EXS 24 Logic Sampler Users Group group photo

Yahoo Groups archive

EXS 24 Logic Sampler Users Group

Index last updated: 2026-04-28 23:25 UTC

Thread

Re: Re: Logic 6 and Panther

Re: Re: Logic 6 and Panther

2004-01-01 by Nick Batzdorf

From: Colin Shapiro <musos@...>

>I'm not fully up to speed with this but....
>Folks on the VSL forum have been talking about Panther and a
>so-called "Swap-file" which is used by the system. Apparently folks
>like us who use audio and EXS24 with lots of samples need to keep
>this swap-file on a separate drive - maybe someone else could jump in
>here with more detail.

Swapfile is a Windows term, but it's a virtual memory file the OS 
uses and we don't have to deal with. AFIK you can't affect it on OS X 
anyway, or if you can it's a bunch of UNIX nonsense in the "no 
serviceable parts inside" area.

Just put Logic on your system drive (or partition) and your samples 
on another, and you'll be fine. And if you're only using EXSs lightly 
- i.e. you're not streaming a lot of voices - you can ignore this.
-- 
___
Nick Batzdorf
818/905-9101, fax -5434, cell 590-9101

Different drives for Logic and samples?

2004-01-06 by nichellyeruk

> Just put Logic on your system drive (or partition) and your samples 
> on another, and you'll be fine. And if you're only using EXSs 
lightly 
> - i.e. you're not streaming a lot of voices - you can ignore this.


Interesting. My Logic *and* samples are both on the same drive (a 
slow laptop drive). Is there a significant performance benefit to put 
the samples on say an external 7,200rpm drive? Presumably you have to 
put aliases or something in the Logic:EXS home directory?


Nic

Re: [EXS] Different drives for Logic and samples?

2004-01-06 by uswitalski@yahoo.de

>> Just put Logic on your system drive (or partition) and your samples
>> on another, and you'll be fine. And if you're only using EXSs
>> lightly 
>> - i.e. you're not streaming a lot of voices - you can ignore this.
 
> Interesting. My Logic *and* samples are both on the same drive (a
> slow laptop drive). Is there a significant performance benefit to put
> the samples on say an external 7,200rpm drive? Presumably you have to
> put aliases or something in the Logic:EXS home directory?

just a thought: if logic (exs) finds aliases instead of the "real" files in
the directory it is looking for (afaik you cant point it anywhere but the
standart) it has to look further following the path the alias is heading...

dosn't this involve _more_ hd action?

just a thought, which might show that all that "optimization techiques" are
two sided and of yesterday, if you ask me.
i keep all samples and programms on a sepereat drive, but just for mobility
my 2 byte.

Re: Different drives for Logic and samples?

2004-01-06 by painrusse

--- In exs-users@yahoogroups.com, "nichellyeruk" 
<nic.hellyer@m...> wrote:
> > Just put Logic on your system drive (or partition) and your 
samples 
> > on another, and you'll be fine. And if you're only using EXSs 
> lightly 
> > - i.e. you're not streaming a lot of voices - you can ignore this.
> 
> 
> Interesting. My Logic *and* samples are both on the same 
drive (a 
> slow laptop drive). Is there a significant performance benefit to 
put 
> the samples on say an external 7,200rpm drive? Presumably 
you have to 
> put aliases or something in the Logic:EXS home directory?
> 

Hi

My exs24 library is on a different drive, and due to the size of it, i 
didn t had any choice (got over 120 gig, and at the time, internal 
could nt handle that).

It does work, BUT, be aware that in most cases, internal drive 
will be faster than any other external drive; of course, i don t know 
wich one is in your laptop and you should verify this with 
someone who knows about benchtest. Last but not least, never 
forget that, if ain t broke, don t touch it !

Louis

PS you could had another internal drive, this is what i m gonna 
do with my new computer, but then again, it s not a laptop, dunno 
about the possibility of hading another drive to a laptop

Re: [EXS] Different drives for Logic and samples?

