[mjs[_2_]]

I just bought a 500gb drive that will serve exclusively as a Sonar 7 Audio
drive (the audio folder will be here, and nothing else).

Here is my CURRENT drive set-up :

C: = Bootup Drive, contains all programs (including Sonar itself)
D: = Documents Drive, contains project files, bundles, etc.
E: = Audio Drive (NEW!)

Until now, the Audio Folder was on the Documents drive... but I'm quickly
running out of room there (15% left). Hence the new drive. I now need two
masters and a slave. Or two slaves and a master. Whatever. =) But I'd like
to know what your recommended ideal Master/Slave config would be.

Should C (programs) and E (wave folder) each be a master? Should E be the
slave of C? Etc.

Thanks!

[Mike Rivers]

On Oct 25, 5:28 pm, "mjs" wrote:

C: = Bootup Drive, contains all programs (including Sonar itself)
D: = Documents Drive, contains project files, bundles, etc.
E: = Audio Drive (NEW!)

Until now, the Audio Folder was on the Documents drive... but I'm quickly
running out of room there (15% left). Hence the new drive. I now need two
masters and a slave. Or two slaves and a master. Whatever. =) But I'd like
to know what your recommended ideal Master/Slave config would be.

I assume these are IDE drives with the cable that has the connector in
the middle? And you have two IDE ports on your motherboard? Or is this
that newfangled SATA stuff (which I don't think uses master/slave
configuration but I don't have any so I don't know for sure)?

You want the boot drive to be master on the primary IDE port. Other
than that, it doesn't really make any difference which is which.
Master or slave status doesn't have anything to do with priority or
who has primary control over the bus, it's just which is drive 0,
drive 1, etc.

I suppose I'd put the boot drive and "documents" drive on IDE port 1,
and make the audio drive be the master on port 2. If you have an IDE
CD or DVD drive, that can be the slave on port 2.

[Richard Crowley]

"mjs" wrote ...
I just bought a 500gb drive that will serve exclusively as a Sonar 7 Audio
drive (the audio folder will be here, and nothing else).

Here is my CURRENT drive set-up :

C: = Bootup Drive, contains all programs (including Sonar itself)
D: = Documents Drive, contains project files, bundles, etc.
E: = Audio Drive (NEW!)

Until now, the Audio Folder was on the Documents drive... but I'm quickly
running out of room there (15% left). Hence the new drive. I now need two
masters and a slave. Or two slaves and a master. Whatever. =) But I'd like
to know what your recommended ideal Master/Slave config would be.

Should C (programs) and E (wave folder) each be a master? Should E be the
slave of C? Etc.

Assumption: This is IDE/PATA stuff with the 40/80 ribbon cables.
Assumption: "D:" is a separate drive and not a partition on "C:"

First controller: C: = master; D: = slave
Second controller: E: = master

Do you have an optical (CD, DVD, etc.) drive? If so, I would try
putting the optical drive as slave on second controller. But if
it bogs down access to your new 500GB drive, I would use this
alternate configuration....

First controller: C: = master, Optical = slave
Second Controller: E: = master; D: = slave

Theoretically, the optical drive shouldn't affect the throughput
to the other drive on the cable. Note that there are utilities you
can download and run to check the read/write speed to your
various drives, etc.

[Geoff]

mjs wrote:
I just bought a 500gb drive that will serve exclusively as a Sonar 7
Audio drive (the audio folder will be here, and nothing else).

Here is my CURRENT drive set-up :

C: = Bootup Drive, contains all programs (including Sonar itself)
D: = Documents Drive, contains project files, bundles, etc.
E: = Audio Drive (NEW!)

Until now, the Audio Folder was on the Documents drive... but I'm
quickly running out of room there (15% left). Hence the new drive. I
now need two masters and a slave. Or two slaves and a master.
Whatever. =) But I'd like to know what your recommended ideal
Master/Slave config would be.
Should C (programs) and E (wave folder) each be a master? Should E be
the slave of C? Etc.

Thanks!

