When I install 4.01, will it interefere or "mess up" projects I've been working on in an earlier version of MTS? Will I lose anything like files, tracks, etc... already recorded?
Thank you for your help.....
MTS 4.01
I would venture a guess that when he finishes a project like 3.11 he starts on 4.0 and does not mention it until he has pounded the rough edges off, and really put the system thruough it's paces. Most likely with a few close friends helping out.. then he releases a finished product. Still all in all it seems to comeout so stable and useable, so he must really know his stuff. Because Flavio over at N-Track seems to be a darned good code writer as well, and really responsive to the clients needs, yet he seems to continue to have bug issues with the software. which is a nice package, yet not as stable as this program overall.
Yep, I have been v4 and v4.01 since the day they were released with no problems at all - and there is a lot to like in the new versions...
My favourites are the new time line thing, and the ease with which you can add new markers, also the stereo VU meters are good. It's nice to tack labels on to your tracks and groups (though it would be prettier if they were the same font as MTS's other text)
Question: All this V4 stuff has got me going on recording again and I plan to record the band soon, so I have added a second delta44 card so I can do 8 track recording. No problems there. I then tried to break the system by adding 8 tracks at a time untill it fell over (these are 24 bit 44.1K)
I got up to 40 tracks playing and added another 8 - and the cpu still only shows about 25% activity (!) This is a 2.4G Dell with -er- 512Mb memory I think.
Anyway, I gave up trying to break it.. So - what's the max number of tracks you guys have used, eh?
Pete H
My favourites are the new time line thing, and the ease with which you can add new markers, also the stereo VU meters are good. It's nice to tack labels on to your tracks and groups (though it would be prettier if they were the same font as MTS's other text)
Question: All this V4 stuff has got me going on recording again and I plan to record the band soon, so I have added a second delta44 card so I can do 8 track recording. No problems there. I then tried to break the system by adding 8 tracks at a time untill it fell over (these are 24 bit 44.1K)
I got up to 40 tracks playing and added another 8 - and the cpu still only shows about 25% activity (!) This is a 2.4G Dell with -er- 512Mb memory I think.
Anyway, I gave up trying to break it.. So - what's the max number of tracks you guys have used, eh?
Pete H
Hi snaarman,
The CPU should not have to do a lotta work when more tracks are added. DMA disks should handle that problem (some audio recording programs may be written poorly, another subject for another day for MTS is written well IMO).
Rule of thumb, CPU usage impacts the number of realtime effects you can apply to the tracks, before or after the fact of recording. RAM comes into play here bigtime, too.
Disk Drives control the amount of tracks you can get away with recording, that and the sheer size of each track as governed by your selected bit depth and sampling frequency (44.1KHz files are going to be a LOT smaller in size than 192KHz files, which impacts the audio stream throughput). To some extent, the amount of RAM can also impact the track count depending upon what kind of buffer dance the particular program does.
For optimum multitrack count you should have a separate DMA disk drive dedicated to the audio stream from the host program, usually found somewhere in the options or setup of the host, the "Audio Temp" file, direct the stream to the first logical partition of that separate disk and keep all OS and apps on the C: drive, nothing else on that second disk should be running at all when recording.
Track count is also a function of playback tracks, too. Those doing multitrack overdubbing are more interested in the number of tracks they can play back while simultaneously recording another number of tracks in without pops, clicks or other glitches and this is a dynamic situation where fewer played back tracks can allow for more recorded tracks at the same time.
In a Live On Location recording situation you typically won't be worrying about the playback and monitoring of pre-recorded tracks which is a good thing, right, for you have more disk resources available for your input audio streams.
After saying all of that, this writer has been able to record 16 tracks of simultaneous input since the middle of 1998 using the old Event Layla (before they became Echo Layla) on some machines that would be considered downright archaic if not anciently slow by today's standards. (remember the o'clocked 400MHz celery daw?)
Times have changed, the other night I did 12 ch. input at a show using my laptop, EMU1616M pcmcia card, outboard AD convertor and an external firewire drive for the stream. No pops, no clicks. Lotta work left to be done on the mix though (grin).
Proper setup and tweaking of the PC is the most important part of getting the highest track count.
I know guys who can get 32 tracks in the studio and do it routinely. I'm also kinda glad I don't have to push it that far.
--Mac
The CPU should not have to do a lotta work when more tracks are added. DMA disks should handle that problem (some audio recording programs may be written poorly, another subject for another day for MTS is written well IMO).
Rule of thumb, CPU usage impacts the number of realtime effects you can apply to the tracks, before or after the fact of recording. RAM comes into play here bigtime, too.
Disk Drives control the amount of tracks you can get away with recording, that and the sheer size of each track as governed by your selected bit depth and sampling frequency (44.1KHz files are going to be a LOT smaller in size than 192KHz files, which impacts the audio stream throughput). To some extent, the amount of RAM can also impact the track count depending upon what kind of buffer dance the particular program does.
For optimum multitrack count you should have a separate DMA disk drive dedicated to the audio stream from the host program, usually found somewhere in the options or setup of the host, the "Audio Temp" file, direct the stream to the first logical partition of that separate disk and keep all OS and apps on the C: drive, nothing else on that second disk should be running at all when recording.
Track count is also a function of playback tracks, too. Those doing multitrack overdubbing are more interested in the number of tracks they can play back while simultaneously recording another number of tracks in without pops, clicks or other glitches and this is a dynamic situation where fewer played back tracks can allow for more recorded tracks at the same time.
In a Live On Location recording situation you typically won't be worrying about the playback and monitoring of pre-recorded tracks which is a good thing, right, for you have more disk resources available for your input audio streams.
After saying all of that, this writer has been able to record 16 tracks of simultaneous input since the middle of 1998 using the old Event Layla (before they became Echo Layla) on some machines that would be considered downright archaic if not anciently slow by today's standards. (remember the o'clocked 400MHz celery daw?)
Times have changed, the other night I did 12 ch. input at a show using my laptop, EMU1616M pcmcia card, outboard AD convertor and an external firewire drive for the stream. No pops, no clicks. Lotta work left to be done on the mix though (grin).
Proper setup and tweaking of the PC is the most important part of getting the highest track count.
I know guys who can get 32 tracks in the studio and do it routinely. I'm also kinda glad I don't have to push it that far.
--Mac
-
fingersonly
- Posts: 33
- Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2005 1:36 pm
OOH! OOOH!
Wait MAC, a quesion I can answer, I only ever get to ask questions -- so let me handle this!!
ummm! BUMP -- is a way of keeping the thread up top so you could get and anwer,-- get it?? bumped up to the top when somone replies.
Now someday maybe I can actually answer as recording question.
Wait MAC, a quesion I can answer, I only ever get to ask questions -- so let me handle this!!
ummm! BUMP -- is a way of keeping the thread up top so you could get and anwer,-- get it?? bumped up to the top when somone replies.
Now someday maybe I can actually answer as recording question.
Good news all around! I "bumped" ya because we were so rudely interrupted with a buncha crap that had been pushed up top is all.
Trolls exist to hamper the fun and good works of folks who want to do things, no sense in your post being pushed back where nobody real could see it or attempt to help ya out with it, tha's all.
I see things are back to normal now, thank you Webmaster/Moderator!
If more forums were to moderate properly the trolls would not be a problem for long, eh?
--Mac
Trolls exist to hamper the fun and good works of folks who want to do things, no sense in your post being pushed back where nobody real could see it or attempt to help ya out with it, tha's all.
I see things are back to normal now, thank you Webmaster/Moderator!
If more forums were to moderate properly the trolls would not be a problem for long, eh?
--Mac