Lots of DELTA AUDIO 1010 QUESTIONS...

[Steve Henningsgard]

ok, how fast is an ultraDMA hardrive then since you build computers you should know, it's a very simple question so why not answer it instead of actin like a jackass

Step 1: type in "UDMA" in google
Step 2: read up dumbass
Step 3: profit.
(http://www.computerhope.com/jargon/u/udma.htm)

In general most hard drives over 30-40GB operate either at 100 or 133 mbps (around 12-16 mBps). This is more than enough for anything you'll be doing for a long time. That is, unless you're recording each individual instrument in a full orchestra & choir...

And who said I was acting?

i bet you're full of sh1t and it's oozing out of your eyes, ears, and fingers.

Judging by your post count/reputation meter, I'd say you've most likely got it backwards jackass.

 

[pacman9000]

Step 1: type in "UDMA" in google
Step 2: read up dumbass
Step 3: profit.
(http://www.computerhope.com/jargon/u/udma.htm)

In general most hard drives over 30-40GB operate either at 100 or 133 mbps (around 12-16 mBps). This is more than enough for anything you'll be doing for a long time. That is, unless you're recording each individual instrument in a full orchestra & choir...

And who said I was acting?



Judging by your post count/reputation meter, I'd say you've most likely got it backwards jackass.

takes one to know one.


so what's all this fuksh1t I'm reading about 7200rpms...what is all this about mbps and plus you still can't dont know how fast my hardrive is it says "most hd's over 30-40 gb are this" that's not defintiive at all.


but to hell with you and all this computers and latency, i'm already scoping out a place that will be getting free hardware ala hendrix and fukkk a computer for mtr I will be using strictly for soundforge...computers with all their compatibility issues with drivers and hardware and soundcards are full of sh1t, should never be used for recording, complete sh1t...these companies aren't working together and have their heads up their arse, fuk off!


what kind of musician would ever want to know all this bullsh1t that is only the result of stupidity, yet these engineers think they are so great, what's so great about imcompatibility issues constatnly in the way unless you are a techie which is actually the anti musician..


I think more techies make music nowadays cos they can figure out the computers and they dont need any musical talents what with all this automated crap and you can fix anything by using techincal features plus all the algorhythmns you don't even have to play anything or even have a good ear for sample you can make some half ass complex electronic trakc think its' a masterpiece.................


i can't see it, I'ma tell u this computer sh1t is some fuksh1t, faggot sh1t, who the fuk wants to record a overdub track with latency then have to go back and make sure it's actually in time with what you were listening to and make technical adjustments that could include running elaborte tests to find out just how latent you recording was, FUKKKIN GHEY!!!


http://acapella.harmony-central.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1242881&highlight=layla3g

 

[pacman9000]

This Is The Most Basic Of Features, You Record A Track And You Want It To Be In Time With The Track(s) Your Were Listening To When Recording, It Just Doesn't Get More Basic Then That.


And Computers Have Tremendous Issues With This, One Of The Most Basic Aspects Of Mtr.

 

[Steve Henningsgard]

Dude I don't know what the hell is going on but you've got a severe case of stupid.

 

[boingoman]

Dude I don't know what the hell is going on but you've got a severe case of stupid.

He's like a douchebag version of Walters.

 

[Bulls Hit]

panties + bunch = pacboy90000

 

[travelin travis]

This Is The Most Basic Of Features, You Record A Track And You Want It To Be In Time With The Track(s) Your Were Listening To When Recording, It Just Doesn't Get More Basic Then That.


And Computers Have Tremendous Issues With This, One Of The Most Basic Aspects Of Mtr.

I hate latency and all the track misalignment crap. Most people don't even seem to be aware of it.

 

[pacman9000]

I hate latency and all the track misalignment crap. Most people don't even seem to be aware of it.

i know, it's because literally, the vast majority of people doing "computer" music production have no idea what they're doing anyway in terms of the actual music, they're performance probably sounds better if it's a bit misaligned so they think it's correct...


