Apple Logic Pro /LogicExpress Discussion group photo

Yahoo Groups archive

Apple Logic Pro /LogicExpress Discussion

Index last updated: 2026-04-28 23:06 UTC

Message

Re: [Logic_Cafe] SATA versus SCSI

2005-01-17 by dennis gunn

On Jan 17, 2005, at 6:47 PM, Maurits van de Kamp wrote:

> Op Monday 17 January 2005 09:01, schreef dennis gunn:
>  > This would certainly be true if the drives were the bottle necks
>
>  It is true just BECAUSE of what you're saying. SCSI and IDE operate at
>  comparable transfer rates, but (SATA) IDE requires more processing 
> power than SCSI. So especially when you notice the following..:
>
>  > but
>  > from the experience people are documenting it appears more and more
>  > that that is not the case.  Witness the fact that cubase for example
>  > can play back so many more tracks than Logic can.
>
>  ..in other words, Logic has less processing power available for the 
> actual
>  recording than Cubase, this only makes SCSI more favourable.


For the sake of clarity the problem is not in the recording tracks but 
the play back tracks.  After all it is not unusual to be playing back 
dozens of tracks at once but recording dozens at once is a 
comparatively rare situation, and what would be an even more rare 
situation would be recording dozens of tracks at once while monitoring 
dozens of recorded tracks usually if you are recording on a whole bunch 
of tracks it is an orchestral situation where you are doing basics also 
In the real world most people don't even have more than about 18-24 
inputs anyway and I have recorded that many inputs without problems.

>  Besides, you can't really speak about "the bottleneck"; every element 
> in the
>  chain can slow things down. Especially in the case of IDE where the 
> processor has to do all the work.
>

Sure I can speak about a bottleneck.  The processor meter can be 
hovering at not much over zero while the disk meter is pegged.  That 
means that the CPU has overhead to spare but the data path to the disk 
is maxed.  That is a bottleneck.  I don't know the details of where or 
why that bottleneck is since it does not seem to be in the disc itself 
since cubase can do better on the same disk and it also does not seem 
to be that the CPU is overtaxed according to the meters, it just seems 
to be one of "those things".

Anyway by all means go spend your hard earned pesos on SCSI drives and 
PCI cards but I don't think you are going to get any performance gain.  
But hey I would love to be proven wrong.

Attachments

Move to quarantaine

This moves the raw source file on disk only. The archive index is not changed automatically, so you still need to run a manual refresh afterward.