[Torn Curtain]

Originally Posted by █████████

things like putting the system resources using primarily the psysical memory, small things bur that make a huge difference on performance.

Yep, there's no need to swap with 2 gigs of RAM (RAM is hugely faster than hard disk drives).

[Torn Curtain]

Originally Posted by nicfit

2 GB dd2 ram (either 667 or 800 mhz in dual channel)

Take the 800mhz one the difference in price shouldn't be significant as DDRII prices have plummetted.

[nicfit]

Originally Posted by █████████

oh ok. yeah ok, give me a minute.

Take all the time you need, no rush at all on my side!
Torn, yes, I'll go with 800mhz corsair xms2 ram methinks...

[█████████]

a good start would be to follow this guide:
http://home.comcast.net/~SupportCD/OptimizeXP.html

then

run > regedit

remove dlls from cache memory

go to hkey_local_machine\software\microsoft\windows\curr entversion\explorer. create a new dword value named alwaysunloaddll, and give it a data value of 1

prefetch parameters
set the registry key hkey_local_machine\system\currentcontrolset\contro l\session manager\memory management\prefetchparameters\enableprefetcher to 0 to disable prefetching, 1 to prefetch application launch files, 2 to prefetch boot files, or 3 to prefetch as many files as possible.

place windows kernel into ram

edit the registry key hkey_local_machine\system\currentcontrolset\contro l\session manager\memory management\disablepagingexecutive to 1 to disable paging and have the kernel run in ram (set the value to 0 to undo this hack). exit the registry and reboot.

enough for now.

[█████████]

Originally Posted by Torn Curtain

Yep, there's no need to swap with 2 gigs of RAM (RAM is hugely faster than hard disk drives).

i was refering specifically to this:

place windows kernel into ram

edit the registry key hkey_local_machine\system\currentcontrolset\contro l\session manager\memory management\disablepagingexecutive to 1 to disable paging and have the kernel run in ram (set the value to 0 to undo this hack). exit the registry and reboot.

if the peak commit charge is frequently near the limit commit charge, you need to increase your memory either by getting more physical ram or increasing the paging file.

[max]

hey Nic! how's the PC treating you, got it already?
Dunno if you ordered already but as far as I experienced PENTIUM cpus are much more reliable than MADs and they don't cost a lot. Also if you are planning on buying some serious sound card avoid the INVIDIA / VIA chipsets...

depending on how many channels you need on the soundcard I would suggest TASCAM stuff... I have 3 of their cards (US122 - 2 ins, 2 outs; US428 - 4 ins, 2 outs; and FW1804 - 10 ins, 2 outs) and I think they're fucking solid audiomakers.

[nicfit]

hey max!
still "building" the thing (due to "budget limitations" I'm waiting for good offers for each "piece") , here 's how it should be according to my latest plans:

Asus p5b-vm mobo
intel E2180 cpu
2 GB dd2 ram (either 667 or 800 mhz in dual channel)
seagate barracuda with 16MB cache and 7200 rpm
rasurbo silent psu
a decent case (possibly with some noise-blocking features like the antec solo).

as for the sound card, I'll save for a motu ultralite..will take some time, but it will be worth it (and in the meantime I can work with the digital recorder+pc anyways).

[nicfit]

still working on this. I was thinking about the processor, will the cache memory have a great influence even if I don't plan to "record" with the pc? Shall I go for a E4400 (2mb cache) or even higher, like, E6600, 4mb cache, just as the one I have on my "graphic+gaming" machine? (prices should drop a bit after april 20th)

[Torn Curtain]

Originally Posted by nicfit

still working on this. I was thinking about the processor, will the cache memory have a great influence even if I don't plan to "record" with the pc? Shall I go for a E4400 (2mb cache) or even higher, like, E6600, 4mb cache, just as the one I have on my "graphic+gaming" machine? (prices should drop a bit after april 20th)

Yes it has. But you can also compensate it with overclocking (the E4400 should be very good at it - without any risk for the hardware).

[nicfit]

yep but overcloking (thing that actually I'm not much inclined to do) wouldn't make the cache bigger, just the cpu faster .

[Torn Curtain]

Originally Posted by nicfit

yep but overcloking (thing that actually I'm not much inclined to do) wouldn't make the cache bigger, just the cpu faster .

Yes but then the performances would be similar between the E4400 and the E6600 at stock speed. If you don't want to overclock go for the E6600 then (I have one and it's still a very powerful CPU event if dates a bit now).

[nicfit]

that's true but I'm not asking the differences i'd get in mhz - speed , just if having a bigger amount of cache would help or if it's not much important for mixing stuff with a bunch of plugins active... even a 2180 can run at 3ghz properly cooled

the "real" question is : how much does the amount of cache memory influence the performances of the cpu in this specific task?

sorry, I didn't make this much clear at first...

