Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Protools LE problems w/ amd

Last response: in Home Audio
Share
Anonymous
February 23, 2005 12:04:50 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Hello,

I just got a custom machine with a 2800+ Athlon AMD, 2 GHZ ram and 2 80
Gig HD's.
I configured XP Home edition as stated in the manual and everything
loaded fine. The problem is that I get interupts (asking to change H/W
buffer) during the lightest operations. Does anyone know why this is?
My friend told me that this me machine should be plenty for lots of
tracks and plugins. It could be a RAM or CPU problem. Does anyone have
any suggestions??

Thanks

More about : protools problems amd

February 23, 2005 12:25:14 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

> I just got a custom machine with a 2800+ Athlon AMD, 2 GHZ ram and 2
80
> Gig HD's.
> I configured XP Home edition as stated in the manual and everything
> loaded fine. The problem is that I get interupts (asking to change
H/W
> buffer) during the lightest operations. Does anyone know why this is?
> My friend told me that this me machine should be plenty for lots of
> tracks and plugins. It could be a RAM or CPU problem. Does anyone
have
> any suggestions??
>
> Thanks

http://duc.digidesign.com/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=UBB32

that is the link to the pro tools le windows xp board.
Are you running usb2 or firewire to external drives? usb1 won't cut it
I found out from experience.
Also reverb plug ins use a lot of cpu, if you have a lot of these you
may want to bounce with your effects to another track to free up cpu.
Good luck
Anonymous
February 23, 2005 10:16:00 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

db wrote:
> > I just got a custom machine with a 2800+ Athlon AMD, 2 GHZ ram and
2
> 80
> > Gig HD's.
> > I configured XP Home edition as stated in the manual and everything
> > loaded fine. The problem is that I get interupts (asking to change
> H/W
> > buffer) during the lightest operations. Does anyone know why this
is?
> > My friend told me that this me machine should be plenty for lots of
> > tracks and plugins. It could be a RAM or CPU problem. Does anyone
> have
> > any suggestions??
> >
> > Thanks
>
> http://duc.digidesign.com/postlist.php?Cat=&Board=UBB32
>
> that is the link to the pro tools le windows xp board.
> Are you running usb2 or firewire to external drives? usb1 won't cut
it
> I found out from experience.
> Also reverb plug ins use a lot of cpu, if you have a lot of these you
> may want to bounce with your effects to another track to free up cpu.
> Good luck

Thanks for that. I have SP2 for XP so it should be USB2.0. I thought it
might be plugins. In this case, I had 2 Amplitubes, 1 EQ and 1 Reverb.
After I bounced the Instruments to do Vox, I still had interupts (just
3 tracks, 1 Comp). I will check out the link.
Thanks
Related resources
Anonymous
February 23, 2005 11:51:44 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Have you checked to see how many non pro tools processes are running in
the background? To optimize your system for pro tools, you may need to
strip down those background processes. It could be anything from a
virus to microsoft office "fast find" that's making the interruption.

Mike
Anonymous
February 23, 2005 12:17:22 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

I set my system so that it loads the bare minimum at startup. I
beginning to suspect that it's a hard drive issue. My Audio Hard drive
is slaved to my System/Programs Hard drive. It might be something with
DMA, etc...
February 23, 2005 8:36:40 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Were you able to check out the Windows pro tools le forum?

You should be able to get some good information there with the same
original post.

There might be an issue with the Athlon AMD not being compatable
somehow.
Anonymous
February 23, 2005 8:40:35 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

I have been running a successful XP system for over 2 years. Some
tricks I've learned. Disable any network interfaces not being used
(this includes any firewire interfaces that are not used. Do not use
an image as your background use a simple color background. See the DUC
for how to trick out your system even more.

I have 2 ibm deskstar drives and they work great with an amd 2400+. I
also record directly to a firewire drive and it works great.

