New PC for recording and mixing - advice appreciated

> > > New PC for recording and mixing - advice appreciated

Posted on

Member Since: Sep 19, 2008

Hi there,

I am planning on buying a new computer since my current one is limited to 10 tracks. From here, when extra tracks are added or real-time plugins are used, it starts to hickup, lag and whatnot.

I typically record in Audition, 32-bit (float) and 48,000Hz. I pretty much want to be able to record eight simultaneous tracks at once. For mixing I'd like to be able to use 3 real-time plugins on 16 different tracks at once (equalizers, compressors, gates, reverbs). I'm currently using URS equalizers and compressors, the free Floorfish for gating and still looking for some great reverbs. (anyone =P ?).


Anyway, I started on building a machine, which is:

Motherboard: Asus P5QC - Intel P45 chipset
Processor: Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 "Wolfdale" - (2x) 3,00Ghz - (2x) 3072kB L2 cache - (4x) 333MHz FSB
Harddisk1: (IDE) Western Digital 80GB - 8,9ms - 8mb cache - 7200rpm
Harddisk2: (IDE) Western Digital 320GB - 8,9ms - 16mb cache - 7200rpm
RAM: (3x) Kingston HyperX 1GB DDR2-800 - 4-4-4-12 (3GB total)
Soundcard: M-Audio Delta 1010lt (already have it)

The first harddisk will get an XP install, the second one will contain Audition and all my recordings. I tried to focus on processor speed, hdd speed and cache, and memory speed and bandwidth.

So, will this do? Is it too much, or not enough?
It's going to cost me 675 euros (or $919.45), so I want to be damn sure I'm doing the right thing!


Thanks a lot for reading, hoping to hear from someone.

Bye.


EDIT: forgot my soundcard haha

[ Back to Top ]


A small pie will soon be eaten
Member
Since: Aug 26, 2004

Oct 15, 2008 09:21 am

I'd personally beef up the CPU a bit.

and there's not much point in getting 3gb of RAM when 4gb won't cost much more.

Also, i THINK that ram runs at 800mhz. For not much more money you could get some Corsair running faster (1066).

I'd also consider getting SATA2 hard drives rather than IDE.

All small things that are fairly cheap but should go a fair way to squeezing out some more grunt :)

Administrator
Since: Apr 03, 2002

Oct 15, 2008 09:26 am

3gHz seems a plenty good CPU, but the FSB seems slow, while I am not current on all things PC these days, I thought FSB were running faster these days.

I agree on the sata drives as well. IDE is very old school.

Member
Since: Sep 19, 2008

Oct 15, 2008 09:50 am

Thanks for your input! I guess Windows XP is the main reason for my choices of:

"and there's not much point in getting 3gb of RAM when 4gb won't cost much more."

4GB is not supported in 32-bit systems.

"Also, i THINK that ram runs at 800mhz. For not much more money you could get some Corsair running faster (1066)."

You are correct, the reason I chose 800 was because of the faster access times.

"I'd also consider getting SATA2 hard drives rather than IDE."

I believe XP crashes on SATA drives. It needs somekind of floppydisk drivers to possibly fix this?

"3gHz seems a plenty good CPU, but the FSB seems slow, while I am not current on all things PC these days, I thought FSB were running faster these days."

You are right, it's Dual 3.0GHz and Quadpumped FSB, so the FSB is 1333MHz, which is pretty fast.


So it seems that XP is limiting some of my choices, but I really dislike Vista (really). I've had several software/hardware problems with that OS (well actually my dad had, but I had to fix it of course <_< ). All the extra functions, ram usage and security are inferior to XP.

About the harddrives, what do you think would be the advantage over IDE using SATA2? Oh and Bleak, about the CPU?

Thanks again :) !

Administrator
Since: Apr 03, 2002

Oct 15, 2008 09:52 am

Quote:
I believe XP crashes on SATA drives.

Not on my XP installs...and Ihave never heard anyone say that personally.

Quote:
it's Dual 3.0GHz and Quadpumped FSB, so the FSB is 1333MHz, which is pretty fast.

Ah, nice!

Member
Since: Sep 19, 2008

Oct 15, 2008 10:08 am

"Not on my XP installs...and Ihave never heard anyone say that personally."

Ok great :) Try to search google for XP Sata, you'll be amazed by the results. But if it's relatively easy to install Sata drivers for XP (if needed of course), I'd might go for SATA2 drives.
What do you think would be the main advantage?

Czar of Turd Polish
Member
Since: Jun 20, 2006

Oct 15, 2008 01:04 pm

That E8400 is the best bang for the buck imo. I know there are some cheaper offerings but I've seen that thing overclocked to 3.8Ghz on the stock cooler alone. One hell of a processor and not much heat generated.

On Sata, I have been using them and supporting them with XP for years now. There is nothing to fear and nothing special needed when setting them up. It is simply the superior interface and the cables are much nicer to run.

Prince CZAR-ming
Member
Since: Apr 08, 2004

Oct 15, 2008 01:07 pm

Sata 1 has burst of 1.5mb, whereas sata2 has burst of 3.0mb.

