I\'ve had Gigastudio 96 for about a month now and from what I\'ve read so far, some of you say I should defrag my drive once a month or so. Basically I have 2 drives. A 30 gig for audio(D drive) and an 8 gig for programs(C Drive). Should I defrag both of these drives? Also, is it safe to use my windows 98 defragmentor on Gigastudio, Cakewalk, and Cool Edit Pro?
Hi Damon - As I\'ve stated in earlier threads, I feel that the drive that contains your Gigs doesn\'t need to be defragged - all of the Gigs are only read by GS/GSt, and (hopefully) not written to. If however, you\'re constantly adding new Gigs to your collection (as I am), you would finally have a reason to defrag that drive at times. The defrag program in Win98 should work fine with GS, GSt, and Gigs - I use it all of the time.
The gigs HD could also get fragmented if you regularly edit gigs.
Strictly speaking, one should always backup before defragging, since even the best software can make mistakes (especially if there is a power surge or outage at a critical stage!).
In any case, people who regularly edit gigs should keep a backup in princple, because more than half the average computer users will lose a harddrive\'s contents at least once during a computer\'s lifetime.
Another possibly nifty trick is to use something like the Norton defrag, which comes with a lot of modern motherboards. This allows you to force certain files (e.g. gigapiano) to be placed first on a drive, and can also place more frequently / recently accessed files closer to the beginning of the drive. This may reflect as a performance increase, since the beginning of a partition has a faster access/seek time than the end.
Nemesys basically says \"use Windows defrag, it works fine.\" I do not think this construes a recommendation of Windows defrag in preference to another defrag. In any case, defragging is defragging, irrespective of which defragger you use. The advantage to something like Norton is that you have a bit more control over what gets defragged to where, and it is slightly more refined than the Windows defrag.
Personally I think that there is some advantage to defragging the more intensive samples (i.e. gigapiano) to the start of the drive. Since GS(t) does random block reads, in theory it should not really matter how a gig is fragmented accross a drive, so defrag should not have much performance impact - yet improvements are reported. The only real differences are the read-ahead cacheing, and the moving of large files to the beginning of the drive.
But then again, if you never edit and delete gigs, you should never have to defrag (provided your gigs are on a separate drive). Nor should the adding of new gigs require defragmentation (except if you had previously deleted gigs off the drive).
As to defragging of standard audio files - defragging cannot harm files (except if the process screwes up somehow, which is why its a good habit to make regular backups). However, putting all the bits of a file together makes it much easier to stream the file smoothly from the disk, since read-ahead cacheing can be optimally utilised. So in general, defragging leads to lower CPU loads and access times.
This is on Nemesys\' web site: \"Be sure and use the Windows 95 Disk De-fragmenter. The GigaSampler will use that automatically if you choose to de-fragment your disk from within the GigaSampler. Using other brands of de-fragmenting software will re-set the GigaSampler copy protection. (Just call or email for a new number if this happens.)\"
This was on their site back when there was only GigaSampler (remember those days?) - I wonder if this still applies to GSt?