2004-01-06 by Hendrik Jan Veenstra

On a fine day, 06-01-2004, uswitalski@... wrote:

>  >> Just put Logic on your system drive (or partition) and your samples
>>>  on another, and you'll be fine. And if you're only using EXSs
>>>  lightly
>>>  - i.e. you're not streaming a lot of voices - you can ignore this.
>
>>  Interesting. My Logic *and* samples are both on the same drive (a
>>  slow laptop drive). Is there a significant performance benefit to put
>>  the samples on say an external 7,200rpm drive? Presumably you have to
>>  put aliases or something in the Logic:EXS home directory?
>
>just a thought: if logic (exs) finds aliases instead of the "real" files in
>the directory it is looking for (afaik you cant point it anywhere but the
>standart) it has to look further following the path the alias is heading...
>
>dosn't this involve _more_ hd action?
>
>just a thought, which might show that all that "optimization techiques" are
>two sided and of yesterday, if you ask me.
>i keep all samples and programms on a sepereat drive, but just for mobility
>my 2 byte.

This question seems to come up every few weeks at least...  The EXS 
*instruments* (.exs files) should go in the Logic application > 
Sampler Instruments folder.  The samples themselves can be stored 
anywhere -- the EXS will find them automatically.
And yes, it's a good idea to store samples and recorded audio on a 
dedicated drive.  The system drive is needed all the time (by the 
system) and streaming audio from a dedicated drive thus naturally 
increases performance.
Storing samples on a dedicated drive will _not_ introduce a 
performance hit.  The 1st time an instrument is loaded in the EXS, 
the EXS needs some time to figure out where the samples are.  The 
location of the samples is then written in the instrument file, so 
that next time you load the instrument, it loads much faster.
I'm not sure if using aliasses would introduce a performance hit, but 
there's no reason to alias your samples anyway, so why would you?
If you want to store your _instrument files_ someplace else, you can 
(I think) put an alias to the instruments folder in the Logic > 
Sampler Instruments folder.  Personally I don't see the benefit of 
that though.  Instrument files are small and need to be accessed only 
once, so there's not much gained (if anything) by storing them 
someplace else.

-- 
Hendrik Jan Veenstra   h @ k n o w a r e . n l
Omega Art: http://www.omega-art.com/

Re: [EXS] Different drives for Logic and samples?

2004-01-06 by Sean McCoy

>Storing samples on a dedicated drive will _not_ introduce a
>performance hit.

True, unless the dedicated drive is an external drive with a potential USB 
or FireWire bottleneck in comparison to the generally faster internal 
drives. With USB 2.0 and FireWire 800, this should be a non-issue.

>I'm not sure if using aliasses would introduce a performance hit

An interesting question. I wonder if one of the Mac-savvy power users might 
have a take on this.

>If you want to store your _instrument files_ someplace else, you can
>(I think) put an alias to the instruments folder in the Logic >
>Sampler Instruments folder.  Personally I don't see the benefit of
>that though.

Yes, this works fine. I do it because I prefer to have my instrument files 
and samples in the same directory for simpler file management.

Re: [EXS] Different drives for Logic and samples?

2004-01-06 by Hendrik Jan Veenstra

On a fine day, 06-01-2004, Sean McCoy wrote:

>  >Storing samples on a dedicated drive will _not_ introduce a
>>performance hit.
>
>True, unless the dedicated drive is an external drive with a potential USB
>or FireWire bottleneck in comparison to the generally faster internal
>drives. With USB 2.0 and FireWire 800, this should be a non-issue.

Yeah, hello... of course if your 2nd drive is slower than your 
internal drive, then you'll experience a performance hit when using 
the 2nd drive.  LOL... :-)

-- 
Hendrik Jan Veenstra   h @ k n o w a r e . n l
Omega Art: http://www.omega-art.com/

Re: [EXS] Akai convert and Instrument / sample management

2004-01-06 by David Wilson

I've got a large library of Akai instruments on my hard disk. How do I 
convert these to use
with the EXS? The Akai Convert seems to only want to look to the CD 
drive.