[█████████]

if you're just talking about cpu cache it really depends on the situation

ok, here's a performance chart:

 

basicly it relies on how much you're willing to spend.
i would keep the money... but it's up to you. if you think that extra money it's worth that sligth improvement....

[nicfit]

interesting chart. even if there are no specific big audio applications on there, looks like tha 4mb isn't much of an improvement. I'll search for a 1MB vs 2MB chart and make up my mind.

[!@#$%!]

dude you don't need huge muscle for audio these days. maybe in 1999 but not in 2008. cpu speed has become pretty irrelevant.

and may i say, speed is overrated. most computers can handle most audio editing these days. i'd put more emphasis on stability and solid performance than in overclocking and pushing benchmarks. my favorite benchmark is how long can you run a computer without rebooting it. i'd focus on that... because having your machine crash and losing work is the real time waster.

[Torn Curtain]

Originally Posted by nicfit

interesting chart. even if there are no specific big audio applications on there, looks like tha 4mb isn't much of an improvement. I'll search for a 1MB vs 2MB chart and make up my mind.

There's much more difference in terms of performance between 1MB and 2 than between 2MB and 4 so go for 2 at least.

[sobriquet]

Originally Posted by phoenix

omfg no dont buy sony buy sennheiser.

Depends what he wants. For some solid durable monitoring headphones go for Beyer DT100 or any number of " Senn's " range (HD650 are good but expensive). For mixing, really, on a budget? Save your money, use whatever headphones/speakers you're used to listening to music on ( a friend of mine uses some shit computer speakers and his mixes are sometomes better than mine ). Otherwise I'd buy Tannoy Reveals (again if on a budget but quite good anyway, actually). I have many different speakers, but in all honesty I use a pair of Panasonic's consumer range headphones mostly ($9).

As for a PC recording machine? I'm not too sure.I've only ever used a 'homebrew' cubase machine once in my life and I hated every fucking second on it. There's just no kineticism - it distends my rectum.

Depending on how serious you are, I'd 'pop' for something like this :

http://cgi.ebay.com/Mackie-HDR-24-96-Hard-Disk-Recorder-No-reserve-As-Is_W0QQitemZ370042073438QQihZ024QQcategoryZ41784QQ ssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

Then get a small desk and the other required bits to accompany it. It has a 'Pro-tools-like' interface built in when you plug in a monitor and mouse. You can get a load of problems with home built computers loaded with Cubase. It can be highly annoying.You want something sturdy and reliable to use as your 'multitracker'.

[terminal pharmacy]

Originally Posted by sobriquet

Depending on how serious you are, I'd 'pop' for something like this :

http://cgi.ebay.com/Mackie-HDR-24-96-Hard-Disk-Recorder-No-reserve-As-Is_W0QQitemZ370042073438QQihZ024QQcategoryZ41784QQ ssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

One of the very very few decent pieces og gear mackie makes, I however would not recommend for a home studio setup on a budget.

[nicfit]

Originally Posted by sobriquet

Depends what he wants. For some solid durable monitoring headphones go for Beyer DT100 or any number of " Senn's " range (HD650 are good but expensive). For mixing, really, on a budget? Save your money, use whatever headphones/speakers you're used to listening to music on ( a friend of mine uses some shit computer speakers and his mixes are sometomes better than mine ). Otherwise I'd buy Tannoy Reveals (again if on a budget but quite good anyway, actually). I have many different speakers, but in all honesty I use a pair of Panasonic's consumer range headphones mostly ($9).

As for a PC recording machine? I'm not too sure.I've only ever used a 'homebrew' cubase machine once in my life and I hated every fucking second on it. There's just no kineticism - it distends my rectum.

Depending on how serious you are, I'd 'pop' for something like this :

http://cgi.ebay.com/Mackie-HDR-24-96-Hard-Disk-Recorder-No-reserve-As-Is_W0QQitemZ370042073438QQihZ024QQcategoryZ41784QQ ssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

Then get a small desk and the other required bits to accompany it. It has a 'Pro-tools-like' interface built in when you plug in a monitor and mouse. You can get a load of problems with home built computers loaded with Cubase. It can be highly annoying.You want something sturdy and reliable to use as your 'multitracker'.

thanks for your suggesions, but I'm pretty much set up as of now (I need a really simple little studio).
I have a fostex digital multitrack recorder with hd
A lem rd82fx mixer
I'll use the pc just to make some electronic bases/noises and mix the separate tracks transferred from the recorder. So the pc is hardly a proper "recording machine" in this scenario, more like a "mixer that keeps track of the changes/effects for each track"
I have yamaha Hs 50m studio monitors, will mix with them.

I'm just trying to decide what's the most cost-effective cpu "future-proof" for a couple years.

[cryptowonderdruginvogue]

macpro tower ftw