Prev: New Song - Power Drift
Next: MIDI educational software
From: John Braner on 15 Jan 2010 05:12
kitekrazy wrote:
> John Braner wrote:
>
>>
>> - Then I upgraded from 4GB to 8GB RAM in my Q6600 2.4 GHz Quad core
>> which is two years old - but is working fine. This was not 100%
>> straightforward, as the 1066MHz (PC2-8500) CL7 memory doesn't really
>> run at it's advertised speed. The mobo is a Asus P5KR and takes 4 x
>> 2GB DDR2 DRAM @ 1066MHz - but I got consistent memtest errors. I found
>> that by backing the timing down to 890 MHz and running at CL5
>> (5-5-5-15) it works fine - and the sisoft sandra benchmarks are only
>> about 3-4% slower than running at 1066 MHz 7-7-7-18. This isn't for
>> the faint hearted - you have to be comfortable with the "gamer" BIOS
>> settings.
>>
>
> A Q6600 is a fine processor. That's what on my Intel machine. I have an
> Intel DG33BU board and it only accepts 800mhz memory. So I have 8 gigs
> of Crucial with a 6 CLAS. I put that in all of my systems.

Yeah - there's plenty of life left in the Q6600. The P5KR says it supports 1066 MHz but it's using
"Super Memspeed Technology". I don't know what that is - try googling it - it's just some black
magic. It doesn't seem to work when you use 2GB in all 4 slots. Mine is crucial memory too. The 4 x
1GB Crucial was OK at 1066 but not the 4 x 2GB.

The interesting thing is how close the sisoft sandra numbers were. Again I think we get caught up
with the settings and they don't make *that* big a difference.

Going from 1066 MHz down to 890 sounds like a lot - but it was, like, 3 or 4 % slower. OK I'm at CL5
instead of CL7 but that doesn't make *that* big a difference either....


/snip



>> I'll keep the XP partition around for awhile in case I need to open
>> old projects, with plugins I didn't bring across etc.
>>
>
> Good move. If you have W7 Pro with VXP, running audio apps would suck.
>

It's easier this way. The only thing I'll miss out on - is - I can't set my disks to AHCI in BIOS or
it will break the XP partition. Of course I could swap the settings depending where I'm booting but
that's a pain. Again - disk speed is *fine* like it is...



>
>> All in all - it turned out to be easier than I thought to make the
>> change. I still had issues and head scratching - but I thought I'd
>> have *more* issues and head scratching ;-)
>>
>> I hope this helps the next person who makes the plunge...
>>


--
===========
John Braner

jbraner(a)NOblueyonderSPAM.co.uk
http://cdbaby.com/cd/JohnBraner
http://www.soundclick.com/johnbraner
From: John Braner on 15 Jan 2010 10:30
Glennbo wrote:
> The killer robot John Braner <me(a)myhouse.com> grabbed the controls of
> the spaceship cakewalk.audio and pressed these buttons...
>
>>> Of course, whether you can hear the difference in practice is another
>>> question altogether, and there are other factors that come into play
>>> if you
>> That's the real question Rick. It's like, "can you hear that bat
>> farting 3kms away during the drum solo?" ;-)
>
> The answer is yes, and it's tonal characteristics are 32 times better
> sounding at 64 bitz! Plus, you can load 300% more samples of it. ;)
>

Plus - some of the sound of the bat fart resides in ultrasonic frequencies, so you need to render
them at 173.31 KHz sample rates.

