[Good Music]

PC recording question:

When I'm recording realtime analog audio, how can I buffer the audio so that
when my PC becomes preoccupied with other activities (popping up license
renewal reminders, etc), it doesn't result in a "skip" (missed information)
in the resulting music .WAV file?

I keep having to re-record cassette tape transfers due to this problem
("skips" in the .WAV file).

How can such buffering be achieved? I would really like to find & purchase
some sort of USB 2.0 device with L & R analog line-level RCA inputs on one
end, and a USB plug on the other, which will perform the buffering for
however long needed (let's say, up to 1 second) at CD-quality audio
recording. Is there such a thing? If so, what are they generally called?

If that's not possible, then what are some reasonably priced, decent,
reliable sound cards which give the user the ability to perform this
buffering?

My system: I'm currently using a Windows XP (SP2) Dell PC, about a year old,
with USB 2.0, and with a "SoundBlaster Live! 24 bit" soundcard. I tried
going to the sound card "properties" to change buffering time, but it only
offered one so-called "advanced" option, with two radio button positions:
"Use sound card features", or "Don't use sound card features". Weird.

Thanks,
- Good Music

[Richard Crowley]

"Good Music" wrote...
PC recording question:

When I'm recording realtime analog audio, how can I buffer the audio
so that
when my PC becomes preoccupied with other activities (popping up
license
renewal reminders, etc), it doesn't result in a "skip" (missed
information)
in the resulting music .WAV file?

I keep having to re-record cassette tape transfers due to this problem
("skips" in the .WAV file).

How can such buffering be achieved? I would really like to find &
purchase
some sort of USB 2.0 device with L & R analog line-level RCA inputs on
one
end, and a USB plug on the other, which will perform the buffering for
however long needed (let's say, up to 1 second) at CD-quality audio
recording. Is there such a thing? If so, what are they generally
called?

If that's not possible, then what are some reasonably priced, decent,
reliable sound cards which give the user the ability to perform this
buffering?

My system: I'm currently using a Windows XP (SP2) Dell PC, about a
year old,
with USB 2.0, and with a "SoundBlaster Live! 24 bit" soundcard. I
tried
going to the sound card "properties" to change buffering time, but it
only
offered one so-called "advanced" option, with two radio button
positions:
"Use sound card features", or "Don't use sound card features". Weird.

You are asking for something that does not exist.
You have two (or maybe 3) choices:

1) Record with something else: MiniDisc, Flash Recorder, etc.
and then transfer the file into your PC.

2) Kill off the offending processes that interrupt recording on
your computer. I like to use "End-It-All". Works great.
Of course, this means that you never have your computer
connected to the internet (or a LAN), no wireless, etc.
while recording. There may be 50-80 processes running
in the background of a typical Windows PC. It is a wonder
that it records as well as it does. You can live without over
half of those processes as long as you are not doing anything
else with your computer (ANYTHING on the internet, WiFi,
opening other apps, etc.) while recording.

3) Switch to some minimalist operating system like Linux where
there aren't enough practical applications to interrupt recording.

Many people here record with their PCs all the time.
But we use option #2 above.

[Julian]

On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 18:27:21 -0800, "Richard Crowley"
wrote:


2) Kill off the offending processes that interrupt recording on
your computer. I like to use "End-It-All". Works great.
Of course, this means that you never have your computer
connected to the internet (or a LAN), no wireless, etc.
while recording.

For a critical transfer I'd go to all that trouble and disconnect my
Internet too. For day to day stuff, I rarely do more than just not
run any programs while I record. For all we know the OP is trying to
check e-mail and play games at the same time he is recording. if so
simply stopping doing that might be enough :-)

If that isn't enough then your suggestion is probably his best advice.
For my self I spend a lot of time in msconfig and I know exactly what
I need and what I don't. I manually kill programs or services as
needed.

There may be 50-80 processes running
in the background of a typical Windows PC.

That is a little excessive, I wouldn't call it a typical number. The
PC's I set up usually have between 30 and 40 processes running with no
programs started.

It is a wonder
that it records as well as it does. You can live without over
half of those processes as long as you are not doing anything
else with your computer (ANYTHING on the internet, WiFi,
opening other apps, etc.) while recording.

I find just not doing anything on my computer is good enough. I don't
have to stop the processes that enable those things.

Julian

[Julian]

On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 21:11:42 -0500, "Good Music"
wrote:

PC recording question:

When I'm recording realtime analog audio, how can I buffer the audio so that
when my PC becomes preoccupied with other activities (popping up license
renewal reminders, etc), it doesn't result in a "skip" (missed information)
in the resulting music .WAV file?

Turn off any programs that might be doing something like popping up a
license renewal reminder of course! I don't have ANYTHING set to
automatically update partly for this reason.

I keep having to re-record cassette tape transfers due to this problem
("skips" in the .WAV file).

I so damn rarely ever get any skips in my recording that once I
actually tried starting up a bunch of things to see if I could make it
skip. I started doing things like surfing the internet, checking
e-mail, newsgroups etc., playing games and finally I was able to get
some skips, but if I simply don't run any programs while I'm recording
I never get a skip.

