any tips for optimising for audio?
Well, the question is in the title. 
But if anyone has any tips, or pointers to sites that have tips, I’d be grateful
Ta,
Ali
Thanks, TG!
These tips are useful to me, too, as I’m finally switching to XP Pro when my E-mu 1820 arrives (probably next week) to replace the remnants of the Isis (RIP).
Thanks TG, just what I was looking for.
I’d gotten W98 just about perfect for DAW work, so I thought it was time to change the OS! 
Ali
| Quote (nergle @ Jan. 20 2005,17:30) |
| I'd gotten W98 just about perfect for DAW work, so I thought it was time to change the OS! |
Sadly, such is the way with computers......
TG
WinXP pro (tweaked per the website that’s already been posted), and nTrack v4.0 have made me a very happy camper lately.
I ran across these a few weeks back, by accident looking for something unrealated…google brings in intersting things sometimes.
http://www.kellys-korner-xp.com/xp_tweaks.htm
http://www.mdgx.com/wxp.htm
WinXP pro (tweaked per the website that's already been posted), and nTrack v4.0 have made me a very happy camper lately.
John, I couldn't agree more, (although, I'm still using 3.3 because, to be honest, I'm playing around with Cubase SX more than I am with n-track).
I wasn't too sure about XP to start with, it was slow, I didn't like the interface, and I didn't really understand all these admin thingies, but now with those pointers from TG and Phoo, I've really got it smoking!
Not only is it faster and smoother, but it seems pretty bomb-proof too.
The n-track Rewire dll (fadxirw.dll) seems to operate perfectly now, (under 98SE it was a wee bit shaky) and Asio and WDM give no problems at all.
All in all, it seems that Billiam Gates has finally come up with an OS that is not only friendly, but suitable for growed up folks too!
So, just one more question guys: I've converted my system disc to NTFS, but I'm unsure what to do about the Audio disc.
I've read conflicting info, so any thoughts?
Ali
John, I couldn't agree more, (although, I'm still using 3.3 because, to be honest, I'm playing around with Cubase SX more than I am with n-track).
I wasn't too sure about XP to start with, it was slow, I didn't like the interface, and I didn't really understand all these admin thingies, but now with those pointers from TG and Phoo, I've really got it smoking!
Not only is it faster and smoother, but it seems pretty bomb-proof too.
The n-track Rewire dll (fadxirw.dll) seems to operate perfectly now, (under 98SE it was a wee bit shaky) and Asio and WDM give no problems at all.
All in all, it seems that Billiam Gates has finally come up with an OS that is not only friendly, but suitable for growed up folks too!
So, just one more question guys: I've converted my system disc to NTFS, but I'm unsure what to do about the Audio disc.
I've read conflicting info, so any thoughts?
Ali
So, just one more question guys: I've converted my system disc to NTFS, but I'm unsure what to do about the Audio disc.
I'm using NTFS on my "data" disk (which includes all of my audio files) because it does a better job at managing files (less fragments) and you grant "rights" for certain users to certain directories. For example: My girlfriend has "read only" access to my MP3 and humor directories, and "no access" at all to my... ummm.... "art" film collection.
I'm not sure about the process of converting from FAT32 to NTFS, though, so be sure you have aback-up of everything that would break you heart if it were to be lost forever; Just in case.
I'm using NTFS on my "data" disk (which includes all of my audio files) because it does a better job at managing files (less fragments) and you grant "rights" for certain users to certain directories. For example: My girlfriend has "read only" access to my MP3 and humor directories, and "no access" at all to my... ummm.... "art" film collection.
I'm not sure about the process of converting from FAT32 to NTFS, though, so be sure you have aback-up of everything that would break you heart if it were to be lost forever; Just in case.
| Quote (John @ Jan. 22 2005,18:40) |
| My girlfriend has..... "no access" at all to my... ummm.... "art" film collection.
|
AaHh Johnie:
What a shame, if there would ever be an accidental break-in to that folder…
Quote (John @ Jan. 22 2005,18:40)
My girlfriend has… “no access” at all to my… ummm… “art” film collection.
I don’t know if I’d want to be close to your part of the woods… 
Bill…
I'm using NTFS on my "data" disk (which includes all of my audio files) because it does a better job at managing files (less fragments) and you grant "rights" for certain users to certain directories. For example: My girlfriend has "read only" access to my MP3 and humor directories, and "no access" at all to my... ummm.... "art" film collection.