Assuming IDE drivses I would go:

C: = Primary Master
D: = Secondary Master
E: = Secondary Slave

That way the data driv being accessed (either) is on a different controller
and cable to the drive that the os/app/swapfile is on.

geoff

[Sue Morton]

Just my $0.02 USD... Assuming all three are physical drives I concur with
Geoff.
--
Sue Morton

"Geoff" wrote in message
...
Assuming IDE drivses I would go:

C: = Primary Master
D: = Secondary Master
E: = Secondary Slave

That way the data driv being accessed (either) is on a different
controller and cable to the drive that the os/app/swapfile is on.

geoff

[Sue Morton]

Hi Bob,
You wrote there is a problem here that is easily fixed...??? In the example
here, E disk is slave to D disk master, and C: is primary master, any DVD
drive would have to be secondary on C or on it's own IDE channel. I don't
see anything mentioned here to 'easily fix'? Or did I misunderstand what
you wrote. If so please clarify, thanks!
--
Sue Morton

"Soundhaspriority" wrote in message
...
Assuming IDE drivses I would go:

C: = Primary Master
D: = Secondary Master
E: = Secondary Slave

There is one problem with the above, which is easily fixed. All CD/DVD
drives run ATA33. If a hard drive shares the bus with a DVD drive, and the
DVD drive is master, the hard drive will run at ATA33. If a hard drive is
added to the second bus, make sure to make it the master, to avoid this
problem. Also, be sure the ribbon cable is the newer type compatible with
ATA66 onwards.

Bob Morein
(310) 237-6511

[Laurence Payne]

On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 12:03:42 GMT, "Sue Morton"
wrote:

Hi Bob,
You wrote there is a problem here that is easily fixed...??? In the example
here, E disk is slave to D disk master, and C: is primary master, any DVD
drive would have to be secondary on C or on it's own IDE channel. I don't
see anything mentioned here to 'easily fix'? Or did I misunderstand what
you wrote. If so please clarify, thanks!

Don't worry. The issue of a slower device dragging the whole
controller down to its speed is history. You can mix-and-match with
impunity these days.

[Sue Morton]

Hi Laurence, you misunderstand me... I wish to know what part of the
proposed drive configuration Bob thinks needs to be 'easily fixed' -- from
where I sit, the proposal doesn't have the flaw he mentioned (assuming the
speed issue is still relevant). So I'd like to understand where he sees the
flaw in the proposal. Thanks.
--
Sue Morton

"Laurence Payne" NOSPAMlpayne1ATdsl.pipex.com wrote in message
news
On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 12:03:42 GMT, "Sue Morton"
wrote:

Hi Bob,
You wrote there is a problem here that is easily fixed...??? In the
example
here, E disk is slave to D disk master, and C: is primary master, any DVD
drive would have to be secondary on C or on it's own IDE channel. I don't
see anything mentioned here to 'easily fix'? Or did I misunderstand what
you wrote. If so please clarify, thanks!

Don't worry. The issue of a slower device dragging the whole
controller down to its speed is history. You can mix-and-match with
impunity these days.

[Fiddler Bob]

"Soundhaspriority" wrote in message
...

"Sue Morton" wrote in message
. ..
Just my $0.02 USD... Assuming all three are physical drives I concur with
Geoff.
--
Sue Morton

"Geoff" wrote in message
...
Assuming IDE drivses I would go:

C: = Primary Master
D: = Secondary Master
E: = Secondary Slave

That way the data driv being accessed (either) is on a different
controller and cable to the drive that the os/app/swapfile is on.

geoff

There is one problem with the above, which is easily fixed. All CD/DVD
drives run ATA33. If a hard drive shares the bus with a DVD drive, and the
DVD drive is master, the hard drive will run at ATA33. If a hard drive is
added to the second bus, make sure to make it the master, to avoid this
problem. Also, be sure the ribbon cable is the newer type compatible with
ATA66 onwards.

Bob Morein
(310) 237-6511


My Lite-On SHM-165H DVD drive is running as DMA 4 - Ultra 66.

What you said about a slower interface drive degrading the transfer rate of
another drive on the bus used to be true, but isn't with modern
motherboards.

Regards,

Bob

[Laurence Payne]

On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 13:06:40 GMT, "Sue Morton"
wrote:

Hi Laurence, you misunderstand me... I wish to know what part of the
proposed drive configuration Bob thinks needs to be 'easily fixed' -- from
where I sit, the proposal doesn't have the flaw he mentioned (assuming the
speed issue is still relevant). So I'd like to understand where he sees the
flaw in the proposal. Thanks.