How can such buffering be achieved? I would really like to find & purchase
some sort of USB 2.0 device with L & R analog line-level RCA inputs on one
end, and a USB plug on the other, which will perform the buffering for
however long needed (let's say, up to 1 second) at CD-quality audio
recording. Is there such a thing? If so, what are they generally called?

They don't exist as far as I know. If you are asking to be able to
use your computer actively while recording, that simply isn't a
realistic expectation. When you record, you don't do anything else
with your computer. Period. Same goes for burning CD's. You are
asking for trouble if you do ANYTHING with your computer while
recording or burning.

If that's not possible, then what are some reasonably priced, decent,
reliable sound cards which give the user the ability to perform this
buffering?

None.

My system: I'm currently using a Windows XP (SP2) Dell PC, about a year old,
with USB 2.0, and with a "SoundBlaster Live! 24 bit" soundcard.

Most any PC with CPU greater than 300 MHz and 256MB RAM is powerful
enough to record reliably as long as a bunch of other stuff isn't
running in the background.

Julian

[Harry Lavo]

"Good Music" wrote in message
...
PC recording question:

When I'm recording realtime analog audio, how can I buffer the audio so
that
when my PC becomes preoccupied with other activities (popping up license
renewal reminders, etc), it doesn't result in a "skip" (missed
information)
in the resulting music .WAV file?

I keep having to re-record cassette tape transfers due to this problem
("skips" in the .WAV file).

How can such buffering be achieved? I would really like to find &
purchase
some sort of USB 2.0 device with L & R analog line-level RCA inputs on one
end, and a USB plug on the other, which will perform the buffering for
however long needed (let's say, up to 1 second) at CD-quality audio
recording. Is there such a thing? If so, what are they generally called?

If that's not possible, then what are some reasonably priced, decent,
reliable sound cards which give the user the ability to perform this
buffering?

My system: I'm currently using a Windows XP (SP2) Dell PC, about a year
old,
with USB 2.0, and with a "SoundBlaster Live! 24 bit" soundcard. I tried
going to the sound card "properties" to change buffering time, but it only
offered one so-called "advanced" option, with two radio button positions:
"Use sound card features", or "Don't use sound card features". Weird.


Not weird at all. It's the "dirty little secret" of PC recording.

Swee****er has about a four-page white paper on how to clean up your pc.
I've used it as a guide, but haven't had to go "all the way" with their
suggestions. I use a Shuttle AMD workstation running XP Pro...so I set up a
seperate DAW user profile....no wireless connection or internet, no email,
no restore, no automatic updates of anything. I found that defeating the
Microsoft's restore function, which can be done from the Control Panel, to
be the last piece of the puzzle that eliminated wav dropouts or "hiccups".
This allows the multichannel asio driver supplied by Presonus to work like a
charm. FWIW, I also record to mirrored internat SATA drives, with the
programs themselves residing on a separate PATA drive. I've kept my two
burners external, using either firewire or usb connections which may help as
well.

When I want to use the computer for other things, I just use a second
personal profile with full wireless internet capability and email. I
haven't coded the changes into a "hardware profile" yet (primarily because I
haven't yet learned how to do so). So connecting and disconnecting the USB
wireless antenna is manual...that is so the machine doesn't automatically
try to install wireless software when I enter the DAW user profile for
recording work.

I'd urge you to visit the Swee****er site and read the white paper
(http://www.swee****er.com/sweetcare/...on&-find=Go%21,
Article #30058, then try the suggestions there you can live with, and maybe
borrow from my and others experience as outlined here. You *can* lick those
"hiccups" no mater how hopeless it may initially seem.

[Julian]

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 00:21:02 -0500, "Harry Lavo"
wrote:

I found that defeating the
Microsoft's restore function, which can be done from the Control Panel, to
be the last piece of the puzzle that eliminated wav dropouts or "hiccups".

You gotta be kidding? Very very few events will initiate a system
restore point being generated - major program installs and windows
updating, etc. If you have automatic updates turned off and don't
install any software while you're recording :-) you shouldn't have any
problems with system restore. My system goes for weeks at a time
without any restore points being generated except when I do a cold
reboot, a software installation or a program update.

I should make a disclaimer. If you are running Windows Defender
spyware software, Windows makes many restore points every day. If you
are running windows defender, please turn off system restore AND
windows defender before recording even 2 track.

This allows the multichannel asio driver supplied by Presonus to work like a
charm.

Have you actually been able to determine system restore caused a
glitch on you system by finding a restore point that was generated
during a recording session? That is completely verifiable.

The OP is talking about recording a 2 track cassette recording on a
sound blaster card. Entirely different situation then multitrack
recording. It should not be needed for 2 track 16 bit recording.
System restore is far too useful of a feature to leave turned off IMO.

FWIW, I also record to mirrored internat SATA drives, with the
programs themselves residing on a separate PATA drive. I've kept my two
burners external, using either firewire or usb connections which may help as
well.

When I want to use the computer for other things, I just use a second
personal profile with full wireless internet capability and email. I
haven't coded the changes into a "hardware profile" yet (primarily because I
haven't yet learned how to do so). So connecting and disconnecting the USB
wireless antenna is manual...that is so the machine doesn't automatically
try to install wireless software when I enter the DAW user profile for
recording work.

