Advise me on this system...please

  • Thread starter Thread starter apico
  • Start date Start date
A

apico

New member
I'm getting a computer from my brother - a dual 733mHz processor, machine with two 40gig
hard drives. It supposedly has a great soundcard and CD burner etc. 256k of P800 RAMBUS RAM(?) which I'll probably increase to 512 or increase BY 512? The OS is WinXP.

Will Sonar run well with this system? They claim to support dual processor systems.

Any suggestions?
 
...yup, it's a good place for SONAR. BTW, what WinXP do you use ? I hear Home edition doesn't support dual proc. Make sure you use Pro edition.

www.musicxp.net
;)
 
I run Sonar just fine on a single 733-Mhz PIII.

The hard drives ideally should be 7200 RPM drives. If they aren't, you might want to consider replacing at least one of them. Then use the 7200 RPM one for your audio files, and use the other one for your OS and programs. If they are both 7200 RPM, even better - but split them up the same way.

Going to 512 memory is a good idea - although you can probably run fairly well with the 256.

A "great" sound card to a gamer, is not necessarily a great sound card for audio recording. Find out what the card is and let us know. This is an area you might also want to consider upgrading. However, you can certainly get your feet wet even with a good game card; although you will likley be limited to recording just two tracks at a time. That may or may not be a problem depending on what you plan to record.

The other suggestion would be to use it strictly for audio. Start by formatting the hard drives, and then just install only what you need for your audio work. This suggestion, may not be practical if this is the only computer you have, and need for other purposes. However, if you can do it, it will make you life a little less complicated.
 
Interesting post -i always look for people who describe their systems and try to compare. Could you guys take a look at what i am doing and comment on what i should expect in performance?

I have a P3 - 800mhz
768meg RAM
30 Gig Ultra 160 SCSI drive for data only
Sonar 2.0 Program runs off of another 7200rpm main drive
Also have a 60gig 7200rpm drive for more storage
i have (2) 8 channel interface cards made by Gadget Labs - the Wave8/24 - so i'm bringing in 16 audio tracks at a time through Mackie 1604. Gadget Labs is no longer in business - which forces me to run Win98

recording is not the problem - all tracks come in just fine. I do live bands - with mics all over the place and the recording of the band gives me no trouble.

Mixing is where the machine bogs, stutters, playes at half-speed etc. When i introduce some plug in's (Waves for the most part) is when i need to start sub-mixing and trying to reduce the number of tracks that i'm working with.

I've found a lot of adjustments as to how i should maximize the performance of my machine and have done them all. I am constantly defragging my drives to squeeze out as much performance as possible.

Is it my processing power? do i need to step that up? or is this the best that i can expect?
 
Bonemix,

items like adding effects via plugins, etc, become processor-intensive, and this may be where you're noticing the limitation. When you add a plugin, do you notice the CPU meter going from ~20% to ~80%? If so, you're probably looking at a processor limitation. Your HD situation sounds good, and it seems like you've got plenty of RAM, which is consistent with your experience having no difficulty tracking. I'd have to guess that you may need to temper your expectations for adding real-time mixing effects in the machine, or look into a new processor.

Also, James Argo is correct. If you want to use Dual Processors, XP pro is a must.

-mg
 
bonemix - How many tracks do you usually work with? I find on my system (733 Mhz) I start to have problems around 15-16 tracks or so with effects.

You can try raising your latency setting or increasing your buffer count. Also, a lot has to do with what FX you are using. Some FX are more intensive than others.

Are you trying to use your Aux Busses for FX as much as possible. Generally wherever you have two or more tracks using the same effect, you should put the effect on a bus.

Beyond that, a new processor looks in order as mg indicated. The rest of your system looks pretty good (short of the OS). As you probably know, going with Win2K or WinXP with WDM drivers would help you out. However, ain't gonna happen with Gadget cards.

FYI, when I bought my Delta 1010 the choice had come down to that or the Gadget 8/24. By dumb luck I made the right choice. :)
 
i suppose, ideally - i would like to work with all 16 at a time.

So, after i bring 16 audio tracks in at once (live performance) and i send the band home - then i start the mixing process.

my usual procedure, when mixing, usually starts with the 8 tracks of drums - at which i patch in some DX compression / maybe EQ and then sub mix it down to a stereo file.

bring in Bass and Rythm guitar - get a sub mix of that - then Vocals and so on.

Trouble being - should the snare get burried in the mix at the end - i'm sorta screwed.

I guess my question is - if some of you guys are recording in a similiar way - is this the normal path that you take when mixing a whole live (16 track) band down to a somewhat legitmate stereo mix?

My results are ok - but hardly impressive. and i feel it is because i do not have control of the entire mix through-out the entire process.

Thanks for your input...
 
I usually like to avoid sub-mixes if at possible (for the reasons you already cited).

As I said, I can generally work with around 15 tracks or so until I start to have problems. After that you're kinda stuck with workarounds (submixes, etc.).

My only comment was that if you are going to put the same reverb on all the drums, then put the reverb on an Aux Bus and route all the drum tracks through it - rather than putting 8 instances of the same reverb on each drum track. You can vary how wet each drum is by using the Track send control.

(If I'm telling you stuff you already know, feel free to ignore me. :) )
 
i'm sorry - i should've addressed that comment

yes- i do Bus as much plug ins as possible - which i think can result in my 'not so impressive' mixes. because - in my mind - bussing the same effects to different tracks is a compromise much like Sub-mixing...no?

Quite frankly - the same compression and reverbs used on both the snare and the kick is not really what i want to do - but - like you said, i end up settling for that in order to finish the mix.

Ok - so it sounds like i'm not any worse off than the rest of us using what i have.

I think understand my (our) limitations - i guess my biggest fear is that i ahve all of this time and money into this thing and i was missing something blatant - and important- that get's me to the next level of performance.

thanks again!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top