What's the procedure to repair instrument links in a song? I can't seem 
to find the
magic in Project manager - if instruments are missing in a song, I go to
project manager, it sees the instrument, in the right place, and the 
samples are
seen, but can't access the instrument in the EXS instrument window. If 
I quit and
open a new file, EXS sees everything fine.

Do I need the ESX Manager to make it all seamless, or am I missing 
something?

David Wilson	
Artist in Residence in Lighting and Sound
Spingold Theater
Brandeis University
Waltham MA 02454
USA

Re: Re: Different drives for Logic and samples?

2004-01-06 by Nick Batzdorf

>  >  >Storing samples on a dedicated drive will _not_ introduce a
>  >>performance hit.

Sean McCoy wrote:

>  >True, unless the dedicated drive is an external drive with a potential USB
>>or FireWire bottleneck in comparison to the generally faster internal
>>drives. With USB 2.0 and FireWire 800, this should be a non-issue.
Show quoted textHide quoted text
From: Hendrik Jan Veenstra <h@...>

>Yeah, hello... of course if your 2nd drive is slower than your
>internal drive, then you'll experience a performance hit when using
>the 2nd drive.  LOL... :-)

Just to nitpick and be really obnoxious, Firewire shouldn't normally 
cause a bottleneck, and the internal drives are the same things you 
put in FW cases. The exception is the SATA drives on G5s.
-- 

Nick Batzdorf
818/905-9101, cell 590-9101, fax 905-5434

Re: [EXS] Re: Re: Different drives for Logic and samples?

2004-01-07 by Sean McCoy

At 03:00 PM 01/06/2004, you wrote:


> >  >  >Storing samples on a dedicated drive will _not_ introduce a
> >  >>performance hit.
>
>Sean McCoy wrote:
>
> >  >True, unless the dedicated drive is an external drive with a 
> potential USB
> >>or FireWire bottleneck in comparison to the generally faster internal
> >>drives. With USB 2.0 and FireWire 800, this should be a non-issue.
>
>From: Hendrik Jan Veenstra <h@...>
>
> >Yeah, hello... of course if your 2nd drive is slower than your
> >internal drive, then you'll experience a performance hit when using
> >the 2nd drive.  LOL... :-)
>
>Just to nitpick and be really obnoxious, Firewire shouldn't normally
>cause a bottleneck, and the internal drives are the same things you
>put in FW cases. The exception is the SATA drives on G5s.

Not obnoxious at all---to the contrary, this is interesting. I'm not a 
qualified tech-head, but to my understanding the latest Ultra ATA drives 
are capable of transfer rates up to 150 MBytes per second or faster over 
the IDE bus, while the Oxford FireWire 400 bridge passes no more than 50 
MBytes per second no matter what drive is mounted in the FW case. The FW 
800 spec doubles that to 100 MBytes/s, so even that is substantially less 
than a fast drive's potential. Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong.

As the pace of disk speed increases has been outpacing our need for speed 
over the past couple of years, we haven't had to worry about it too much, 
and these numbers are plenty high enough to sustain all but the most 
demanding high definition audio streams. But now that we're adding the 
potentially tremendous disk-streaming demands of huge 24 bit sample 
libraries (VSL, anyone?), disk throughput capabilities are again becoming 
an issue.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Different drives for Logic and samples?

2004-01-07 by Nick Batzdorf

>  > >  >  >Storing samples on a dedicated drive will _not_ introduce a
>>  >  >>performance hit.
>>
>>Sean McCoy wrote:
>>
>>  >  >True, unless the dedicated drive is an external drive with a
>>  potential USB
>>  >>or FireWire bottleneck in comparison to the generally faster internal
>>  >>drives. With USB 2.0 and FireWire 800, this should be a non-issue.
>>
>>From: Hendrik Jan Veenstra <h@...>
>>
>>  >Yeah, hello... of course if your 2nd drive is slower than your
>>  >internal drive, then you'll experience a performance hit when using
>>  >the 2nd drive.  LOL... :-)
>>
>>Just to nitpick and be really obnoxious, Firewire shouldn't normally
>  >cause a bottleneck, and the internal drives are the same things you
>  >put in FW cases. The exception is the SATA drives on G5s.
Show quoted textHide quoted text
From: Sean McCoy <osr@...>