These all sound like good engineering practice for multitracking but
overkill for the application being discussed.

Julian

[Peter Larsen]

Good Music wrote:

PC recording question:

When I'm recording realtime analog audio, how can I buffer
the audio so that when my PC becomes preoccupied with other
activities (popping up license renewal reminders, etc)

Disable stuff that pops up.

How can such buffering be achieved?

Sound card and recording software handles that.

I would really like to find & purchase some sort of USB 2.0

You have a problem with what is called a "real time task", in which case
something USB is not the solution, even on board sound is likely to be
better in terms of cpu overhead.

device with L & R analog line-level RCA inputs on one
end, and a USB plug on the other, which will perform the
buffering for however long needed (let's say, up to 1 second)
at CD-quality audio recording.

CD quality is a term that is tagged on to so much crapola equipment that
it has become a warning label .... O;-) ... anyway, I get your point.

Is there such a thing? If so, what are they generally called?

M-Audio Audiophile PCI, either 24/96 or 192. Less than USD 100.
Supplement with Magix Audio Cleaning Suite, and you have a good basic
toolkit. You can also use Audiograbber for line-in recording, and it has
pause detection and direct save to mp3. Example products, but well
placed in terms of price-performance ratio.

My system: I'm currently using a Windows XP (SP2) Dell PC

Right click "My Computer", advanced, find the place where you can
optimize visual appearance, select "best performance".

about a year old, with USB 2.0, and with a "SoundBlaster Live!
24 bit" soundcard. I tried going to the sound card "properties"
to change buffering time, but it only offered one so-called
"advanced" option, with two radio button positions:
"Use sound card features", or "Don't use sound card features".

"Use sound card features" would be my choice, the card is in fact good
enough for what you want to do and should do fine. I havent got such a
card and do not expects to get one, so I do not know whether there is
stuff you might want to disable on it.

You need to look into taming that OS. "Videoguy's XP tweaks" may be a
helpful search term. At the very least prohibit messenger from starting
up!

I just switched over to using a dedicated pc for sound recording at home
so as to free up the main daw while transcribing. That box is an 8 years
old Celeron 366 overclocked to 450-some with 384 megs of ram, two
harddisks of a matching vintage and a 3com NIC running Windows ME and
with a matching vintage sound software version. I did optimize the OS
according to those of Videoguy's WinMe tweaks I agree in so as to
benefit from having so much ram in it. A lean DAW is a happy DAW.

What kind of graphics card do you have in that box, integrated - aka
sharemen would certainly fit the problem description. If so, then the
cure for the problem is to get a real graphics card, Nvidia or Matrox
come to mind.


Regards

Peter Larsen

[Ray Thomas]

I found the Swee****er XP tuning tips for Audio Recording to be clear and
easy to follow, with most of their tips making sense.....but can anyone
explain how restoring the desktop configuration to Windows Classic and
tinkering with the icon and font sizes would have any impact on CPU load---
when the desktop isnt visible during most recording procedures---.as the
sofware metering screen is what you'd be viewing instead ? Similarly with
the start menu icon loading...wouldnt that be all over and done with by the
time you start recording ? I can understand kicking out firewalls, virus
scans, arbitrary self-initiating restore point generators and system
sounds...but how much CPU overhead would be clawed back by those screen
appearance changes ? I'd like to see a percentage system efficiency chart
plotted for each of those Swee****er recommendations (which are very similar
to those outlined in other Windows XP Tune up guides), so we could decide
which are "cost effective" ?

Ray

"Harry Lavo" wrote in message
. ..

"Good Music" wrote in message
...
PC recording question:

When I'm recording realtime analog audio, how can I buffer the audio so
that
when my PC becomes preoccupied with other activities (popping up license
renewal reminders, etc), it doesn't result in a "skip" (missed
information)
in the resulting music .WAV file?

I keep having to re-record cassette tape transfers due to this problem
("skips" in the .WAV file).

How can such buffering be achieved? I would really like to find &
purchase
some sort of USB 2.0 device with L & R analog line-level RCA inputs on
one
end, and a USB plug on the other, which will perform the buffering for
however long needed (let's say, up to 1 second) at CD-quality audio
recording. Is there such a thing? If so, what are they generally
called?

If that's not possible, then what are some reasonably priced, decent,
reliable sound cards which give the user the ability to perform this
buffering?

My system: I'm currently using a Windows XP (SP2) Dell PC, about a year
old,
with USB 2.0, and with a "SoundBlaster Live! 24 bit" soundcard. I tried
going to the sound card "properties" to change buffering time, but it
only
offered one so-called "advanced" option, with two radio button positions:
"Use sound card features", or "Don't use sound card features". Weird.


Not weird at all. It's the "dirty little secret" of PC recording.

Swee****er has about a four-page white paper on how to clean up your pc.
I've used it as a guide, but haven't had to go "all the way" with their
suggestions. I use a Shuttle AMD workstation running XP Pro...so I set up
a seperate DAW user profile....no wireless connection or internet, no
email, no restore, no automatic updates of anything. I found that
defeating the Microsoft's restore function, which can be done from the
Control Panel, to be the last piece of the puzzle that eliminated wav
dropouts or "hiccups". This allows the multichannel asio driver supplied
by Presonus to work like a charm. FWIW, I also record to mirrored
internat SATA drives, with the programs themselves residing on a separate
PATA drive. I've kept my two burners external, using either firewire or
usb connections which may help as well.

