm going to jump in.
Thanks for stilling my heart.
But then, does all this apply to faster FSB speeds?
WHAT THE HELL AM I DOING!!!

Dan
 
Well, I sit on both sides of the fence on the AMD vs. Intel issue. Among my duties in my day job is buying our company workstations. About the last 40 units were PIIIEB-800 systems using ASUS motherboards with VIA chipsets. The classic arguement in favor of Intel is that ALL software companies test their products with Intel chips, but not all test on AMD chips. Because we write a lot of our own software, and because my corporate employeer values compatability over raw speed, we are buying Intel. However I have resolved to buy at least one Thunderbird (and perhaps one Duron) system for compatability testing.

At home its a bit different, I'm spending my own money and I'm looking for max bang per buck. My last purchase was a PIIIEB-533 but my next will definately be AMD. A lot of folks on this board warn about compatability problems with AMD or VIA chipsets but most of the warnings seem to be "a guy I know said his friend's friend had a problem". The only REAL posting I have seen on a manufacturers site that warned of compatability issues was directed at the AMD chipset on early Athlon processors - not VIA.


If anyone is interested there are reveiws of two new Thunderbird motherboards (with VIA chipsets) in the May issue of Maximum PC magazine. There was a lot of other good stuff in there too, including a review of Sound Forge 5.0.
 
Back
Top