Just that fact that there's all this "gear buzz" and so many products that dont' work as advertised shows you people are morons and are more interested in the 'GEAR' and 'PROGS' then the actual MUSIC!!

these peple think the "progs" are what's hot, that the designers are rock stars because they can make computer programs that actually let some un creative hack techie make half way decent sounding music (to themselves).


People are actually singing sonar's praises despite them not being able to address latency issues in like 5 or 6 versions.


I bet it goes alot deeper then sonar, if you don't have a high end system it's rolling the dice on whether you're going to hear back what you actually played - on time, and personally, I'm not about to go back and correct every overdub that's anti-creative...


this whole society is anti-creativity, it's a war on creativity like it's a war on the poor.


fukit, i'm takin whatever i need, and I'm takin hardware.



Part of the reason I'm ranting is because I really thought that technology had made things easier for the home recording musician...but in fact, they have made it 100% more complex and complicated...and the biggest downside to computer recording as opposed to REEL TO REELS, other then the simplicity of REEL TO REEL recording, is that analog TAPE SOUNDS 1000% BETTER THEN DIGITAL HD RECORDING, EVEN WITH HIGH END SYSTEMS.

why do you think the MAJOR STUDIOS still use analog tape???


Yet NOW there is NO reel to reels being manufactured thanks to the "digital revolution" which sucks ass up to this point, a horrible replacement for a wonderful recording medium (analog tape)...If they were still manufacturing reel to reels today they would probably be less then say the DPS24 or the VS2480 or any high-end DAW, yet they would certainly "SOUND" better, you would just have to get outboard gear.


FUKKK DIGITAL


IVE ALWAYS LIKE THE SOUND OF EVEN LITTLE TINY CASSETTE TAPES OVER CD'S TOO, PLUS CASSETTES ARE EASIER TO CARRY, THE ONLY ADVANTAGE CD'S HAVE IS THAT YOU CAN SKIP TO WHATEVER SONG YOU WANT MORE EASILY, WHICH CHEAPENS THE MUSIC, THAT OPTION WAS FOR THE MTV CROWD TYPE MUSIC LISTENER BUT NOW WE ALL USE IT AND WE'VE BEEN CORRUPTED.

 

[pacman9000]

^just venting...before I started lookin into a daw I was looking for multi-track reel to reel, for a couple years, but every one in my price range needed "tlc" or replacement parts that were hard to find so that discouraged and now I don't want a daw either cos they suck and will probably give me just as much frustration as an old reel to reel that needs to be repaired constantly.

 

[Chris.]

This thread makes my head hurt.

 

[amra]

Get a fucking grip.
Me and many other people on here record with the 1010 or other computer based set ups without any hassle all the time. I had a band come in last, night. We did two tracks minus the vocals and the bass in 2 1/2 hours, and that includes mic setup on the drumkit.

I recorded 10 tracks at once using two 1010s in the same pc, which is nothing. You can do 16 tracks at once just as easy. No latency. I have a whole array of VST plugins at my disposal, as well as rack gear to use set up as sends. Easy as pie.

Don't make try to excuse your ignorance by pretending that technology doesn't work, because it DOES.

 

[pacman9000]

Get a fucking grip.
Me and many other people on here record with the 1010 or other computer based set ups without any hassle all the time. I had a band come in last, night. We did two tracks minus the vocals and the bass in 2 1/2 hours, and that includes mic setup on the drumkit.

I recorded 10 tracks at once using two 1010s in the same pc, which is nothing. You can do 16 tracks at once just as easy. No latency. I have a whole array of VST plugins at my disposal, as well as rack gear to use set up as sends. Easy as pie.

Don't make try to excuse your ignorance by pretending that technology doesn't work, because it DOES.

refer to one of my previous posts.

 

[sauce]

Actually while many studios still have a Studer or Otari 2" machine or two laying around many of them are collecting dust. Alot of the Mid-Level commercial studios are selling the tape machines to get pro-tools rigs. true story.

 

[pacman9000]

Actually while many studios still have a Studer or Otari 2" machine or two laying around many of them are collecting dust. Alot of the Mid-Level commercial studios are selling the tape machines to get pro-tools rigs. true story.