When I want to use the computer for other things, I just use a second
personal profile with full wireless internet capability and email. I
haven't coded the changes into a "hardware profile" yet (primarily because
I haven't yet learned how to do so). So connecting and disconnecting the
USB wireless antenna is manual...that is so the machine doesn't
automatically try to install wireless software when I enter the DAW user
profile for recording work.

I'd urge you to visit the Swee****er site and read the white paper
(http://www.swee****er.com/sweetcare/...on&-find=Go%21,
Article #30058, then try the suggestions there you can live with, and
maybe borrow from my and others experience as outlined here. You *can*
lick those "hiccups" no mater how hopeless it may initially seem.

[Laurence Payne]

On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 19:12:28 -0800, Julian
wrote:

For a critical transfer I'd go to all that trouble and disconnect my
Internet too. For day to day stuff, I rarely do more than just not
run any programs while I record. For all we know the OP is trying to
check e-mail and play games at the same time he is recording. if so
simply stopping doing that might be enough :-)

Indeed. I can boot into a minimal Windows with only music
applications installed. But I never do :-) I know I SHOULD disable
the network port, turn off anti-virus etc while working on a
multitrack project, but I usually forget to. But my system tray isn't
full of toy programs, and it wouldn't occur to me to have other major
applications running behind a music session.

I thoroughly recommend the dual-boot with one kept squeaky-clean.
If/when the working boot gets due for a spring-clean, you just switch.
Your essential tools are there. At your leisure, transfer and install
the less important stuff. And, when convenient, wipe the old
partition and set up your NEXT minimal boot.

Computer systems need maintenance, just like tape decks. It's just a
different kind of maintain, and rather less frequently :-)

[Laurence Payne]

On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 19:22:11 -0800, Julian
wrote:

Most any PC with CPU greater than 300 MHz and 256MB RAM is powerful
enough to record reliably as long as a bunch of other stuff isn't
running in the background.

As was my first PC, a 200Mz Pentium 2 with 64MB :-) No trouble
working on 16 track projects in Cubase. You did have to be a bit more
pernickety about optimising the system in those days though.

[Laurence Payne]

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 00:21:02 -0500, "Harry Lavo"
wrote:

FWIW, I also record to mirrored internat SATA drives, with the
programs themselves residing on a separate PATA drive. I've kept my two
burners external, using either firewire or usb connections which may help as
well.

I've recently been playing with RAID, and am beginning to suspect it
is counter-productive. I've tried RAID 0. The speed figures are
impressive, but really make no practical difference. And I don't
really need to buy my disk space twice just for the security of
mirroring. I don't count a backup in the same box as a real backup.

[Laurence Payne]

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 01:43:51 -0800, Julian
wrote:

I should make a disclaimer. If you are running Windows Defender
spyware software, Windows makes many restore points every day. If you
are running windows defender, please turn off system restore AND
windows defender before recording even 2 track.

Is that your experience? Two computers here are running Windows
Defender. I just looked. Both have restore points where expected,
when software was changed. The machine I am typing on now has been
booted for several days. The last restore point is 24 hours ago, when
I updated a program.

[Julian]

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 13:27:31 +0000, Laurence Payne
lpayne1NOSPAM@dslDOTpipexDOTcom wrote:

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 01:43:51 -0800, Julian
wrote:

I should make a disclaimer. If you are running Windows Defender
spyware software, Windows makes many restore points every day. If you
are running windows defender, please turn off system restore AND
windows defender before recording even 2 track.

Is that your experience? Two computers here are running Windows
Defender. I just looked. Both have restore points where expected,
when software was changed. The machine I am typing on now has been
booted for several days. The last restore point is 24 hours ago, when
I updated a program.

I installed windows defender on 12 machines at a client's office in
October. My computer guru when I consulted him for advice on the
situation advised me it is a good program but it creates many restore
points every day. His concern is if you let it run unchecked
eventually it will eat up too much disc space. In that application it
didn't seem a problem so I went ahead and I am happy with the results,
BTW. I did check restore points on one or two of those computers and
I did see as he predicted that there were many times more restore
points those machines as opposed to my machine at home where I only
see a restore point when I cold boot and when I install something.
That was probably back in November when I checked so the details are a
little fuzzy, but easy for you to check on your machines. Just start
up system restore and select "restore to an earlier point" and you can
then browse for restore points to choose from. You should see lots
and lots of restore points on any machine running windows defender.

Julian

[Julian]

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 23:10:15 +1030, "Ray Thomas"
wrote:

I found the Swee****er XP tuning tips for Audio Recording to be clear and
easy to follow, with most of their tips making sense.....