Also, do not bypass plugins. when I have plugins in bypass mode i will
get all kinds of those errors. When I disable them instead of
bypassing it works like a champ.

steve
Anonymous
February 23, 2005 11:40:31 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

I've been through the whole list of stuff on the DUC site but still the
same problem. I even made the Audio drive a master drive and that
didn't work. BTW, the error comes when I frist minimize the Protools
screen. Then it keeps coming back no matter what at different instances
in playback. This particular session has a reverb, eq, comp, 3
amplitudes. I had the same problem with only 2 tracks running a comp.
Any other ideas??

rudedogg wrote:
> I have been running a successful XP system for over 2 years. Some
> tricks I've learned. Disable any network interfaces not being used
> (this includes any firewire interfaces that are not used. Do not use
> an image as your background use a simple color background. See the
DUC
> for how to trick out your system even more.
>
> I have 2 ibm deskstar drives and they work great with an amd 2400+.
I
> also record directly to a firewire drive and it works great.
>
> Also, do not bypass plugins. when I have plugins in bypass mode i
will
> get all kinds of those errors. When I disable them instead of
> bypassing it works like a champ.
>
> steve
Anonymous
February 24, 2005 4:18:13 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

<demysaid@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1109179042.704660.193910@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> I set my system so that it loads the bare minimum at startup. I
> beginning to suspect that it's a hard drive issue. My Audio Hard drive
> is slaved to my System/Programs Hard drive. It might be something with
> DMA, etc...
>

I'd like to know how you resolve the issue. I find it too difficult to deal
with XP due to the lack of ability to reserve (or even see) IRQ usage
and DMA usage. I wouldn't think there would be a bottleneck because
both drives are on the same IDE cable. Other running processes are
my supposition as well.

--
David Morgan (MAMS)
http://www.m-a-m-s DOT com
Morgan Audio Media Service
Dallas, Texas (214) 662-9901
_______________________________________
http://www.artisan-recordingstudio.com
Anonymous
February 24, 2005 6:45:29 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

should have bought a mac

dale
February 24, 2005 7:56:38 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

should have bought a mac


dale

That was so clever. Mine works just fine on Windows XP. Yeah it bogs
down a bit with about 25 plug ins running... but heh, I guess I'll just
have to deal with it.
Anonymous
February 24, 2005 11:20:18 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <1109209235.658011.214620@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> steverude@gmail.com writes:

> I have been running a successful XP system for over 2 years. Some
> tricks I've learned. Disable any network interfaces not being used
> (this includes any firewire interfaces that are not used.

In a full time fixed installation, these days that's a little
impractical. You don't want to have to reboot the computer and load
another hardware profile if you need to access a file on another
machine on your network, or access a Firewire device. If you're going
to have a dedicated recorder, you might as well just get (or build)
one and isolate it from the rest of the world (and Microsoft).

> Do not use
> an image as your background use a simple color background. See the DUC
> for how to trick out your system even more.

That's reasonable, but how much does it really help?

> Also, do not bypass plugins. when I have plugins in bypass mode i will
> get all kinds of those errors. When I disable them instead of
> bypassing it works like a champ.

What's "bypassing" a plug-in? (this is a real question since I don't
use plug-ins) I figured that either you installed it on a track or you
didn't. If you wanted to bypass it (for instance an EQ or a
compressor) momentarily to see if you were making things better or
worse when you had it in, sure, you bypass it. But if you decide you
don't want to use it, just remove it from the track. If I patch a
compressor into a track and decide it's not doing me any good, I just
pull the patch cable. Isn't it just that simple on a DAW?

Or is this a decision that people are unable or unwilling to make?

--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
Anonymous
February 24, 2005 1:35:42 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

So I finally figured that the problem is deeper than just turning on
and off another driver. I was also gettting sudden restarts when
starting a program or doing a certain function in Protools. This
sounded like a RAM problem. I downloaded and ran DocMem and sure
enough, both sticks of 1ghz ram failed 2 test loops (the were given to
me, btw.) So, can anyone recommend the best ram makers for intesive
audio work? I need PC3200 DDR either 2x512 or 1 ghz

Thanks
Anonymous
February 24, 2005 2:45:15 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

>In a full time fixed installation, these days that's a little
>impractical. You don't want to have to reboot the computer and load
>another hardware profile if you need to access a file on another
>machine on your network, or access a Firewire device. If you're going
>to have a dedicated recorder, you might as well just get (or build)
>one and isolate it from the rest of the world (and Microsoft).

I don't think that turning off a network interface during the tracking
or mixing of a session is too much to ask. It is more of a work flow
thing. Maybe in a huge production company with a 5 studio SAN network,
you might not be able to do this, but you most likely won't be running
windows xp on an amd processor either.

I was offering suggestions on how to get better performance out of a
windows machine, not how to run a network, or the ideals of how to
build a studio based network. These ideas were regurgitated from the
DUC and digi's recommendations not out of my imagination. I have been
doing network engineering for my day job for the past 7 years, so
believe me this is not the ideal way I would run it either ;)  I'm
usually the last person to tell you to turn off a network interface.
But I have noticed an increase in performance with protools when the
network interfaces are disabled.



