Pro Tools question

[whitelightening]

I have ordered my Digi 002R and I'm wondering how it will work with my current setup. I am considering formating my hard drive and starting with a clean slate (since I don't have much on my comp anyway, i won't be losing much). I need to know if I should set up a partition space for my operating system (XP Home) or not. I have a 40GB hard drive I'm going to put XP on and a free 100GB that I want to use for storage. So, the question is...

Should I set up an NTFS partition or not?

[Tigerfolly]

I have ordered my Digi 002R and I'm wondering how it will work with my current setup. I am considering formating my hard drive and starting with a clean slate (since I don't have much on my comp anyway, i won't be losing much). I need to know if I should set up a partition space for my operating system (XP Home) or not. I have a 40GB hard drive I'm going to put XP on and a free 100GB that I want to use for storage. So, the question is...

Should I set up an NTFS partition or not?

You want the operating system running on a separate hard drive than whatever drive you're using for audio. Use the 40gb drive for the OS and other stuff, and use the 100gb drive for all of your audio applications and storage. You'd think 100gb doesn't go fast, but remember that every minute of audio is roughly 10mb in size.. a 16 track, 5 minute long song is 480mb, and that's not including mixdowns, effects tracks, or multiple takes. Just like video production, there's no such thing as enough disk space or memory.

Since you're running XP (by the way, I -highly- suggest getting a copy of XP Professional Corporate edition.. it's the best out of all of them. XP Home is an absolute mess), you can run NTFS on the 40gb drive and gain some benefit from it. And if you're running that as NTFS, it's fairly standard to make your second drive the same filesystem, unless you have need for running FAT32 or FAT16, usually for some insanely obsolete but required program :P

Since it's the Digi 002, it's running through Firewire so you're maximum bandwidth is going to be determined by it and not by the hard drive's efficiency. No matter what you do, you're limited to 400mb/sec of bandwidth through Firewire (or is it 480? I always forget). But regardless of what you're running, it's always good practice to run your audio, graphic or video production programs on a separate hard drive than your OS, especially if you're using a PC. Windows eats up so much hard drive bandwidth because of it's virtual memory usage. Definitely format and defrag that 100gb drive too. It'll take a while, but it's worth it.

[whitelightening]

hey thanks a lot. I think XP Pro is out of the question because I just don't want to spend another $300 right now, but maybe in the future. What exactly makes Pro so much better than Home by the way? (sorry if this is an ignorant question)

[Tigerfolly]

hey thanks a lot. I think XP Pro is out of the question because I just don't want to spend another $300 right now, but maybe in the future. What exactly makes Pro so much better than Home by the way? (sorry if this is an ignorant question)

I've been working with computers since 1981 and I've never, ever paid for an operating system. I've always had people around with copies of the OS, and just inherited cd after cd. I got rid of all of the old copies of stuff, but I think I've still got copies of Windows 3.0 and 3.11 on floppy in a box somewhere, as well as Win 95, 95b, 98, 98SE, ME, NT 4.0, 2000, XP Home, and XP Corp. Hanging onto all of these has really come in handy for fixing other people's computers, especially if they bought a retail computer like an HP, Compaq, or something similar because those come with an OEM disc, which you can't boot off of.. and that's a pain in the ass when fixing major computer problems. If you can, find a friend with XP Corp. It's the first Windows OS that is stable, efficient, and flexible out of the box, that still works well with directx (unlike Win2000).

The number one thing that's better about XP Corp is that it's an operating system designed for actual configuration in mind. XP Home is designed for the minimal user. Basically, your standard home user doesn't need half of what a user who knows what they're doing is going to need. There are a lot of options in a simple OS setup that will configure your machine for specific uses. I've run into the most difficult when networking with XP Home. Compared to networking with XP Corp, XP home works like it was designed by deranged monkeys with crowbars.

One of the (many) reasons most studios and professionals use Apple computers instead of Windows machines is because they handle multimedia production so much better because the hardware has been designed from the ground up with multimedia being the priority. On a Windows machine, it's designed from the ground up with the operating system as the priority. Since every computer requires an operating system of some type, it's always better when your computer doesn't have to waste so much time and energy just running the OS. The more you can configure your OS, the more you can optimize it for the tasks you need it for. The better and more flexible of an operating system you have on a PC, the better it will run for you. These days, my laptop has become my main workhorse even though my desktop is better on paper, and I have very few problems with crashing (except for a buggy version of a Waves bundle, but that one's my fault), all because I've gutted the operating system and made sure my computer ONLY does what I tell it to do. Most computers have all kinds of bullshit running on them by default.

Here's a good tool to make sure that when your computer starts up, it only runs what you want it to run. (http://www.mlin.net/StartupCPL.shtml) In some cases, I've halved the boot time of a person's computer just by turning off useless crap like MSN messenger (only turn it on when you actively use it), Real player and Quicktime (two HORRIBLE programs that just suck resources), and Norton or similar antivirus startup or autorun programs (I never, ever let anything handle my virus scanning and prevention.. I do it manually). The rule of thumb is to have as few processes running as absolutely possible. You can view what processes are running in the Task Manager (right click your start bar).

