Hello Giga People
I would like to start this thread to find out from user feedback what computer speed is fast enough to run giga studio, effects and a sequencer of choice. Last july I bought a pentium 3 450 ,and at the time I thought it would be fast enough for the next Nemesys release [I was even told that by Nemesys] But now I see my 450 is sady enemic and not fast enough to run a complete workstation with sequencer, giga etc. This time before I make the leap I want to be sure before I spend the money.This is not a thread about AMD verses Pentium . I feel a 800 AMD is fairly close to a Pentium 800 in workstation ability. First of all we have to decide what we expect are computer to do before we decide which speed will do . Lets figure a exteme recording session so we wont have to worry about it ,so well be totally covered in any situation. Ok lets say 12 24/96 tracks [in cakewalk or what ever] ,with 12 direct x plug ins and 16 different sounds in giga studio,with 8 of those 16 sounds being 1 gig each and the other 8 sounds are at 20 megs each . And also for each of those 16 sounds in giga studio to have a different NFX giga studio native effect .Any idea\'s anyone , would anyone with giga studio and a sequencer etc care to max out there system to the point of locking up and tell us what there configuration is and what kind of performance they got ? thanks , Ken
You\'ll probably need a 2ghz Athlon with fast SCSI drives to achieve that....
So, what you should do instead. Since you\'re already planning on getting an Athlon, and Athlon uses different mobo\'s than Pentiums. You should keep your P2 450 for HD-recording (although it might be a little slow for what you want - a P3 800 would be better). And assemble a dedicated Gigastudio setup with the Athlon (or a P3). In my opinion there\'s no way you\'re gonna be able to stream so much data on/off your HD as well as using DX + NFX effects on ONE single computer at the moment. Maybe with that 2GHz system with fast SCSI drives, but not today.
thanks for the reply , I just have a couple questions . What are different mobo\'s . Also if I got a second computer ,what would the best way to sync them both together be and can they share my Darla 24? thanks , Ken
If you follow their advice, you can get a mean machine cheaper than you probably would otherwise.
At any rate, here\'s what I\'ve been doing:
I have a PIII 700, all Ultra160 SCSI, and a Gina card. I also have a PII 266 with an SB Live! This is the Giga machine.
I use the PII 266 for all sequencing and master take recording. In other words, I do the master recording of the GigaSampler performance, along with my other external synths, with the PII 266.
When I\'m done doing the master take of the MIDI stuff, I move the ProAudio .BUN file to the PIII 700. *Then* I can start doing live recording, mixing, etc. If I only do small stuff, I can add other sequenced tracks here too.
This mode of working is fine for me, but it may not work for you. However, you can probably find some variation of that that makes sense for you.
One more thing, you should investigate overclocking the processor you have before you spend too much money. There are a vast number of pro\'s and con\'s to doing this, but it just might get you where you need to be.
P.S. To PaPa and Worra: The BiggaGigga samples on the Nemesys sound sample CD\'s are outstanding and making me really covet your library (the French Horn is the very best I\'ve ever heard). As soon as I recover from all the money I\'ve just spent...
I plan to use two computers (systems) shared between one keyboard, one mouse and one monitor via a switch box. Dave of Nemesys has posted about this approach. For my method of working, and studio ergonomics this is THEE way to go. All that\'s holding me back at this point is (a) lack of spare cash, and (b) I want to finish my current project - a CD of my original music, before making any changes in the studio.
I think the homerun for Integrated DAW+Gigastudio will happen if and when Gigastudio become Win2k compatible. Then we\'ll be able to run 2 800Mhz processors and dedicate one to each app, along with dual hardisks and dual monitors. In essence two machines in one, but with the potential benefits of integrated/interprocess communication.
Let\'s hope that the Audio related issues with Win2k/WDM get resolved in the next year or so, so this dream can happen
[This message has been edited by David Abraham Fenton (edited 05-28-2000).]
I use an inexpensive mechanical switch box. Maybe takes .5 secs to switch and for the monitor to adjust. Only small glitch is that the first character that I type once I switch is lost. It\'s sort of a wake up character for the keyboard. After that it works just fine.
Lougheed I use the two computer, one switch box approach. It works very well. I have a PIII 600Mhz mainly for GS and a PIII500 for PARIS, ACID and audio editing. They\'re tied together via Ethernet. Saves on space and money. Once you have GS setup to the performance you need, you can switch back to the audio computer for eveything else. GS works flawlessly in the \"background.\"