>> Do not use
>> an image as your background use a simple color background. See the
DUC
>> for how to trick out your system even more.

>That's reasonable, but how much does it really help?

On XP every little bit helps. I have noticed increased performance
after doing this with several other tweaks. This particular one... who
knows how much exactly.


>What's "bypassing" a plug-in? (this is a real question since I don't
>use plug-ins) I figured that either you installed it on a track or you

>didn't. If you wanted to bypass it (for instance an EQ or a
>compressor) momentarily to see if you were making things better or
>worse when you had it in, sure, you bypass it. But if you decide you
>don't want to use it, just remove it from the track. If I patch a
>compressor into a track and decide it's not doing me any good, I just
>pull the patch cable. Isn't it just that simple on a DAW?

It is usually just like you say, but when I am working on certain parts
of songs, i may disable plugins to get better performance, but I don't
want to get rid of them completely. Like bouncing tracks with plugins
so I can use more. then turning the voices off on the original tracks.
I like to leave the settings in the plugins however so if i go back to
change it later then I don't have to completely redo the settings.

However in learning all of this, I found that if I leave them in bypass
mode (just pressing the button that says bypass on them, that it only
takes like 2 in bypass and i'll start getting the errors. But
disabling them (ctl-option click) or windows (ctl-windows-key click)
you can keep all the settings and it is more like a hardware bypass.

in hardware units, you can pull patch cables, and the settings stay the
same on the unit. not so with plugins, you can however save the
settings, but once you have like 30 settings saved for the same plugin,
it can become quite annoying esp with eqs.

steve
Or is this a decision that people are unable or unwilling to make?
Anonymous
February 24, 2005 7:29:05 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

>> in hardware units, you can pull patch cables, and the settings stay
the
>> same on the unit. not so with plugins, you can however save the
>> settings, but once you have like 30 settings saved for the same
plugin,
>> it can become quite annoying esp with eqs.

>Tee hee chortle chortle

ok, bit of exaguration. as soon as you patch it in again it's gone.
but that's what documentation is for...<G>
Anonymous
February 24, 2005 9:13:23 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <1109274315.564044.52580@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com> steverude@gmail.com writes:

> I don't think that turning off a network interface during the tracking
> or mixing of a session is too much to ask.

Changing ANYTHING on a computer that works is too much to ask. There's
no reason why these things can't peacefully coexist. If they don't,
there's something wrong or broken.

> It is more of a work flow
> thing. Maybe in a huge production company with a 5 studio SAN network,
> you might not be able to do this, but you most likely won't be running
> windows xp on an amd processor either.

Exactly. You have to interrupt your work flow to disable the network,
and then you have to interrupt it again when you need it (or more
likely, you'll try to use it then have your work interrupted when it
doesn't work and you have to re-enable it, which may mean rebooting.

> I was offering suggestions on how to get better performance out of a
> windows machine, not how to run a network, or the ideals of how to
> build a studio based network.

And I was trying to set the scene for the way that most people who are
troubled by things like this work. They use their computers for
everything.

> These ideas were regurgitated from the
> DUC and digi's recommendations not out of my imagination.

I'm not blaming you, but there are a lot of fixes that get sealed into
folklore because they worked at one time. I just think that things
should work better, that's all.

> I'm
> usually the last person to tell you to turn off a network interface.
> But I have noticed an increase in performance with protools when the
> network interfaces are disabled.

That sounds like a ProTools problem rather than a network problem. But
I know that talking to Digidesign about getting a problem like this
fixes is like talking to the wall. They make recording systems and
will fix recording problems. Networking is the customer's problem.

> It is usually just like you say, but when I am working on certain parts
> of songs, i may disable plugins to get better performance, but I don't
> want to get rid of them completely. Like bouncing tracks with plugins
> so I can use more. then turning the voices off on the original tracks.
> I like to leave the settings in the plugins however so if i go back to
> change it later then I don't have to completely redo the settings.

This sounds like a lack of horsepower, or an attempt to push a system
too far. The nice thing about hardware is that it's very easy to tell
when you run short on resources - no more hardware to patch in. <G>

> However in learning all of this, I found that if I leave them in bypass
> mode (just pressing the button that says bypass on them, that it only
> takes like 2 in bypass and i'll start getting the errors.

Apparently putting them in bypass mode doesn't take them out of the
processing mode. It sounds like you're fixing a problem that shouldn't
be there, but it is.

> disabling them (ctl-option click) or windows (ctl-windows-key click)
> you can keep all the settings and it is more like a hardware bypass.