I read it briefly after reading Harry's post. They basically have the
right idea IMO.

but can anyone
explain how restoring the desktop configuration to Windows Classic and
tinkering with the icon and font sizes would have any impact on CPU load---

There are background applications associated with active desktop. Not
exactly resource hogs, but if you want to kill it all, why not turn it
off? I notice there is a windows service called "themes" which by
default runs on my computer at home even though I DO use classic
desktop. There probably are windows services that can be turned off
too when doing audio work, but Swee****er doesn't want to go that far.

Similarly with
the start menu icon loading...wouldnt that be all over and done with by the
time you start recording ?

dunno about that one...

I can understand kicking out firewalls, virus
scans, arbitrary self-initiating restore point generators and system
sounds...but how much CPU overhead would be clawed back by those screen
appearance changes ?

I can't imagine it is significant either.

Julian

[Julian]

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 13:22:45 +0000, Laurence Payne
lpayne1NOSPAM@dslDOTpipexDOTcom wrote:

I've recently been playing with RAID, and am beginning to suspect it
is counter-productive. I've tried RAID 0. The speed figures are
impressive, but really make no practical difference. And I don't
really need to buy my disk space twice just for the security of
mirroring. I don't count a backup in the same box as a real backup.

I have to agree. We had a fatal crash of a multiple hard drive RAID
array server running AudioVault last summer. We actually lost data
trying to bring the array back to life. It's sort of like facilities
with UPS's. I've seen more problems caused by the UPS's
malfunctioning in a power outage than facilities which just go dark.
The new AudioVault system has a better idea. We have a 4 computer
network and each computer mirrors the other's audio files, so if one
hard drive fails, you still have everything you need on 3 others. no
need for RAID there.

Julian

[Laurence Payne]

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 06:02:55 -0800, Julian
wrote:

Just start
up system restore and select "restore to an earlier point" and you can
then browse for restore points to choose from. You should see lots
and lots of restore points on any machine running windows defender.

Didn't you read my post? I just have, and didn't.

[Mike Rivers]

Laurence Payne wrote:

As was my first PC, a 200Mz Pentium 2 with 64MB :-) No trouble
working on 16 track projects in Cubase. You did have to be a bit more
pernickety about optimising the system in those days though.

You were probably running Win95 or 98 on that machine. Much less
cluttered than today's Windows computers, so probably easier to
optimize, though maybe not as simple to do what needed to be done. I
still use a 266 MHz PII with 128 MB RAM for 2-track work. I've never
tried to see how many tracks it could support, but when it was new, I
was reviewing the Echo Gina and successfully recorded 8 tracks using the
supplied copy of Cool Edit Pro. And I did no optimization other than not
set it up for an Internet connection.

[John L Rice]

I installed windows defender on 12 machines at a client's office in
October. My computer guru when I consulted him for advice on the
situation advised me it is a good program but it creates many restore
points every day. His concern is if you let it run unchecked
eventually it will eat up too much disc space.

You can select the amount of disk space used for restore points. Go into the
System properties page and select the System Restore tab. Select each drive
or partition and then click the Settings button. Move the slider to select
how much hard drive space system restore points can take up.

--
John L Rice
www.DeliriumFix.com

[Laurence Payne]

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 09:33:06 -0800, "John L Rice"
wrote:

I installed windows defender on 12 machines at a client's office in
October. My computer guru when I consulted him for advice on the
situation advised me it is a good program but it creates many restore
points every day. His concern is if you let it run unchecked
eventually it will eat up too much disc space.

You can select the amount of disk space used for restore points. Go into the
System properties page and select the System Restore tab. Select each drive
or partition and then click the Settings button. Move the slider to select
how much hard drive space system restore points can take up.

I'm a little worried about this guru of yours :-) He should know
that there is a fixed space allocation for restore points. Frequent
restore points will merely fill it up quicker. A few days after
installation, there will be no difference whatsoever.

It's worth reminding that, with today's big hard drives, the default
allocation can be ridiculously big. Windows defaults to a percentage
of partition size, not an absolute size. If you have a large
partition, go to the System Restore settings and get a few GB back.

[John L Rice]

The new AudioVault system has a better idea. We have a 4 computer
network and each computer mirrors the other's audio files, so if one
hard drive fails, you still have everything you need on 3 others. no
need for RAID there.

Julian

How does that work? Is it a scheduled process for after hours or real time?
I'd think a real time system would cause serious problems! ;-)

John L Rice

[Arny Krueger]

"Laurence Payne" lpayne1NOSPAM@dslDOTpipexDOTcom wrote in
message
On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 00:21:02 -0500, "Harry Lavo"
wrote:

FWIW, I also record to mirrored internat SATA drives,
with the
programs themselves residing on a separate PATA drive.
I've kept my two burners external, using either firewire
or usb connections which may help as well.

I've recently been playing with RAID, and am beginning to
suspect it is counter-productive. I've tried RAID 0.
The speed figures are impressive, but really make no
practical difference. And I don't really need to buy my
disk space twice just for the security of mirroring. I
don't count a backup in the same box as a real backup.

Try RAID 5. The latest Nvidia chipsets support it.

[Julian]

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 15:11:51 +0000, Laurence Payne
lpayne1NOSPAM@dslDOTpipexDOTcom wrote:

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 06:02:55 -0800, Julian
wrote:

Just start
up system restore and select "restore to an earlier point" and you can
then browse for restore points to choose from. You should see lots
and lots of restore points on any machine running windows defender.