I'm not sure about the process of converting from FAT32 to NTFS, though, so be sure you have aback-up of everything that would break you heart if it were to be lost forever; Just in case.
Well, I thought the best thing to do was conduct some tests.
I ran DSKBENCH on my smaller (4Gig) audio partition.
Firstly with FAT32, then NTFS - 4k clusters, and finally, NTFS - 512B clusters.
And to be honest, there wasn't a great deal of difference. I've pasted the results below.
FAT32 was overwhelmingly better at the largest block size, but for every other block size, NTFS-4k was marginally better.
I didn't test my larger 40Gig partition, but I assume NTFS is better at larger disc sizes anyway.
So, for the sake of better file integrity of my "Maria exercises Fido" series, I've changed both partitions to NTFS - 4k.
Thanks John and everyone else.
Ali
E:\>c: emp\dskbench (FAT32, 4k clusters)
DskBench 2.12
© 1998, SESA, J.M.Catena (cat@sesa.es, www.sesa.es)
Timer Check = 1001 (should be near 1000)
CPU Check = 50.15 % (should be near 50.00 %)
CPU index (relative to Pro 200 MHz) = 5.524740
Open = 0 ms
Write = 5398 ms, 47.42 MB/s, CPU = 3.39 %
Flush = 60 ms
Rewin = 0 ms
Read = 5438 ms, 47.08 MB/s, CPU = 3.54 %
Close = 0 ms
BlockSize = 131072, MB/s = 16.04, Tracks = 190.67, CPU = 1.81 %
BlockSize = 65536, MB/s = 8.38, Tracks = 99.64, CPU = 1.72 %
BlockSize = 32768, MB/s = 4.24, Tracks = 50.38, CPU = 1.68 %
BlockSize = 16384, MB/s = 2.13, Tracks = 25.33, CPU = 1.63 %
BlockSize = 8192, MB/s = 1.82, Tracks = 21.62, CPU = 2.68 %
BlockSize = 4096, MB/s = 1.45, Tracks = 17.18, CPU = 4.01 %
E:\>c: emp\dskbench (NTFS, 4k clusters)
DskBench 2.12
© 1998, SESA, J.M.Catena (cat@sesa.es, www.sesa.es)
Timer Check = 1001 (should be near 1000)
CPU Check = 50.48 % (should be near 50.00 %)
CPU index (relative to Pro 200 MHz) = 5.727162
Open = 0 ms
Write = 5658 ms, 45.25 MB/s, CPU = 3.63 %
Flush = 10 ms
Rewin = 0 ms
Read = 5578 ms, 45.89 MB/s, CPU = 3.60 %
Close = 0 ms
BlockSize = 131072, MB/s = 13.31, Tracks = 158.28, CPU = 1.49 %
BlockSize = 65536, MB/s = 8.90, Tracks = 105.82, CPU = 1.71 %
BlockSize = 32768, MB/s = 4.77, Tracks = 56.66, CPU = 2.42 %
BlockSize = 16384, MB/s = 2.45, Tracks = 29.13, CPU = 2.22 %
BlockSize = 8192, MB/s = 2.48, Tracks = 29.52, CPU = 3.30 %
BlockSize = 4096, MB/s = 1.88, Tracks = 22.40, CPU = 4.69 %
E:\>c: emp\dskbench (NTFS, 512 clusters)
DskBench 2.12
© 1998, SESA, J.M.Catena (cat@sesa.es, www.sesa.es)
Timer Check = 1002 (should be near 1000)
CPU Check = 50.20 % (should be near 50.00 %)
CPU index (relative to Pro 200 MHz) = 5.571626
Open = 0 ms
Write = 5668 ms, 45.17 MB/s, CPU = 4.43 %
Flush = 20 ms
Rewin = 0 ms
Read = 5568 ms, 45.98 MB/s, CPU = 4.13 %
Close = 0 ms
BlockSize = 131072, MB/s = 13.02, Tracks = 154.74, CPU = 1.81 %
BlockSize = 65536, MB/s = 7.74, Tracks = 91.98, CPU = 1.48 %
BlockSize = 32768, MB/s = 4.11, Tracks = 48.89, CPU = 1.54 %
BlockSize = 16384, MB/s = 2.16, Tracks = 25.69, CPU = 1.34 %
BlockSize = 8192, MB/s = 2.37, Tracks = 28.21, CPU = 3.03 %
BlockSize = 4096, MB/s = 1.90, Tracks = 22.57, CPU = 4.65 %
I'm not sure about the process of converting from FAT32 to NTFS, though, so be sure you have aback-up of everything that would break you heart if it were to be lost forever; Just in case.
