DAW to use with Cubase

[dansted]

I wan't to build a DAW that can run many VST's and record audio in Cubase flawlessly. But I haven't got that much PC experience.

How would this DAW work?
Motherboard:
Asus M4A88TD-V/EVO/USB3 AMD880G SATA6

CPU:
AMD Phenom II X4 965 Black 3.4GHz 125W

Memory:
A-Data DDR3 8GB 1333MHz CL9

Hard drive 1 (win7 and Cubase 5): 500GB SATA6 16MB 7200RPM
Hard drive 2 (VSTi, EZDrummer and etc): 640GB SATA6 64MB 7200RPM
Hard drive 3 (Cubase projects): 640GB SATA6 64MB 7200RPM

Does it matter that Hard drive 1 only has 16MB buffer ?

 

[phriq]

The ability to run plug-ins is typically dependant on your DAW software itself. You will run your plug-ins within your DAW. So if you have Cubase, your plugins will be loaded and run through Cubase. So support for those plugins is dependant one what Cubase supports.

You would not really need to have your plugins loaded on another HDD. I mean you could install them there if it makes things better organized for you, but I don't see necassarily the benefits of it... I could be wrong I guess though.

As far as your drives buffer, think of this as designated RAM for your HDD. Since RAM is faster than simply accessing the drive, the bigger the buffer, the faster frequently accessed HDD information can be loaded. I would probably swap HD 1 and 2 so you have a drive with a faster buffer running your OS and DAW software.

 

[Chili]

I agree mostly with Phriq except for the part about swapping drives. You want the larger buffer on the drive that will be streaming audio. The workload on the O/S and DAW program is relatively small compared to streaming audio.

I think Phriq is correct about the VSTi stuff. Your VSTi's will load into memory and run from there, don't need a separate drive except for organization. 8gigs sounds like plenty of room to me, but that really depends on how many plugs you've got going.

I don't know anything about AMD stuff, but it looks like a quad core and for sure, that's plenty of horsepower to most anything you ask of it.

 

[phriq]

I agree mostly with Phriq except for the part about swapping drives. You want the larger buffer on the drive that will be streaming audio. The workload on the O/S and DAW program is relatively small compared to streaming audio.

I think Phriq is correct about the VSTi stuff. Your VSTi's will load into memory and run from there, don't need a separate drive except for organization. 8gigs sounds like plenty of room to me, but that really depends on how many plugs you've got going.

I don't know anything about AMD stuff, but it looks like a quad core and for sure, that's plenty of horsepower to most anything you ask of it.

Wouldn't the streaming of audio files take place on drive 3 though since that is where the sessions are saved? I guess to my understanding, if he had drive 2 loaded with the VST installs and the session files on drive 3, the VST's would access the audio files from drive 3 and not do anything with drive 2 except for running the plugins....

But then again, I don't see the point of putting your plugins on a different drive than your DAW. I guess if it was my rig, I would put the OS, DAW, and plugins on drive 1 and then use drive 2 and 3 soley for sessions files and audio files.

AMD used to be the bee's knees of processors but that was back in like '03 and '04. Ever since Intell first introduced their Core 2 Duo, the game changed in favor of Intell. But AMD still makes nice stuff, so don't get me wrong on that. Sounds like a killer rig!

 

[Chili]

Wouldn't the streaming of audio files take place on drive 3 though since that is where the sessions are saved? I guess to my understanding, if he had drive 2 loaded with the VST installs and the session files on drive 3, the VST's would access the audio files from drive 3 and not do anything with drive 2 except for running the plugins....

But then again, I don't see the point of putting your plugins on a different drive than your DAW. I guess if it was my rig, I would put the OS, DAW, and plugins on drive 1 and then use drive 2 and 3 soley for sessions files and audio files.

AMD used to be the bee's knees of processors but that was back in like '03 and '04. Ever since Intell first introduced their Core 2 Duo, the game changed in favor of Intell. But AMD still makes nice stuff, so don't get me wrong on that. Sounds like a killer rig!

Oops, you know what, I read your post wrong and thought you meant drive 3 should be the 16MB. I agree with what you are saying. If the VSTi's are going to be on their own drive, it should be the slowest out of the three.

Sorry 'bout that.

 

[phriq]

Oops, you know what, I read your post wrong and thought you meant drive 3 should be the 16MB. I agree with what you are saying. If the VSTi's are going to be on their own drive, it should be the slowest out of the three.

Sorry 'bout that.

No problem Chili. Lol, it's all good! I know from reading your posts that you know what your talking about much more than me. Computers, however, are my second love though (Double major in Audio Production and Computer Science after all)

 

[PDP]

I run an Intel 2.8 Quad Core with 8G Ram and you'd be surprised how fast it can get used up, running good quality separate VSTi's I can run 4 or 5 which is usually enough for my songs (plus you can always bounce).

but,

Just for example:
1.EZ Drummer in multi-out mode
2.Trillian Bass module (high grade sounds can use 3G ram alone)
3.Steinberg Grand 3
4. Native instruments Kontact

Quad core is out a gas trying to add more than that.

I figure a core per VSTi, there are new Intel chips with 8 cores, might be worth it to go there now.

 

[PDP]

If the VSTi's are going to be on their own drive, it should be the slowest out of the three.

Just to confirm,

I have 3 drives:
1 OS and Cubase
2. Projects
3. VSTi sample data

Which one needs to be the fastest ?

 

[Chili]

Just to confirm,

I have 3 drives:
1 OS and Cubase
2. Projects
3. VSTi sample data

Which one needs to be the fastest ?

I'd say #2, your projects drive if that is where your audio is streaming to.