Basically, if you're going to be running a simple personal home studio that won't use very many tracks or many bells and whistles, you can be a little more lax with your computer's setup, what's running on it, what else you use it for, etc. But since you're talking about running a Pro Tools rig, that's a serious professional application. If it's going to be a serious studio set up, you're going to want a good solid OS, a separate drive setup (and maybe even a RAID array to backup everything), and a really good hardware interface.

[whitelightening]

Well, I'll put it like this. All I want to do is run the Digi 002 and that's about it. I am NOT setting up a big time studio rig. It will essentially be for my own small AUDIO projects and uses. I will not be doing any video at all!

I also need a few more pieces of advice if you can halp. I am running an Athlon XP 1700+ at 266Mhz FSB with 256MB Ram. Now I know these are not sufficient, BUT...I want to know what I need to do next. Would I be able to get away with maxing out my CPU at 266 (I believe it's an XP 2400+), or should I go for something with a 333 FSB (since my mobo only supports 266 or 333)? Perhaps an XP 3000+.

*Segway into next question*

If I do go to a CPU with a 333 FSB, will my current PC2100 DDR RAM work with it or do I need to buy all new PC2700 DDR RAM? Sorry for the ignorance here, I'm just not sure what the differences are in the FSB.

Finally...how much RAM should I go with? Is 512 enough, or do I need 1024?

Wow, if you can find your way through that mess, I commend you. I really appreciate all of your advice so far. Thank you!

Troy

[Spacehog]

While I'm not running Pro-Tools, I'd think an XP2400+ would probably be sufficient for your needs, at least in the short-to-mid term. That's what I run, I can record 16 tracks simultaneously into Sonar 3 (I have two M-Audio Delta 1010LT's) and the CPU doesn't show any strain unless trying to run at 24/96 with some big plug-ins.

A 333 CPU will require PC2700 RAM... PC2100 would be unstable, if it worked at all, at 333MHz. But then you'd want to replace your 256Mb stick, probably, anyway. I've been configuring Windows PCs since before Win95, and I've always seen the value of as much RAM as is realistic (allowing for buggy earlier releases simply not working very well with lots of memory!). I run 1.5Gb of RAM in my machine, although most motherboards only have 2 DDR slots and 1Gb sticks are expensive, so unless you're lucky enough (like me) to have a 3rd slot, I'd go for the 1Gb option. I also have RAID built into my board, which is plenty useful :)

As for Tigerfolly's comments, I'm sure Microsoft would *love* to hear that you've never paid for an operating system ;-) More to the point, I've never found XP home to be any less stable than XP Pro or corporate, or indeed any less configurable if you know where to look. I've only had 2 system crashes since upgrading to Windows XP at the start of 2003, and none on Home.

Regarding actually *purchasing* XP Corp / Pro, most PC component retailers will sell you the OEM (original equipment manufacturer) version of WinXP (ie without the box or manual) for a *lot* cheaper than the full retail version, dependant on buying something like a hard disk. So you could get XP Pro and a new hard drive for probably less than Home would cost you retail. Definitely worth looking into :)

Martin

[whitelightening]

Well, luckily I do have a third DDR slot and my motherboard does have RAID built in. I just don't know what it is or how to set it up/configure it (again showing my lack of PC skills here). It sounds to me that I should go with a 333mhz FSB CPU and maybe two 512mb sticks...correct? Only other concern is since you say XP Home doesn't seem any less stable, then why would you suggest I upgrade to and OEM version of Pro anyway?

[Spacehog]

...since you say XP Home doesn't seem any less stable, then why would you suggest I upgrade to and OEM version of Pro anyway?

I didn't suggest you upgrade to XP Pro, I merely said that if you wanted to, you wouldn't have to pay the $300 you mentioned in the 3rd post of this thread. The decision's yours, I personally wouldn't go for it.

Martin

[Tigerfolly]

Well, I'll put it like this. All I want to do is run the Digi 002 and that's about it. I am NOT setting up a big time studio rig. It will essentially be for my own small AUDIO projects and uses. I will not be doing any video at all!

I also need a few more pieces of advice if you can halp. I am running an Athlon XP 1700+ at 266Mhz FSB with 256MB Ram. Now I know these are not sufficient, BUT...I want to know what I need to do next. Would I be able to get away with maxing out my CPU at 266 (I believe it's an XP 2400+), or should I go for something with a 333 FSB (since my mobo only supports 266 or 333)? Perhaps an XP 3000+.

*Segway into next question*

If I do go to a CPU with a 333 FSB, will my current PC2100 DDR RAM work with it or do I need to buy all new PC2700 DDR RAM? Sorry for the ignorance here, I'm just not sure what the differences are in the FSB.

