Jun 09, 2006 12:59 am i don't know much, but if memory serves me correctly, windows me completly sucked....go with 2000, it's more stable, but i'd go AMD and xp if i were in your situation....
my two cents
Using a Sonorus Card - Win ME or XP HELP!
Posted on Jun 09, 2006 12:21 am
hempguitarstraps
Member Since: Jun 09, 2006
Hey, I need some serious help here folks.
Here is our convoluted (but inexpensive and rather interestingly put together) rig
2 Alesis ADATS (they can't record but the optical outs still work!)
1 Sonorus I/O 16 channel optical interface
with..
Here is the computer we are planning on getting:
AMD Sempron 64 2500+ Palermo 1600MHz HT Socket 754 Processor
1 gig ram(PC 3200)
HITACHI Deskstar serial ATA 160GB
The question is this: seeing as how the Sonorus only supports MME XP drivers, I figure we should run ME as it supports ASIO drivers.
My bandmate argues we should run XP since he thinks due to the speed of the system the lag shouldn't matter with using an MME driver.
Also, do you think the 64 bit processor will run ME well. I assume it is backwards compatible.
I would love it if you could settle this argument before we partition a hard drive and run tests. I'm sure your knowledge will help me out.
[ Back to Top ]
Jun 09, 2006 12:59 am i don't know much, but if memory serves me correctly, windows me completly sucked....go with 2000, it's more stable, but i'd go AMD and xp if i were in your situation....
my two cents
Jun 09, 2006 01:17 am Well, the card supports MME drivers for everything, but only supports ASIO for win 95/98/ME
Its basically a question of
go with ME and ASIO
or
XP (and 2000 is the same as XP) with MME drivers
Jun 09, 2006 06:23 am My suggestion would be to get rid of the Sonorus, it's a loosing proposition. 95/98/ME are all OS's that run on the unstable FAT file system, I personally liked ME (as far as FAT OS's go) but I was far and away the minority. 2000 is a dog and XP is stable and much faster than 2000. If your interface is preventing your from using XP, loose the interface, not XP.
Jun 09, 2006 06:52 pm Your reading it all wrong on the Sonorus. MME XP drivers means it only supports MME drivers which are virtual drivers. They emulate WDM and ASIO. It does not mean you must run windows ME at all. It is only describing the audio driver type needed.
Jun 10, 2006 11:25 pm Db... yes if I had a crapload of money to throw at this I would have already done just that.
Noize2U - thanks for the information, but I don't quite understand what you mean. How do they emulate the other drivers? If I'm using a program that allows switching between WDM, ASIO and MME drivers, does that mean that I could use any of them easily under XP?
For instance, their website, which I can't pull up right now (maybe it is gone), has a list of programs like Emagic and Cakewalk and the different drivers that can be used with it under various operating systems.
IE: There is a chart that has sound programs listed with all the drivers supported. It says for Cubase it supports ASIO, WDM and MME with a disclaimer of "not under 2000/NT/XP" listed beside ASIO and WDM on the Cubase listing.
Any help would be appreciated before we spend the time testing this stuff next week.
Thanks!
Jun 11, 2006 09:27 am What is the exact model of the optical interface you are using? IF it is older, then it is possible that they dropped support for newer OS like XP and 2000.
But as dB stated above, the asio4all drivers might do the trick for you. I know several people have sloved their ASIO problems by using these drivers.
Jun 11, 2006 10:27 pm I will try the website, though one of the requirements is an WDM driver for the device, which I don't have. Thanks for the link.
Here is the last update Sonorus put out:
news.harmony-central.com/...-NT-Driver.html
This is the MME NT driver.
The company then promptly went out of business, though they kept a website until apparently a few days ago.
So if I absolutely had to use an MME driver for XP, would it be worth going back to the old crustiness of Windows ME just for ASIO support?
Jun 12, 2006 09:33 pm Well going backwards and running windows ME is going to limit the software you can use to record with.
Here is my suggestion. If you are not having latency issues with the MME drivers or WDM drivers in SP, then try that. But if latency is going to be an issue, then I guess if you have the means to try going with ME, then it may work for you. IT really depends on what software you want to record with and the quality of the recordings you want to produce.
Jun 13, 2006 01:28 am So I suppose the suggestion is: try it... (thats what I was trying to avoid but I will have to)
Software: just about any good software I'm depending on run's best on XP - sony, cakewalk, and cubase (in that order).
So I guess I'm back to square one. Testing.... of course I want the best recordings possible though I have destoyed my budget on microphones, which I think in the end, will turn out to be the best investment.
Jun 13, 2006 08:05 pm Indeed the mic's are a worthwhile investment.
As for testing, do you know anyone with XP that you can run the test with on their PC? OR are you allready running XP?
Jun 15, 2006 11:48 pm I'm already running XP. Do you know how to easily test latency?
Jun 16, 2006 05:15 pm I will generally use a pre recorded loop like a kick drum or snare. Preferably with no reverb on it so it has no tail.
Load the loop into one track, arm the next track to record and play the loop directly into you audio cards input from the output. Now zoom the two tracks and look to see how far behind the original track the recorded track is. You will need to zoom way in and set your time line to milleseconds or what ever fine time it will set to. If the tracks dont line up fairley near perfect then you have some heavier latency.
Jun 26, 2006 09:22 pm Will do.. thanks for the advice.
But for a theoretical question: if you have a fast enough computer, do the drivers even matter anymore?
Jun 27, 2006 05:26 pm Yes, if you want to run without latency. And better up to date drivers will definately give a performance increase as well. ASIO is in most cases the fastest driver for audio. Although certain companies such as ESI have a modified WDM driver that will run fast enough to match an ASIO driver. And in some windows system's it performs as well or better.