Didn't you read my post? I just have, and didn't.

Sorry. I was half asleep when I read it. That is weird. There are
definitely a bazillion restore points on the machines I'm working
with. I wonder what's different?

Julian

[Julian]

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 09:45:40 -0800, "John L Rice"
wrote:

The new AudioVault system has a better idea. We have a 4 computer
network and each computer mirrors the other's audio files, so if one
hard drive fails, you still have everything you need on 3 others. no
need for RAID there.

Julian

How does that work? Is it a scheduled process for after hours or real time?
I'd think a real time system would cause serious problems! ;-)

There is a utility always running that checks the library on each
computer and if you create something on one computer it automatically
migrates to the others. if you delete something on one computer, it
automatically deletes on the others. Does not back up system
configuration or anything, just the cuts in the library.

Julian

[Julian]

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 17:41:23 +0000, Laurence Payne
lpayne1NOSPAM@dslDOTpipexDOTcom wrote:


I'm a little worried about this guru of yours :-) He should know
that there is a fixed space allocation for restore points.

Maybe I don't remember all the details of our conversation back in
October. I do remember him saying I would get lot's of restore points
and I do. I wonder why you don't.

Julian

[John L Rice]

"Julian" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 09:45:40 -0800, "John L Rice"
wrote:

The new AudioVault system has a better idea. We have a 4 computer
network and each computer mirrors the other's audio files, so if one
hard drive fails, you still have everything you need on 3 others. no
need for RAID there.

Julian

How does that work? Is it a scheduled process for after hours or real
time?
I'd think a real time system would cause serious problems! ;-)

There is a utility always running that checks the library on each
computer and if you create something on one computer it automatically
migrates to the others. if you delete something on one computer, it
automatically deletes on the others. Does not back up system
configuration or anything, just the cuts in the library.

Julian


Thanks for the info. I was just wondering what the effect would be if all
four workstations are recording at once. Seems like the hard drives will be
over taxed if they not only have to handle local files but files from three
other systems at the same time.

John L Rice

[Julian]

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 13:16:13 -0800, "John L Rice"
wrote:

"Julian" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 09:45:40 -0800, "John L Rice"
wrote:

The new AudioVault system has a better idea. We have a 4 computer
network and each computer mirrors the other's audio files, so if one
hard drive fails, you still have everything you need on 3 others. no
need for RAID there.

Julian

How does that work? Is it a scheduled process for after hours or real
time?
I'd think a real time system would cause serious problems! ;-)

There is a utility always running that checks the library on each
computer and if you create something on one computer it automatically
migrates to the others. if you delete something on one computer, it
automatically deletes on the others. Does not back up system
configuration or anything, just the cuts in the library.

Julian


Thanks for the info. I was just wondering what the effect would be if all
four workstations are recording at once. Seems like the hard drives will be
over taxed if they not only have to handle local files but files from three
other systems at the same time.

John L Rice

I'm guessing there is some prioritizing going on and library updates
can get put on the back burner while recording or something else is
going on that takes priority. We never have all 4 workstations
recording at once. One workstation is in the on air control room and
that only gets used for playback and another is in the live
performance room and it rarely gets used at all. We frequently have 2
workstations recording at once however.

All I can say is it works great compared to the old dual RAID 5 server
system.

Part of the system's success may be the Digigram VX882 sound card:

http://www.digigram.com/products/get...prod_key=12850

Julian

[Laurence Payne]

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 15:26:49 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

I've recently been playing with RAID, and am beginning to
suspect it is counter-productive. I've tried RAID 0.
The speed figures are impressive, but really make no
practical difference. And I don't really need to buy my
disk space twice just for the security of mirroring. I
don't count a backup in the same box as a real backup.

Try RAID 5. The latest Nvidia chipsets support it.

Considering my comments above, why would I want to?

[Laurence Payne]

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 13:04:53 -0800, Julian
wrote:

I'm a little worried about this guru of yours :-) He should know
that there is a fixed space allocation for restore points.

Maybe I don't remember all the details of our conversation back in
October. I do remember him saying I would get lot's of restore points
and I do. I wonder why you don't.

I get as many as fill the allocated space. So does everyone. I
thought the question was how OFTEN a restore point was created?

Did you read my other post regarding Windows' habit of allocating
over-generous space for restore point storage?

[VainGlorious]

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 21:44:28 +0000, Laurence Payne
lpayne1NOSPAM@dslDOTpipexDOTcom wrote:

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 15:26:49 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

I've recently been playing with RAID, and am beginning to
suspect it is counter-productive. I've tried RAID 0.
The speed figures are impressive, but really make no
practical difference. And I don't really need to buy my
disk space twice just for the security of mirroring. I
don't count a backup in the same box as a real backup.

Try RAID 5. The latest Nvidia chipsets support it.

Considering my comments above, why would I want to?

The employment of RAID 0 should be predicated on your write bandwidth.
Most of us are recording 2,3, maybe 5 or so tracks at a time. Very
often in 24-bit 44.1 or 48K. A reasonable SATA or PATA drive can
handle this without a problem.