Finally...how much RAM should I go with? Is 512 enough, or do I need 1024?

Wow, if you can find your way through that mess, I commend you. I really appreciate all of your advice so far. Thank you!

Troy

Sorry for the extended delay in the response time, but I've been renovating a house and time has been of the essence.

The Athlon 1700 will work fine, but definitely upgrade the 256mb of RAM to at least 512mb. You can get away with just 512, but more memory is always a good thing. You can offset the motherboard's FSB speed with more memory, or by overclocking the CPU, but in both cases they're probably not necessary. If you're going to look into upgrading, you might as well check a few online stores and see about a motherboard/CPU/RAM barebones kit and upgrade that way. Basically, what you've got will work, but if you get bigger and faster, your system will only run faster.. always a good thing :)

As Spacehog noted, your PC2100 RAM will not be compatible with the 333 FSB. And as I've kinda jumped ahead and replied to already, 512 is enough, but 1024 is always better. You can never, ever have enough RAM.. especially in a programming world that believes virtual memory equals infinite memory. For some reason, programmers seem to think we all have massive, empty hard drives. Every year, programs get less efficient.. fatware is king.

[Tigerfolly]

As for Tigerfolly's comments, I'm sure Microsoft would *love* to hear that you've never paid for an operating system ;-)

Yeah, I give a shit about Microsoft. :) They've given me more headaches and frustration than anything else on this planet.. they should give me and every other IT consultant who has ever had to fix their products free stuff for life. Big Billy can afford it ;)

My motto is that when a company makes something worth buying, I'll buy it. We have lemon laws for many products, why not the product that is pushing the information age? If you buy a car that has big holes in the doors so that any auto thief can reach into the hole, unlock the door, and drive off with your car, you wouldn't be happy would you? Especially when the auto manufacturer puts those holes in there on purpose to sell to other companies.

I don't ask for much: make something worth paying for, and I'll pay for it. I pay for a lot of software, but I also get a LOT of software free. I never, ever pay for a product unless I'm sure the product works properly. And since you can never return opened software, every purchase is a gamble. I don't gamble with my money or my time :)

Some companies, you can be safe with and not have to worry about that crap with it. For example; I have absolutely no hesistation when it comes to buying an Adobe product. Build it right, and we will buy. Build crap, and we'll pirate it. Same thing goes for the music industry.. Push crap at people, and they don't want to pay for it.

More to the point, I've never found XP home to be any less stable than XP Pro or corporate, or indeed any less configurable if you know where to look. I've only had 2 system crashes since upgrading to Windows XP at the start of 2003, and none on Home.

It really comes down to how much is utilized in the system. I've worked on around seven or eight XP systems this month, maybe thirty or forty this year. Most of them are for standard home users, and most of them have been networking or wireless networking setups or issues, and all of them have caused me extra work while working in XP home because it doesn't let you do what you want to do, only what IT wants you to do. Five times this year I've repaired networks that absolutely would NOT function properly with XP Home, merely by installing XP Corp on the machines.

As for an operating system being "more" or "less" stable than another, that entirely depends on what's running on the machines. I personally had a machine that ran three years straight, every single day, without a single crash that I didn't directly cause, and I caused four.. all trying to run things I shouldn't have been running. Win95 was -never- that stable.. and because of that machine, I avoided ever using Win98 or ME on my home machine. That's a blessing right there :) If you take two identical machines with identical software and put XP Home on one, and XP Corp on the other, I seriously doubt you'd notice much of a difference after they're set up and running. But it's the set up time and configurability that's the issue. For the average user, a dumbed down version of an operating system is not a bad thing.. but if you know what you're doing, and you know what you need your computer to do, and you know how to get your computer to do what you need it to do; don't EVER get XP Home, because the only thing you'll get is frustration.

Regarding actually *purchasing* XP Corp / Pro, most PC component retailers will sell you the OEM (original equipment manufacturer) version of WinXP (ie without the box or manual) for a *lot* cheaper than the full retail version, dependant on buying something like a hard disk. So you could get XP Pro and a new hard drive for probably less than Home would cost you retail. Definitely worth looking into :)

Again, keep in mind that you can't boot off of OEM copies though. The proper way to install an operating system isn't to upgrade over the old one, but to do a clean install on a formatted drive. You can't do that if you don't have a way to boot into it. Again, if you're not a power user, this won't affect you anyway.. pay an anal retentive consultant like me to do it for you :) But if you do any of your own work, that might be a hinderance to you.. it definitely has been to me. I have story after story of Microsoft clusterfucks, the best being the week-long WinME installation.. now THAT is a dog of an operating system. >.<

Anyway, like most things, it really comes down to the user and the user's needs. If XP Home's doing the job for you, and you haven't come across any problems yet, then don't give it a second thought. But I always, always recommend XP Corp over XP Home based on pure experience.

[BotneKeys]

Goto: www.musicxp.net

Also, get the "xplite" -software.