I have 2 sata2 drives in my XP Pro SP2 install, and 1 sata1 as a backup drive.

It's been humming along swimmingly every since day one.

(no other stuff on it, and it's kept very clean running).


Member
Since: Sep 19, 2008

Oct 15, 2008 01:25 pm

Thank you!

I guess it will be safe to move from IDE to SATA then. I came to the following HD:

Seagate Barracuda 7200.11 - 500GB - 32MB cache - 7200rpm

More space and cache and it even costs less! I still use the (IDE) WD 80GB for my XP install since I already own it, I don't know of any conflicts when using IDE drives with SATAII drives?

Tripps, I will try and overclock that 8400 on the FSB to 400 so it will match my RAM speed, using a 9x MP to get to 3.6GHz :) Hope it works out.

A small pie will soon be eaten
Member
Since: Aug 26, 2004

Oct 15, 2008 07:49 pm

Quote:
4GB is not supported in 32-bit systems.

It'll actually use around 3.25 GB.

For the purposes of 'future proofing' I'd still go with 4 gb. Senseless not too given the little cost involved.

And as for SATA conflicts with Xp, I've NEVER had the slightest problem. I've had all manor of raid configurations at different points as well and still no dramas.







Czar of Midi
Administrator
Since: Apr 04, 2002

Oct 15, 2008 08:34 pm

ONe very important thing. Don't install and run Audition or any app from the secondary HD as that will slow things down. Keep all application's running on the main OS disk with XP.

Only use the secondary HD for audio and project file storage.

But yes, Seagate is all I will use and the 32mb cahce drives are dirt cheap now. I just picked up another 1 TB drive for under $150 US with the 32mb chace and it is fast as all get out in transfer rate.

Czar of Midi
Administrator
Since: Apr 04, 2002

Oct 15, 2008 08:41 pm

All I run now are SATA drives by the way. All on SP Pro SP3 and i have no trouble at all.

My main studio box is running with almost 4 TB of disc space and they are all SATA and I have not crashed it once due to the drives.

Member
Since: Sep 19, 2008

Oct 16, 2008 02:56 am

Quote:
ONe very important thing. Don't install and run Audition or any app from the secondary HD as that will slow things down. Keep all application's running on the main OS disk with XP.
Thanks I didn't know that! (could you explain it a bit further?) Does Audition benefit from a 32mb cache drive too (currently 8mb), or is it just the recordings that really need a larger cache?

[quote]It'll actually use around 3.25 GB.

For the purposes of 'future proofing' I'd still go with 4 gb. Senseless not too given the little cost involved.[/quote]
Maybe for the future then, I'm already over my budget, and my budget is already over my real budget ;)

I'm glad to hear everyone has good experience with SATA+XP, I'm confident enough now to get one.


EDIT: Great article on harddrives here btw: tomshardware.com/reviews/understanding-hard-drive-performance,1557.html Haven't had the chance to fully read it yet though.

Member
Since: Jul 02, 2003

Oct 16, 2008 03:54 am

The problem with SATA and XP is only during the XP install, and only if you have the drive set in the BIOS to SATA mode. If the BIOS is set to IDE (as most are by default) there are no problems. The problem isn't that it crashes it's that XP cannot see the drive. As far as I know there is no performance loss leaving the BIOS set to IDE mode.

Dan

Prince CZAR-ming
Member
Since: Apr 08, 2004

Oct 16, 2008 07:37 am

My MB came up and loaded onto the SATA drives without problem.

regarding the drives;

Once you load audition into memory, the drive isn't helping it. The program runs almost entirely from memory. The reason to put it onto the system drive, is that if your tracking, and writing streaming data to disk, you don't want audition to look for a new subroutine and read from the audio drive. Better to have it read from the system drive.

Also, having windows swap file running ONLY] on the system drive keeps swap file reads from happening when tracking as well.

I used 2 HD when I built my rig:

A) 160g
B) 80g

I partitioned my 160g as 2 drives: C - 40g, and S - 120g. My 40g C drive is system files, program files, swap file, etc. The 120g S drive is for sample files, libraries, and my normal song/audio storage.

My 80g T drive is only for audio tracking. When I'm tracking, I put the project on T drive and track. After it tracks, I move the project directory over to my S drive, so the T drive stays clean and fast.

I have a third drive 160g SATA-I that I use for backups.

Member
Since: Sep 19, 2008

Oct 16, 2008 11:03 am

That sounds like a great setup pjk! So when tracking I'd want to have a HD fully focused on just that, and when I start on mixing I could move the project+wavs over to the HD where XP+Audition is installed, but on another partition?

Who do you think benefits more from a 32mb cache drive, Audition+XP or the tracking drive?

EDIT: btw where do you get your hardware from?

Czar of Midi
Administrator
Since: Apr 04, 2002

Oct 16, 2008 09:41 pm

Ype, my MSI MoBo's loaded XP Pro right onto the SATA in SATA mode no problem.

> > > New PC for recording and mixing - advice appreciated

Related Forum Topics:


If you would like to participate in the forum discussions, feel free to register for your free membership.