But if you are trying to capture 24 simultaneous tracks, I'd
recommend a RAID 0 array using SATA drives with 16MB buffers.

RAID reliability can be augmented by disabling your motherboard's
on-board RAID and getting a true honest-to-Pete RAID controller card.

- TR

[Abyssmal]

There probably are windows services that can be turned off
too when doing audio work, but Swee****er doesn't want to go that far.

For Windows XP,there is only the necessity to run 6 processes.
explorer.exe
services.exe
spoolsv.exe
svchost.exe
system
system idle process

I work in tech support and when conflicts arise,
all processes but these can be turned off.
You can end most of these in task manager,but some will have to be
removed in msconfig.
Following all the steps in an article like Swee****er has on their
site will benefit performance,especially in large audio/video
projects.
I know enough about computers to only keep the necessary processes
running,no matter what function I use the computer for.
I usually disable the firewall, anti virus,then end the other
processes in task manager before a session.
I end up with about 15 processes running.
I have never had a problem running any sized session.
A simple reboot will turn my protection back on.

Randall

[Richard Amirault]

"Good Music" wrote ...
(snip)
How can such buffering be achieved? I would really like to find &
purchase
some sort of USB 2.0 device with L & R analog line-level RCA inputs on one
end, and a USB plug on the other, which will perform the buffering for
however long needed (let's say, up to 1 second) at CD-quality audio
recording. Is there such a thing? If so, what are they generally called?
(snip)

I don't know how well this works but it's cheap enough to try .. $30 USA

http://www.behringer.com/UCA202/index.cfm?lang=ENG

--
Richard Amirault N1JDU Boston,
MA, USA
n1jdu.org "Go Fly A Kite"

[Julian]

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 21:47:49 +0000, Laurence Payne
lpayne1NOSPAM@dslDOTpipexDOTcom wrote:

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 13:04:53 -0800, Julian
wrote:
I do remember him saying I would get lot's of restore points
and I do. I wonder why you don't.

I get as many as fill the allocated space. So does everyone. I
thought the question was how OFTEN a restore point was created?

Yes that is what I'm talking about. I have seen computers where
windows defender creates many restore points every day.

Julian

[Julian]

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 22:03:08 -0500, Abyssmal
wrote:

For Windows XP,there is only the necessity to run 6 processes.
explorer.exe
services.exe
spoolsv.exe
svchost.exe
system
system idle process

Thank you for that information.

How is this different then just starting up in safe mode, or selecting
VGA mode from the boot options?

Julian

[John L Rice]

Thanks for the info. I was just wondering what the effect would be if all
four workstations are recording at once. Seems like the hard drives will
be
over taxed if they not only have to handle local files but files from
three
other systems at the same time.

John L Rice

I'm guessing there is some prioritizing going on and library updates
can get put on the back burner while recording or something else is
going on that takes priority. We never have all 4 workstations
recording at once. One workstation is in the on air control room and
that only gets used for playback and another is in the live
performance room and it rarely gets used at all. We frequently have 2
workstations recording at once however.

All I can say is it works great compared to the old dual RAID 5 server
system.

Part of the system's success may be the Digigram VX882 sound card:

http://www.digigram.com/products/get...prod_key=12850

Julian


Thanks Julian, that makes sense. Plus if each workstation only has one of
those Digigram sound cards (they look really nice!) and if all stations are
running full bore at the same time, that's only 32 tracks (4x8) and any
decent computer should be able to handle that many tracks of information on
its own. (maybe 32 @ 24/192 might get problematic depending on how fast the
CPU and hard drive seek/read/write speed is)

John L Rice

[John L Rice]

"Good Music" wrote in message
...
PC recording question:

When I'm recording realtime analog audio, how can I buffer the audio so
that
when my PC becomes preoccupied with other activities (popping up license
renewal reminders, etc), it doesn't result in a "skip" (missed
information)
in the resulting music .WAV file?

I keep having to re-record cassette tape transfers due to this problem
("skips" in the .WAV file).

It's best just to turn everything off on your DAW computers like others have
said. My DAW is ONLY a DAW so it's not connected to a network and has no
active firewalls or virus scanners. (and software that doesn't listen when I
tell it to leave me the &^%$ alone is not allowed on the machine like Norton
Antivirus!!! Norton originally had awesome products that got gradually
screwed up over the years until they are unusable. it's sad . . .)

Anyway . . .

There is something you could try but I've never done it with audio recording
software, is to change the priority of the related processes to your
recording software. You may want to check with Digigram and your IT
department first. And to anyone reading this, if you play around with these
settings and screw up your machine, don't come crying to me! ;-) This IS NOT
a common end user setting to change and you shouldn't mess with it unless
you have some sort of understanding of the potential consequences are!

Basically you open Task Manager, select the Processes tab, then find the
recording software process(es) and right click them. In the menu go to Set
Priority and it will show you what the priority is currently set to. Set it
to the next step up and see if it helps or solves the problem.

Before you begin, run your audio software and start making a cassette
transfer. Then activate something small on your system that you think will
cause a glitch. (open Notepad or ???) Once you've found something that will
reliably cause a glitch, change the priority of your recording software
process and then try to make it glitch again.

