Harddisk recording: AV or Ultra ATA?
soun...@worldnet.att.net
B. de Jong wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I'm about to buy a PC. Still I don't know what harddisk is the best to
> buy for harddisk recording. In some shops they advice me to buy an
> AV-rated harddisk and in other shops salesmen say I'll be better off
> with an Ultra ATA.
>
> Who can give me some advice? Each tip would be very much appreciated!
>
> Thanks for your help,
>
> Bouwe de Jong
Seagate Barracudas are very popular. I use their 4 gig (I believe they
have larger ones now). I use it on the Spectral Prisma system.
Billy Sarokin
B. de Jong
Murf/SMurph
Billy Sarokin-->
Seagate Barracudas are very popular. I use their 4 gig (I believe they
have larger ones now). I use it on the Spectral Prisma system.
Bruce Murphy-->
Agreed, and add Micropolis to that list. I might suggest you look
seriously at a Mac, however, instead of a PC: it's not just the initial
price, it's the upkeep and expansion. Most importantly [to turn the
PCer's argument against them:)], Mac's own sound and picture editorial.
Think SCSI, not Ultra ATA: maybe the speed is finally similar [don't know
for sure], but unlike ATA with SCSI you can daisy chain drives till the
cows come home.
B
bi...@mix.com
Murf/SMurph <bamu...@biteme.massmailers.com> writes:
> Think SCSI, not Ultra ATA: maybe the speed is finally similar [don't know
> for sure], but unlike ATA with SCSI you can daisy chain drives till the
> cows come home.
You can get fast SCSI, wide SCSI, etc, even differential if you need
long cable runs to racks of disk drives. I'm sure there's more than
enough bandwidth available.
For those building their own systems there is an excellent discussion
of PC hardware, disks and such at -
http://www.vix.com/pc-hw/bsd-os-hwconfig.html
This is directed at those building BSD Unix machines but much of it
is just plain good advice in any case.
Billy Y..
Jay Rose
|: ...Eventually most audio
|: workstations may be "WinTel" but that definitely isn't the case now.
|: If you're going to be doing music or sound effects for movies or video,
|: I strongly recommend ProTools. There are currently more ProTools
|: workstations being used than all other workstations combined...
I like your logic: use PT because there are more copies of it being used,
but ignore Windows even though there are more copies of it being used.
As a matter of fact, PT _does_ have impressive numbers of users. That's
what comes from being the oldest surviving system (Dyaxis is pretty much
dead) plus distribution at every music store in the known universe.
It also comes from having a system which Digi/Avid claims is ideal for
music production, radio, feature films, mastering, and anywhere else they
think they can find a market.
But that's hardly reason to consider it being the -best- system for music
or sfx cutting. There are a lot of much faster dedicated-hardware DAWs on
the market now, designed specifically for this kind of work, including the
Fairlight and Orban.
--
Jay Rose's Digital Playroom
Clio/Emmy Winning Sound for Broadcast, Multimedia
tech docs & funny tutorials @ http://www.tiac.net/users/jcrose
Randy Thom
Here's another vote for the Mac Platform. Eventually most audio
workstations may be "WinTel" but that definitely isn't the case now.
If you're going to be doing music or sound effects for movies or video,
I strongly recommend ProTools. There are currently more ProTools
will almost certainly not change for another several years.
bi...@mix.com
Jay Rose <jcr...@dplay.com> writes:
> There are a lot of much faster dedicated-hardware DAWs on
> the market now, designed specifically for this kind of work, including the
> Fairlight and Orban.
^^^^^
There's a damn nice piece of hardware. Anyway for those interested
in Pro Tools and in the southern California area there will be a mini
trade show called DigiWorld in Warner Bros. stage 1 (next to gate 2
at Olive and Frankiln in Burbank) Saturday, Oct. 25th, from 11AM to
7PM. Call 800 333-2137 ext. 311 if you'd like to attend. Parking
is available just across the street in WB's brand new garage...
Billy Y..
Ty Ford
In Article
<jeffkreines-06...@user-2k7i1o9.dialup.mindspring.com>,
jeffk...@mindspring.com (Jeff Kreines) wrote:
>In article <344299...@dnai.com>, ear...@dnai.com wrote:
>>
>What is the consensus re 24 bit? Is most film post going to go that way?
>I mean, release formats probably are not... so is there much reason to go
>to the trouble when there is such a weak link at the end of the chain? I
>know the (good) arguments, re future release formats, etc... anyone want
>to predict?
>
>Jeff Kreines
I think once enough people have heard the difference (good that is) that
24-bit can make, there will be a shift. That will also give the mfgrs the
time to iron out the wrinkles in the first production run.
Right now there are still too many people arguing whether or not 24-bit is
needed. This "Denial Stage" will continue until there's enough product out
there to prove that 24-bit makes a difference.
Arguments that the final delivery medium for theaters (for example) will be
mitigated by below-par repro systems, while correct, are just another form
of denial.
If we spent less time wimpering about having to learn some new technology so
we could get the best out of the new stuff, we'd be a lot better off.
Regards,
Ty Ford
Ty's Article and Audio Archives are available from www.jaguNET.com/~tford. He
currently has a 16-bit, 44.1 sample of the new Neumann TLM 103 mic there for
download.
bi...@mix.com
Ty Ford <tf...@jagunet.com> writes:
> Right now there are still too many people arguing whether or not 24-bit is
> needed. This "Denial Stage" will continue until there's enough product out
> there to prove that 24-bit makes a difference.
OK - what in the world are you going to feed it with that even comes close
to using all 24 bits worth (ca. 144 dB) of dynamic range?
> Arguments that the final delivery medium for theaters (for example) will be
> mitigated by below-par repro systems, while correct, are just another form
> of denial.
How about the range between the threshold of hearing and the threshold
of pain? Not to mention the practical limits imposed by the viewing
environment...?
Billy Y..