I said major studio's not some mid-level digital studio piece of sh1t...LMAO AT A PRO TOOLS STUDIO BEING "PROFESSIONAL"

NOT EVEN CLOSE TO THE SOUND OF VOCALS ON REELS., NOT EVEN CLOSE MY FRIEND


BUT EVERTYINTG ON CD NOW SO IT DOES N'TR MATTER RIGHT?

EVEN THOUGH CD SUCKS, IT SOUNDS BETTER IF YOU RECORD INITIALLY ON ANALOG TAPE..

SOUNDS BEST WHEN YOU NEVER GO DIGITAL, ANALOG TAPE TO VINYL OR CASSETTE.

 

[Steve Henningsgard]

I can't even begin to describe how retarded you are. You are spouting off such an avalanche of bullshit, I can't even begin to analyze it. You have absolutely no idea what the hell you're talking about and it shows. Cassette tapes sound better than CD's? Computers are more of a hassle than analog tape?! You're basing your opinions on whit you've heard other people talk about: I can guarantee you you've got very little real-world experience. You just like to sound smart (which you're not very good at faking) and pretend whatever random-ass theories you've hobbled together are pure fact (which they aren't).

Please do yourself a favor and stop talking. You're just looking stupider and stupider with every post.

 

[pacman9000]

I can't even begin to describe how retarded you are. You are spouting off such an avalanche of bullshit, I can't even begin to analyze it. You have absolutely no idea what the hell you're talking about and it shows. Cassette tapes sound better than CD's? Computers are more of a hassle than analog tape?! You're basing your opinions on whit you've heard other people talk about: I can guarantee you you've got very little real-world experience. You just like to sound smart (which you're not very good at faking) and pretend whatever random-ass theories you've hobbled together are pure fact (which they aren't).

Please do yourself a favor and stop talking. You're just looking stupider and stupider with every post.

Just preserving this incase you realize your own idiocy and try to come back and cover your tracks.

 

[dgatwood]

In general most hard drives over 30-40GB operate either at 100 or 133 mbps (around 12-16 mBps). This is more than enough for anything you'll be doing for a long time. That is, unless you're recording each individual instrument in a full orchestra & choir...

Wow. That's completely and totally wrong. Literally every single thing you said is incorrect.

First, UDMA tells you nothing about the speed of the drive. It just tells you the speed of the interface. Reading data from the track cache buffer on the drive will achieve those data rates, so if you read a block and then later read the next block, usually that second read will come back at such a high speed. However, most drive mechanisms don't come anywhere close to keeping up with the speed of the ATA bus.

Second, ATA-100 is NOT 100 Megabits per second. It is 100 MegaBYTES per second. Only the very fastest hard drives on the planet can even keep up with ATA-66 unless you're looking at burst performance. There are no drives (even 15,000 RPM drives) that can transfer 100 MB per second continuous. None. Not one.

Third, 12 MB/sec. is not necessarily fast enough, IMNSHO, unless that's your random read/write mix performance. It's theoretically 41 channels at 24-bit 96kHz, which is plenty, but only if that number represents a random mix of reads and writes scattered across the disk.

If that's the continuous read or continuous write performance, it's way too slow because multitrack audio isn't a continuous read. You're reading multiple files, one per channel, from different places on the disk. Yes, it reads a decent span at a time, but it doesn't read continuously from a single place by any stretch of the imagination. Performance of 12 MB/sec. continuous probably translates to about 6 MB/sec. of semi-continuous audio utilization, which would be about twenty tracks or so. That's not remotely "more than enough for anything you'll be doing for a long time".

Most modern drives should be fast enough, though. I'd go with a 7200 RPM drive. That's the sweet spot, IMHO. 10k is too fast and too hot. 5400 RPM is sometimes borderline.

 

[sauce]

I said major studio's not some mid-level digital studio piece of sh1t...LMAO AT A PRO TOOLS STUDIO BEING "PROFESSIONAL"

You're right..."professional" studios don't use ProTools. I think they are using wax cylinders. Scotch tape with rust on it is dead.

 

[pacman9000]

yes I am right, they use analog tape, and you are a moron who should be tied up with ducktape over your mouth.