Only mess with processes that show your user name. Don't mess with System
Processes especially.

Best of luck!

John L Rice

[Julian]

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 22:56:40 -0800, "John L Rice"
wrote:

Thanks for the info. I was just wondering what the effect would be if all
four workstations are recording at once. Seems like the hard drives will
be
over taxed if they not only have to handle local files but files from
three
other systems at the same time.

John L Rice

I'm guessing there is some prioritizing going on and library updates
can get put on the back burner while recording or something else is
going on that takes priority. We never have all 4 workstations
recording at once. One workstation is in the on air control room and
that only gets used for playback and another is in the live
performance room and it rarely gets used at all. We frequently have 2
workstations recording at once however.

All I can say is it works great compared to the old dual RAID 5 server
system.

Part of the system's success may be the Digigram VX882 sound card:

http://www.digigram.com/products/get...prod_key=12850

Julian


Thanks Julian, that makes sense. Plus if each workstation only has one of
those Digigram sound cards (they look really nice!) and if all stations are
running full bore at the same time, that's only 32 tracks (4x8) and any
decent computer should be able to handle that many tracks of information on
its own. (maybe 32 @ 24/192 might get problematic depending on how fast the
CPU and hard drive seek/read/write speed is)

John L Rice

Most broadcast work is never above 16 bit 48 kHz, so they are not
breaking a sweat.

Julian

[Arny Krueger]

"Laurence Payne" lpayne1NOSPAM@dslDOTpipexDOTcom wrote in
message
On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 15:26:49 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

I've recently been playing with RAID, and am beginning
to suspect it is counter-productive. I've tried RAID 0.
The speed figures are impressive, but really make no
practical difference. And I don't really need to buy my
disk space twice just for the security of mirroring. I
don't count a backup in the same box as a real backup.

Try RAID 5. The latest Nvidia chipsets support it.

Considering my comments above, why would I want to?

I read that you objected to the fact that RAID 1 requires 2 identical drives
but only gives you a data space the size of 1 drive. This is true.

BTW I happen to edit video on a PC with a mirrored boot drive, and find the
cost tolerable. RAID 1 also provides performance benefits roughly equivalent
to RAID 0 for reading.

RAID 5 with 4 identical drives provides enough redundancy that the failure
of one drive can be tolerated, but gives you a data space the size of 3
drives. Less cost for so much usable space.This is what you can achieve
today with a ca. $100 system board and 4 drives.

[Arny Krueger]

"VainGlorious" wrote in
message
On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 21:44:28 +0000, Laurence Payne
lpayne1NOSPAM@dslDOTpipexDOTcom wrote:

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 15:26:49 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

I've recently been playing with RAID, and am beginning
to suspect it is counter-productive. I've tried RAID
0. The speed figures are impressive, but really make no
practical difference. And I don't really need to buy
my disk space twice just for the security of
mirroring. I don't count a backup in the same box as
a real backup.

Try RAID 5. The latest Nvidia chipsets support it.

Considering my comments above, why would I want to?

The employment of RAID 0 should be predicated on your
write bandwidth. Most of us are recording 2,3, maybe 5 or
so tracks at a time. Very often in 24-bit 44.1 or 48K. A
reasonable SATA or PATA drive can handle this without a
problem.

But if you are trying to capture 24 simultaneous tracks,
I'd recommend a RAID 0 array using SATA drives with 16MB
buffers.

I'd recommend recording software that splits the writing over up to three
drives, like Audition. It is more reliable than striping.

RAID reliability can be augmented by disabling your
motherboard's on-board RAID and getting a true
honest-to-Pete RAID controller card.

Two costs - one is the price of a RAID 5 card which is usually like $200+,
and the other is the losses due to the card being on the PCI bus.

[Abyssmal]

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 22:10:09 -0800, Julian
wrote:

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 22:03:08 -0500, Abyssmal
wrote:

For Windows XP,there is only the necessity to run 6 processes.
explorer.exe
services.exe
spoolsv.exe
svchost.exe
system
system idle process

Thank you for that information.

How is this different then just starting up in safe mode, or selecting
VGA mode from the boot options?

Julian


Safe mode only loads the necessary windows processes and
drivers,mainly used to run diagnostics and perform troubleshooting.

VGA mode loads the standard vga graphics driver instead of the
video card driver, and runs at 640x480,the same as in safe mode.

Basically safe mode options are for troubleshooting,and not an
option to enhance system performance.

Most current software wants a resolution of 800x600 or higher to
display correctly,and the computer will be useless for recording if
necessary drivers are disabled.

Randall

[Julian]

On Mon, 15 Jan 2007 09:10:33 -0500, Abyssmal
wrote:

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 22:03:08 -0500, Abyssmal
wrote:

For Windows XP,there is only the necessity to run 6 processes.
explorer.exe
services.exe
spoolsv.exe
svchost.exe
system
system idle process

Thank you for that information.

How is this different then just starting up in safe mode, or selecting
VGA mode from the boot options?

Julian


Safe mode only loads the necessary windows processes and
drivers,mainly used to run diagnostics and perform troubleshooting.

What processes different from the ones you list above are used in safe
mode? - is the question I am asking.

Julian