SCSI or IDE hard drives?

[storm]

I'm doing a little research on computers for recording and found that most computer audio people use SCSI hard drives (10k). These drives are quite expensive compared to IDE drives.
Sooo... Here are my questions:

*SCSI or IDE?
*what better to run, (2) smaller drives ( 2-20GB) or having (1) massive 60 or 80 GB Hard Drives?
*With a IDE drive, can the speed be excelerated with a faster bus system?
* Would there be a difference between SCSI or IDE drive if both are 7200 rpm's?


Thank you for all your help??

Still learning computers, be gentle.

 

[storm]

If you are putting together a pro studio you would want SCSI. For demos and homerec stuff a 7200rpm IDE will do just fine. I read somewhere that 40g/7200rpm is the ideal size and speed HD due to seek times being fairly well expedited across the width of the platter.

The second and third questions are beyond my expertise. As far as SCSI and IDE being somehow compatable (is that what you're going after?) hmmmmm. Good question. I thought controllers were one or the other, not both. I suppose you could add a SCSI controller but that's gonna eat a PCI slot that you're gonna want later. Honestly I doubt you could hear the difference between those two formats.

That said, what is your recording/playing experience?

 

[storm]

I've been playing drums and keys for years, and have recorded various projects at different studios, currently taking the plunge to start my own. I have some money, some musical/audio knowledge but not much computer experience.

 

[Kermit]

My 10, 000 rpm SCSI is loud as hell. I usually stick to my nice quiet 7200 IDE while tracking, then transfer everything to the scsi in mixdown. Of course, this was in an apartment. Now that I have my own basement with a real control room (as opposed to two bedrooms seperated by thin walls) I might just use the SCSI. But isolate the PC a little more so it is not a distraction.

As for which is better, check the transfer rates, seek times, and cache on each. SCSI is generally better. Bigger rates, faster seek times, and a slightly larger cache even at the same spin rate.

SCSI rewuires it's own controller (PCI slot), and if you are looking at a new system you can get it on the motherboard. A better IDE controller can help as well. An ATA 66 (or 100) might help.

One of the advantages of 2 drives is that you're swap file can be put on the second drive, which means it uses your main (OS) disk less. Also, you can put your OS on one drive, then use the second for your projects. That way, when your OS needs to use the disk, it won't interrupt what you are working on (...as much).

IDEs are affected by bus speeds. Pushing data through a slower bus is like pushing a truck through a lemon. Faster bus speeds means you're pushing that truck through a watermelon instead. Again, generally.

When looking at SCSIs, pricewatch.com is your friend. hth.

 

[SBax]

I am no expert on SCSI evidenced by the fact that I dropped $732 on a 40G Quantum Ultra 160 and Adaptec Ultra 160 controller card. Supposed to transfer 160 MB/sec. Bullshit. The very best I've benchmarked is 95 MB/sec and it took a while to get there. I am currently running 42 tracks (15 are stereo) on a Sonar project and disk usage is at 50% (sometimes drops to 10% or 60%). Before I defragged and compacted the audio data I was getting HD dropout. My OS is on a ATA 100 drive. Maybe I should have put Sonar on the IDE, I don't know. But, I am a little disappointed with the performance of the SCSI. My limited understanding is the SCSI really outshines IDE when, for lack of a better term, multitasking which is what I thought computer recording is. Simultaneous playback and recording.

 

[MOFO Pro]

There was a time when SCSI ruled when recording audio. Those days are pretty much over now. If you do a search on IDE vs. SCSI you'll find a number of sites claiming the same. DMA 66 and 100 have resolved the bus speed problems, and the new drives spin at 7500. IDE is dirt cheap compared to SCSI. There are just not enough performance benefits to justify the additional cost.

It's a good idea to keep your OS & Audio files on separate drives so I'd recommend two drives. The IDE controller is onboard the actual drive, so it's usually a good idea to use the same brand for both drives that are hooking up to the motherboard. Sometimes different brand drives can send conflicting commands, those I'm not sure if this is a problem any longer (Better safe than sorry).

I's also recommend setting your virtual memory to 300 - 400 meg. This leaves enough room for your windows swap file and doesn't create audio dropouts when your OS decides that it wants to change the size of the swap file in the middle of your mix down. Never have your virtual memory file on the same drive as your audio files.

IDE should really do it for you. Just make sure your motherboard supports at least UDMA 66 (The IDE ribbon cable has twice the conductors of the legacy IDE) Most all new boards support this format. If you're upgrading an older board you could buy an aftermarket PCI interface (but that would probably cost at least half the price of a new motherboard.

Memory>>> you just cannot have too much. And it's cheap!! The first 1 Meg SIM that I bought cost me $100 (Can you believe that??). That same $100 today, will buy you 512 Meg of PC 133 SDRAM. Of course if you're buying a new motherboard it's most likely going to support DDR Memory... this stuff is great!! You can't run SDRAM & DDR ram together though, the SDRAM can't keep up!!

Well that's an earful for now. Let me know if you have any more questions.

Steve

 

[RWhite]

I agree with most of what Steve said. Unless you are putting together a network file server there is no good reason to use SCSI rather than IDE. SCSI is good because it deals with many read/write accesses at the same time (which is what a file server typically does). In a recording situation, where you are typically doing one big write or one big read, IDE is just fine. And if you are a perfomance freak, some of the new IDE RAID setups are just as fast as SCSI setups costing 5-10 times more.