Oh, don't worry about scoring points off Bob (in whichever incarnation
he appears :-) Just be happy there's no problem.

[Sue Morton]

It's not about points, dude :-) If he saw something I missed I'd like to
know about it. I don't think so, but I have been fooled before :-)
--
Sue Morton

"Laurence Payne" NOSPAMlpayne1ATdsl.pipex.com wrote in message
...
On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 13:06:40 GMT, "Sue Morton"
wrote:

Hi Laurence, you misunderstand me... I wish to know what part of the
proposed drive configuration Bob thinks needs to be 'easily fixed' -- from
where I sit, the proposal doesn't have the flaw he mentioned (assuming the
speed issue is still relevant). So I'd like to understand where he sees
the
flaw in the proposal. Thanks.

Oh, don't worry about scoring points off Bob (in whichever incarnation
he appears :-) Just be happy there's no problem.

[Laurence Payne]

On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 12:28:14 -0400, "Soundhaspriority"
wrote:

Sorry, I didn't read carefully enough. I was thinking of a common mistake.
If you do put a hard drive and a burner on the same cable, make sure the
hard drive is the master, and put it on the end of the cable.

Why? Do you feel master/slave is anything more than a designation
convention these days? Particularly on a system new enough to have
the sort of cable you're talking about (but, confusingly, haven't
described.)

[Sue Morton]

That wasn't my question Bob.

Here is again what was proposed to do with the three disk drives:

Assuming IDE drivses I would go:

C: = Primary Master
D: = Secondary Master
E: = Secondary Slave

The drives are either Masters or are Secondary only to another disk drive in
the above configuration.

You wrote:
There is one problem with the above, which is easily fixed.

Where is the problem you see? That is what I'm trying to understand. I
only see that a DVD drive added to the above configuration would
automatically be secondary to a disk drive, and therefore not cause a
performance problem at all. If you just goofed, that's fine, I'm not trying
to pick on you. I only wanted to be sure I wasn't overlooking something. I
don't think I am.
--
Sue Morton

"Soundhaspriority" wrote in message
...

"Fiddler Bob" wrote in message
...

"Soundhaspriority" wrote in message
...

"Sue Morton" wrote in message
. ..
Just my $0.02 USD... Assuming all three are physical drives I concur
with Geoff.
--
Sue Morton

"Geoff" wrote in message
...
Assuming IDE drivses I would go:

C: = Primary Master
D: = Secondary Master
E: = Secondary Slave

That way the data driv being accessed (either) is on a different
controller and cable to the drive that the os/app/swapfile is on.

geoff

There is one problem with the above, which is easily fixed. All CD/DVD
drives run ATA33. If a hard drive shares the bus with a DVD drive, and
the DVD drive is master, the hard drive will run at ATA33. If a hard
drive is added to the second bus, make sure to make it the master, to
avoid this problem. Also, be sure the ribbon cable is the newer type
compatible with ATA66 onwards.

Bob Morein
(310) 237-6511


My Lite-On SHM-165H DVD drive is running as DMA 4 - Ultra 66.

What you said about a slower interface drive degrading the transfer rate
of another drive on the bus used to be true, but isn't with modern
motherboards.

Regards,

Bob

But modern hard drives run DMA-5,6, or 7, ie., 100 or 133mbs. It is worth
preserving the burst transfer rate.

Bob Morein
(310) 237-6511

[[email protected]]

mjs wrote:

I just bought a 500gb drive that will serve exclusively as a Sonar 7 Audio
drive (the audio folder will be here, and nothing else).

Here is my CURRENT drive set-up :

C: = Bootup Drive, contains all programs (including Sonar itself)
D: = Documents Drive, contains project files, bundles, etc.
E: = Audio Drive (NEW!)

Until now, the Audio Folder was on the Documents drive... but I'm quickly
running out of room there (15% left). Hence the new drive. I now need two
masters and a slave. Or two slaves and a master. Whatever. =) But I'd like
to know what your recommended ideal Master/Slave config would be.

Should C (programs) and E (wave folder) each be a master? Should E be the
slave of C? Etc.

Thanks!

Maybe it's too late, but if your MB doesn't have SATA, you could have
got a PCI SATA controller and a SATA drive. Some newer MB's are losing
the PATA headers so its' a matter of time before PATA drives will go the
route of floppy disks.