You should always try to have the most up to date drivers for the operating system you are running. They do make a differance.
Jan 01, 2007 06:01 pm do you still have the xp drivers on your machine?
I'm on xp too with a sonorus card (or at least trying to be) but since they closed the website I can't get the drivers anymore...
If possible, could you email me the drivers for xp or win2k ?
/ Daniel
Jan 01, 2007 07:36 pm Any drivers I have would not work with your sound card. Drivers are written for specific hardware. M-audio drivers will only work with M-Audio, ESI with ESI hardware and so on.
You have to remember that card has not been supported for several years and is about 8 years old or so. You can try the driver package found here. www.mail-archive.com/alsa...t/msg12606.html
Otherwise I had a big look around on Google and it seems that most places that did have info associated with Sonorus have taken it down.
Jan 06, 2007 04:00 pm Well fella, its your lucky day, but I'm going to need your email address to send you the drivers. This card really was ahead of its time and it does work pretty well for live recording. I was checking out those linux drivers from the link. Very interesting.. though I don't know many multitrack sound apps for linux. If I ever have bad problems with my drivers, though, I might have to check those out.
It's a neat rig if you have 2 band members who can rock the house on computer editing and 2 more who wonder what those spikey things are going across the screen but can work an ADAT and mixing board fairly well.
I'm going to guess that the webmaster address on your site is your email and send them there.
The price: a myspace add myspace/hillrodband or mutual homepage link to Hillrod.net - we sonorus users need to stick together.
Jan 13, 2007 08:17 am Hey there,
I just suffered a major disk crash and lost my studi/o driver backup. The card is still up and running in my xp box but I am not comfortable without the backup.
Amazingly, the last NT driver (1.29) is simply impossible to get online ! Could someone please ftp the package or send it to me, so that I can host it on a safe place, for the sonorus user to have a backup.
You can reach me on my web site : infolieux.info or simply email the file to me : add roger in front of the domain name.
Thanks in advance for this : this is still a great card and I would not want to be stuck next time windows autodestructs itself :) When I receive the file, I will attach it to an article on my webpage and let google do the rest.
Enough said, it took me 20 minutes on google to end here : the only place where someone recently claims having a copy.
Thanks again.
Roger
Jan 14, 2007 08:11 pm Fear not, I can send it to you. Never heard anything from that last fella, but I sent it to him too. Do you have any tips or dos and don'ts with recording with this card? I've never talked to anyone else who uses it.
Jan 30, 2007 09:45 pm Hey there,
I received the driver archive and I want to say : thank you so much. I feel way more comfortable with it, being related to a decisive piece of hardware.
I don't know what to answer to your questions : nodos and todos are rather the same as with other sound cards : hi end or not.
Maybe this tip : skip the use of the monitor mixer applet, even more the channel mixer applet. You probably have a mixer at the other end of the optical fiber anyway.
Absolute todo is to check clock sync : rather sync the card as slave. Prefer final project sample rate for initial recording and apply dithering with discernment if you have to.
When synched to external clock , decrease monitor level at windows launch : hi end monitors HATE square waves at full volume...
Also, if the card is plugged to an old digital mixer like the first generation 01v, don't forget that the AD/DA converters in it (the mixer) are 20bits, which is way better than 16 bits and is stored as 24 bits but still is NOT 24 bits. That makes a lot of zeroes to take into consideration when applying in beetween processing AND DITHERING.
While monitoring, you might considere using the very nice onboard DA converter which can even feed headphones. In the case of headphones only will you use the monitoring mixer. If a 20 bits mixer in beetween, just forget about it.
Todo : use the advance features of the driver. Only SawStudio can do this. If you're serious with audio production and mixing, give it a try : sonorus did not enter the exciting DWAVE driver protocol, but the card still supports the "high performance mode" in saw, which results in low latency / high performance mixing with any system, at low buffer sizes. You should see those meters : have to slow them down. And hear those reverbs of course. Never plug anything in cubase again after that.
Absolute todo : make profit of the rare sample accurate transfer of this card . In saw, you can compare an offline processed file with a live one : use two stero channels, monitor separately, cancel with phase reverse : any audible difference or remaining sound when phase canceling indicates some trouble in the signal chain. Very few cards allow this test. I actually failed it with a RME 9652.
There is still a lot to say about this card. Maybe post some information for people to be able to install it in XP : the procedure is so weird !
That's it, thanks again for the drivers.
Roger
infolieux.info
Feb 05, 2007 03:40 pm So much of that went right over my head... I do wonder, though, what you might have to say in this thread after you install it in XP. Have you noticed latency issues in XP verses ME/98/95? We are still working on the physical structure of our studio and haven't tried it out doing overdubs yet.
It isn't so hard to install in XP, you just have to be sure to read the readme file before rushing in and installing things. You just have to ignore the auto installer and run the program. The weird stuff in the readme is a win2K glitch I believe. XP should be alright, or at least it was for me. If you want to look at weird, check out the NT procedure - now that is weired!....
May 11, 2007 03:03 am Well it looks like after doing your latency test I have around a 30 ms latency. Is that awful?
May 11, 2007 10:22 pm I didn't think so... Do you think I can correct it within Vegas? I think there is an option in there somewhere to offset for hardware latency..
May 14, 2007 07:34 pm Yes, you can either set the buffer of the audio interface lower, say maybe 256 or 128 is best. Otherwise if that is not an option then setting the offset for hardware latency is the next best thing. You want to shoot for around 13ms or less of latency to have it at a point you can use.
|
Related Forum Topics: |
If you would like to participate in the forum discussions, feel free to register for your free membership.