That's better.

> in hardware units, you can pull patch cables, and the settings stay the
> same on the unit. not so with plugins, you can however save the
> settings, but once you have like 30 settings saved for the same plugin,
> it can become quite annoying esp with eqs.

Tee hee chortle chortle


--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
Anonymous
February 26, 2005 12:22:40 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Hold the phone everyone. After trying several tweeks I downloaded
DocMemory to check my RAM and sure enough, both sticks failed the test.
I purchased a new 1gig
Crucial stick w/ heatsink and now there are no problems (of course). If
anyone is experiencing problems, please check your RAM. My PC machine
now runs seamless!!

rudedogg wrote:
> >> in hardware units, you can pull patch cables, and the settings
stay
> the
> >> same on the unit. not so with plugins, you can however save the
> >> settings, but once you have like 30 settings saved for the same
> plugin,
> >> it can become quite annoying esp with eqs.
>
> >Tee hee chortle chortle
>
> ok, bit of exaguration. as soon as you patch it in again it's gone.
> but that's what documentation is for...<G>
Anonymous
February 26, 2005 8:33:53 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"David Morgan (MAMS)" <mams@NOSPAm-a-m-s.com> wrote:
>
> I'd like to know how you resolve the issue. I find it too difficult
> to deal with XP due to the lack of ability to reserve (or even see)
> IRQ usage and DMA usage.



Y'know, since I went to XP, I quit worrying about IRQ and DMA usage.
When I got my first XP machine I decided to try just letting the OS
handle it, figuring I could always override later if it didn't work out.
Haven't even thought about those acronyms since, until you brought them
up here.


--
"It CAN'T be too loud... some of the red lights aren't even on yet!"
- Lorin David Schultz
in the control room
making even bad news sound good

(Remove spamblock to reply)
Anonymous
February 26, 2005 8:43:08 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Gee, that was helpful Dale. And what exactly should he do when the Mac
misbehaves? Putz.

To the OP (you didn't mention your name), try a different video card.
Go with a super-simple offering from a well-known vendor. Something
super-common/mainstream (I went with an ATI 9600).

We've encountered problems with video drivers causing Pro Tools to
misbehave intermittently on both a Wintel machine and a G4. We never
did figure out what the issue was, but in both cases changing out the
video card to a different brand and/or model solved the problem. It may
not be what's wrong with your machine, but it couldn't hurt to try it.
The fact that it occurs after minimizing is what has me thinking in that
direction.

--
"It CAN'T be too loud... some of the red lights aren't even on yet!"
- Lorin David Schultz
in the control room
making even bad news sound good

(Remove spamblock to reply)

"dale" <dallen@frognet.net> wrote in message
news:1109245529.871466.303270@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> should have bought a mac
>
> dale
>
Anonymous
February 26, 2005 11:25:37 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Lorin David Schultz" <Lorin@DAMNSPAM!v5v.ca> wrote in message news:5q2Ud.13028$ab2.7873@edtnps89...
> "David Morgan (MAMS)" <mams@NOSPAm-a-m-s.com> wrote:
> >
> > I'd like to know how you resolve the issue. I find it too difficult
> > to deal with XP due to the lack of ability to reserve (or even see)
> > IRQ usage and DMA usage.
>
>
>
> Y'know, since I went to XP, I quit worrying about IRQ and DMA usage.
> When I got my first XP machine I decided to try just letting the OS
> handle it, figuring I could always override later if it didn't work out.
> Haven't even thought about those acronyms since, until you brought them
> up here.


Hi Lorin,

You aren't the first person to tell me "Just let this great new OS deal with it".
In one case I asked Romeo (you remember the name) to show me just what
he had on his PC in the way of IRQ allocations... so he did. To my amazement,
3 or 4 items per IRQ (his home machine was absolutely jam-packed with large
amounts of peripheral hardware). I couldn't believe it... then he put Nuendo
on the machine and added the Hammerfall card, and bragged some more.

Well... admittedly, everything was pretty damned smooth as best as I could
tell. But he would still end up with the ocassional pop or tick on a track and
his audio CD burning ran well over a 5% failure rate if you call glitches as
they are.... failures.

I still want to blame it on the OS and not being able to control hardware
assignments. But maybe this is my own hang-up. I just don't want to
lose control over the fact that I turn out about 99% flawless CDs on
older OSes where I have tweaked as necessary.

So.... I'm still anxious to hear more on this, even though the OP simply
had bad RAM.

DM
!