[Sue Morton]

Thanks Bob!
--
Sue Morton

"Soundhaspriority" wrote in message
...
Sue,
You're fine. My apologies if I've added any confusion. I've done this
for so long, sometimes my mind fills in, instead of carefully reading the
post. But let me add one note.

With parallel ATA, when a command is sent to one drive on a bus, the
secondary drive can't be accessed until the first command is completed. So
if two of your three drives are likely to be used simultaneously, while a
third is "backup", or "less frequently accessed", the two drives should be
on separate buses. A system drive is always in use by Windows for
swapping, so that should be on a different bus than your streaming audio
drive. A desirable arrangement would be:

C (system) and archival or low-use drive on primary bus. Either drive can
be master on this bus.
Streaming drive master on secondary bus; DVD drive slave on secondary bus.

I hope this helps, or, at least, that I'm not confusing you any more

Regards,
Bob Morein
(310) 237-6511

[Gary R. Hook]

Sue Morton wrote:
It's not about points, dude :-) If he saw something I missed I'd like to
know about it. I don't think so, but I have been fooled before :-)

The original illustration only lists primary or secondary
master or slave; it does not specify _which_ of the devices is
the optical drive. I think Bob was simply suggesting that (based
on historical information) optical drives should always be slaves.

--
Gary R. Hook
__________________________________________________ ______________________
Vocatus atque non vocatus deus aderit

[Sue Morton]

Gary I think you missed it. :-) The configuration was about three disk
drives. You're right, an optical drive wasn't mentioned. But the point Bob
made about never making it a master didn't apply to THAT configuration, when
he said it did. That was MY point. Two of the disk drives were both
specified as Masters in the recommended configuration, and the third disk as
a secondary to one of the others. In that configuration the ONLY thing an
optical drive could be is a slave.
--
Sue Morton

"Gary R. Hook" wrote in message
et...
Sue Morton wrote:
It's not about points, dude :-) If he saw something I missed I'd like to
know about it. I don't think so, but I have been fooled before :-)

The original illustration only lists primary or secondary
master or slave; it does not specify _which_ of the devices is
the optical drive. I think Bob was simply suggesting that (based
on historical information) optical drives should always be slaves.

--
Gary R. Hook
__________________________________________________ ______________________
Vocatus atque non vocatus deus aderit

[Peter Larsen]

mjs wrote:

I just bought a 500gb drive that will serve exclusively as a Sonar 7 Audio
drive (the audio folder will be here, and nothing else).

Here is my CURRENT drive set-up :

C: = Bootup Drive, contains all programs (including Sonar itself)
D: = Documents Drive, contains project files, bundles, etc.
E: = Audio Drive (NEW!)

You don't say where the CD-drive is nor whether it is a writer. Some
writers insist on being masters and on having no slaves. This assuming a
standard IDE setup. You may have to get a pci pata controller and to put
the writer - ie. cd/dvd burner on it. IDE equipped boxes generally like
to boot from the master on the first controller but nowadays that is
configurable. I have never detected any real world performance
difference depending on whether harddisks were slaves or masters nor on
whether they were on the same or on different IDE bus'es.

Try to avoid clogging the pci bus with harddisk controller traffic if
you do sound on it.

Kind regards

Peter Larsen



Until now, the Audio Folder was on the Documents drive... but I'm quickly
running out of room there (15% left). Hence the new drive. I now need two
masters and a slave. Or two slaves and a master. Whatever. =) But I'd like
to know what your recommended ideal Master/Slave config would be.

Should C (programs) and E (wave folder) each be a master? Should E be the
slave of C? Etc.

Thanks!

[Gary R. Hook]

Sue Morton wrote:
Gary I think you missed it. :-) The configuration was about three disk
drives. You're right, an optical drive wasn't mentioned. But the point Bob
made about never making it a master didn't apply to THAT configuration, when
he said it did. That was MY point. Two of the disk drives were both
specified as Masters in the recommended configuration, and the third disk as
a secondary to one of the others. In that configuration the ONLY thing an
optical drive could be is a slave.

Yes, after reading the rest of the posts I concluded that the issue was
the lack of clarity. And it seems that the details were finally ironed
out, even if the rule no longer applies to current products.

--
Gary R. Hook
__________________________________________________ ______________________
Vocatus atque non vocatus deus aderit