--
===========
John Braner

jbraner(a)NOblueyonderSPAM.co.uk
http://cdbaby.com/cd/JohnBraner
http://www.soundclick.com/johnbraner
From: John Braner on 15 Jan 2010 10:37
Glennbo wrote:
> The killer robot John Braner <me(a)myhouse.com> grabbed the controls of
> the spaceship cakewalk.audio and pressed these buttons...
>
>>> I know, I just like to joke around whenever 64 bit operating systems
>>> are mentioned because so many people actually *do* think it's going
>>> to sound better, or perform faster since it's more bitz. Since the
>>> most RAM hungry plugin I use is Superior Drummer 2, and using the
>>> sounds I like the best for it add up to only about a half a gig, I'm
>>> not getting anywhere close to the 2 gigs of RAM I have available.
>>> Basically, my DAW ain't broke, so I'm not fixing it. ;)
>>>
>> Good philosophy. The thing that drove me to make the move was Trilian.
>> I was able to manage nice big Superior kits and Omnisphere together -
>> along with whatever else - but Trilian made me have to juggle things
>> and bounce more. So I started thinking.... (always a sign of danger)
>> ;-)
>
> The only thing I ever had that was a space hog sample player was
> Gigastudio, which I bought solely so I could use Purrrfect Drums. The
> whole thing was a HUGE dissapointment. I built a dedicated machine for it,
> threw tons of money at it, and it still responded slow, and had crappy
> sounding drum samples. It was at that time that I came to realise that
> BIGGER doesn't always equal better.
>
> I eventually downsized to using only the cymbals from Purrrfect and a much
> much cheaper and much much smaller set of samples for the actual drum
> sounds. That was the original Drumkit From Hell samples, which all of
> added together were like the size of the floor tom sample in Purrrfect, yet
> they sounded a *million* times better, and could be run in Vsampler on the
> same machine as the DAW with faster response.
>
> I still am of the mind that BIGGER doesn't always mean better, as the
> digital drums I currently use only consume about a half a gig of memory,
> and frequently have musician friends of mine asking if I'm using real drums
> on my tracks. There are BIGGER sample sets I could load, but I've yet to
> play one that feels as real when playing it, or sounds more real when
> mixing it, so I stick with the smaller, lightning fast kit I use now.
>

I agree with you. Trilian is bigger because you can load all the articulations. First of all it's
disk streaming, but you can set (roughly) how much to load in RAM and how much to stream (well, you
dedicate a certain amount of RAM and the rest streams). Anyway it's overkill, but it's way cool
because you can keyswitch between legato, staccato, slides, glissandos etc. It's like loading a
bunch of different bass instances at the same time - and key switching between them. PLUS there are
a bunch of round robin samples for *each articulation*.

Can you make good bass tracks just using one "main" articulation? Of course you can - but this new
way is addicting ;-) Of course you can slim down your sample set for ie just the notes you're using
in your song etc - but it's nice to have "everything" there when you're composing your bass part ;-)

--
===========
John Braner

jbraner(a)NOblueyonderSPAM.co.uk
http://cdbaby.com/cd/JohnBraner
http://www.soundclick.com/johnbraner
From: BobF on 15 Jan 2010 10:54
Glennbo wrote:
> The killer robot John Braner <me(a)myhouse.com> grabbed the controls of the
> spaceship cakewalk.audio and pressed these buttons...
>
>> Can you make good bass tracks just using one "main" articulation?
>
> No, but I can do it with no sampled articulations and one real bass! ;)
> http://members.cox.net/glennbopix/BassMent.jpg
>

That's not a *real* bass. It has too many strings!
From: John Braner on 15 Jan 2010 12:02
Glennbo wrote:
> The killer robot BobF <nothanks(a)nospam.yum> grabbed the controls of the
> spaceship cakewalk.audio and pressed these buttons...
>
>>>> Can you make good bass tracks just using one "main" articulation?
>>> No, but I can do it with no sampled articulations and one real bass!
>>> ;) http://members.cox.net/glennbopix/BassMent.jpg
>>>
>> That's not a *real* bass. It has too many strings!
>
> Well, I do have one of these too that I use half the time.
>
> http://gretschpages.com/guitars/G1212-junior-jet-bass/
>
> It's two bits, has zero memory requirements, zillions of
> articulations, and doesn't drag my machine down at all. ;)
>

It's even better than Trilian! ;-)

--
===========
John Braner

jbraner(a)NOblueyonderSPAM.co.uk
http://cdbaby.com/cd/JohnBraner
http://www.soundclick.com/johnbraner
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: New Song - Power Drift
Next: MIDI educational software