Well, I thought the best thing to do was conduct some tests.
I ran DSKBENCH on my smaller (4Gig) audio partition.
Firstly with FAT32, then NTFS - 4k clusters, and finally, NTFS - 512B clusters.
And to be honest, there wasn't a great deal of difference. I've pasted the results below.
FAT32 was overwhelmingly better at the largest block size, but for every other block size, NTFS-4k was marginally better.
I didn't test my larger 40Gig partition, but I assume NTFS is better at larger disc sizes anyway.
So, for the sake of better file integrity of my "Maria exercises Fido" series, I've changed both partitions to NTFS - 4k.
Thanks John and everyone else.
Ali
E:\>c: emp\dskbench (FAT32, 4k clusters)
DskBench 2.12
© 1998, SESA, J.M.Catena (cat@sesa.es, www.sesa.es)
Timer Check = 1001 (should be near 1000)
CPU Check = 50.15 % (should be near 50.00 %)
CPU index (relative to Pro 200 MHz) = 5.524740
Open = 0 ms
Write = 5398 ms, 47.42 MB/s, CPU = 3.39 %
Flush = 60 ms
Rewin = 0 ms
Read = 5438 ms, 47.08 MB/s, CPU = 3.54 %
Close = 0 ms
BlockSize = 131072, MB/s = 16.04, Tracks = 190.67, CPU = 1.81 %
BlockSize = 65536, MB/s = 8.38, Tracks = 99.64, CPU = 1.72 %
BlockSize = 32768, MB/s = 4.24, Tracks = 50.38, CPU = 1.68 %
BlockSize = 16384, MB/s = 2.13, Tracks = 25.33, CPU = 1.63 %
BlockSize = 8192, MB/s = 1.82, Tracks = 21.62, CPU = 2.68 %
BlockSize = 4096, MB/s = 1.45, Tracks = 17.18, CPU = 4.01 %
E:\>c: emp\dskbench (NTFS, 4k clusters)
DskBench 2.12
© 1998, SESA, J.M.Catena (cat@sesa.es, www.sesa.es)
Timer Check = 1001 (should be near 1000)
CPU Check = 50.48 % (should be near 50.00 %)
CPU index (relative to Pro 200 MHz) = 5.727162
Open = 0 ms
Write = 5658 ms, 45.25 MB/s, CPU = 3.63 %
Flush = 10 ms
Rewin = 0 ms
Read = 5578 ms, 45.89 MB/s, CPU = 3.60 %
Close = 0 ms
BlockSize = 131072, MB/s = 13.31, Tracks = 158.28, CPU = 1.49 %
BlockSize = 65536, MB/s = 8.90, Tracks = 105.82, CPU = 1.71 %
BlockSize = 32768, MB/s = 4.77, Tracks = 56.66, CPU = 2.42 %
BlockSize = 16384, MB/s = 2.45, Tracks = 29.13, CPU = 2.22 %
BlockSize = 8192, MB/s = 2.48, Tracks = 29.52, CPU = 3.30 %
BlockSize = 4096, MB/s = 1.88, Tracks = 22.40, CPU = 4.69 %
E:\>c: emp\dskbench (NTFS, 512 clusters)
DskBench 2.12
© 1998, SESA, J.M.Catena (cat@sesa.es, www.sesa.es)
Timer Check = 1002 (should be near 1000)
CPU Check = 50.20 % (should be near 50.00 %)
CPU index (relative to Pro 200 MHz) = 5.571626
Open = 0 ms
Write = 5668 ms, 45.17 MB/s, CPU = 4.43 %
Flush = 20 ms
Rewin = 0 ms
Read = 5568 ms, 45.98 MB/s, CPU = 4.13 %
Close = 0 ms
BlockSize = 131072, MB/s = 13.02, Tracks = 154.74, CPU = 1.81 %
BlockSize = 65536, MB/s = 7.74, Tracks = 91.98, CPU = 1.48 %
BlockSize = 32768, MB/s = 4.11, Tracks = 48.89, CPU = 1.54 %
BlockSize = 16384, MB/s = 2.16, Tracks = 25.69, CPU = 1.34 %
BlockSize = 8192, MB/s = 2.37, Tracks = 28.21, CPU = 3.03 %
BlockSize = 4096, MB/s = 1.90, Tracks = 22.57, CPU = 4.65 %