Re: Live gigs: worth having a second drive (SSD) for audio?
Posted: Sat Aug 13, 2011 9:08 pm
Packing a second harddrive instead the cd/dvd is a regular thinkpad feature, and it really helps a lot to stability and speed. Highly recommended!
I have my Library on the SSD - I have no idea how yours is 42Gb's as mine is around 5Gb! Do you have a load of additional stuff in there that you could maybe store somewhere else? But I don't see any reason why you couldn't store that on the other drive - don't see how it can affect performance during playback. Sample libraries most definitely are on the audio drive. After all, every time you play a sample, it's reading audio!samtastic wrote:trevox wrote:I have two HD's in my MBP too (one SSD, one regular 7200RPM drive), but I use them differently. I have my OS and all apps installed on my SSD and read/write all audio to the regular drive. I guess if you can get a big enough SSD, it would be great, but I record my audio at 96kHz (sometimes 192kHz) and my current 80Gb SSD would get eaten up quite quickly. Having your OS on a SSD is far more useful in terms of performance anyway IMO. Obviously 2 SSD's would be the dream - maybe when they get a little less expensive for the larger drives! BTW, I have recorded 16 tracks of audio at 96kHz in my setup and my machine did not bat an eyelid! I am sure if I had more inputs, it could have handled plenty more....
yeah that sounds really similar to what i want to do!
except I don't think I'll record at such high sample-rates.
Yeah I was thinking i'd install the system on the SSD, as well as the Live Library (mine is about 42gb) and maybe some key sample libraries (30gb) (for vst-instruments, I don't really use samples that much anyway)...
and I can see the logic in your recording/reading audio from the HDD.
My only question is:
if your System & Live Lib are installed on the SSD, and you're recording and reading all audio from the HDD, where would be the best place to keep your ableton project folders? On the SSD with your live library, or on the HDD with all your audio?
To me, it makes sense to keep it on the HDD with your audio, as that's what most of the data in an Ableton project usually is
and i'd also keep the latest couple of productions I'm working on at that time, I reckon. And also my live sets.
42+30 = 72gb (of 120gb total SSD, can't afford the larger-capacity ones!)
All photos, media and emailing stuff, I'll use my older Macbook (2.1Ghz, white 2008 model)... so the quad-core will be for audio only : )
No, that's not very fast. Sequential read/write speeds should be 10 times that. Decent random speeds would be >40Mbps. I cannot stress how much the random read/writes is more important than sequential. Again, I don't work for Intel, but 6 months or so ago when I did my research, the X25-M really thrashed the competition in terms of lower priced SSD's.ionic wrote:20mbps doesnt seem very fast for me, what do others think?
Glad it worked out for you! I do take the point from others in terms of using the SSD as the audio disk, but the difference in overall machine performance is so radically improved, I feel having the OS/apps on the SSD is more beneficial. What SSD did you get in the end?samtastic wrote:hey ionic, that's what I now plan to do, but keeping it all internal by using this:
http://eshop.macsales.com/item/Other+Wo ... DDAMBS0GB/
got two HDs in my macbook pro now. SSD for the system disk & current work-in-progress projects (120gb) and larger sample libraries, instruments, and older projects on a HDD (750gb).
having the system on the SSD makes such a difference. she's now the fastest-feeling computer I've ever used. faster than my 8-core Mac Pro (though it's system is on an traditional, magnetic HDD).
strongly recommend running the system of an SSD (for all - I'm sure it could give extra life to many older computers)
my 2¢ : )
to answer the original question:
"Live gigs: worth having a second drive (SSD) for audio?"
yes. but stick the system on the SSD instead. if you can afford two SSDs, then use two. one for system, one for data.