>Not obnoxious at all---to the contrary, this is interesting. I'm not a
>qualified tech-head, but to my understanding the latest Ultra ATA drives
>are capable of transfer rates up to 150 MBytes per second or faster over
>the IDE bus, while the Oxford FireWire 400 bridge passes no more than 50
>MBytes per second no matter what drive is mounted in the FW case. The FW
>800 spec doubles that to 100 MBytes/s, so even that is substantially less
>than a fast drive's potential. Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong.
>
>As the pace of disk speed increases has been outpacing our need for speed
>over the past couple of years, we haven't had to worry about it too much,
>and these numbers are plenty high enough to sustain all but the most
>demanding high definition audio streams. But now that we're adding the
>potentially tremendous disk-streaming demands of huge 24 bit sample
>libraries (VSL, anyone?), disk throughput capabilities are again becoming
>an issue.

I'm not a tech-head either, but like you and unlike most people 
quoting computer specs on the Internet, I know enough to know that! 
Too many people quote specs like they do understand them, and that 
leads to a lot of misinformation floating around.

But I always say that - it's a bee in my bonnet.

Anyway, the important question is how many voices you can get through 
Firewire 400's bandwidth, and I believe the practical limit is 350 - 
400 mono voices. My understanding is that the drive's transfer rate 
isn't so important; it's the seek time that makes the difference. 
That's why the Western Digital Raptor 10K RPM SATA drives 
(approaching $300 for a 72GB drive) are best for maxing out the 
number of voices, even though you can't use the throughput.

The other thing I've learned from my investigations into Windows 
machines for streaming samples in Kompakt is that if you use an 
add-on SATA card rather than one on the motherboard, the hard drive-> 
system latency increases. That doesn't matter because of the latency, 
but it does make a difference to the timing of the system. Likewise, 
tweaked-out memory makes a difference because of its timing with the 
motherboard; the speed of the memory itself isn't the important spec.

But people seem to be getting good streaming results on G5s with the EXS.

On the Vienna Symphonic Library forum, their resident computer guru 
CM recommends using two 160GB drives for their roughly 230GB library. 
You can fit it on one 250GB drive, but the drive is going to be too 
full, and that will hurt its performance. He also says that drives 
with 2MB buffers seem to be more responsive, but that may have been 
an anecdotal off-cuff comment.
-- 

Nick Batzdorf
818/905-9101, cell 590-9101, fax 905-5434

Re: [EXS] Different drives for Logic and samples?

2004-01-07 by Sean McCoy

At 01:52 PM 01/07/2004, Nick Batzdorf wrote:


>Anyway, the important question is how many voices you can get through
>Firewire 400's bandwidth, and I believe the practical limit is 350 -
>400 mono voices. My understanding is that the drive's transfer rate
>isn't so important; it's the seek time that makes the difference.
>That's why the Western Digital Raptor 10K RPM SATA drives
>(approaching $300 for a 72GB drive) are best for maxing out the
>number of voices, even though you can't use the throughput.

Ah, good to know.  I hadn't ever heard drive performances expressed in 
terms of voices---maybe we could get the manufacturers to add that to their 
specs!  Is there any advantage to mounting an SATA drive in a FireWire 
enclosure, as opposed to a standard ATA drive? Is it that the newer SATA 
drives have consistently faster seek times than their older counterparts?


>On the Vienna Symphonic Library forum, their resident computer guru
>CM recommends using two 160GB drives for their roughly 230GB library.
>You can fit it on one 250GB drive, but the drive is going to be too
>full, and that will hurt its performance. He also says that drives
>with 2MB buffers seem to be more responsive, but that may have been
>an anecdotal off-cuff comment.

I assume he's talking about external FireWire drives? Has he made any 
comments about FW 400 vs. FW 800? (I don't frequent that forum since I 
can't justify the cost of that library to my wife!)

Re: Different drives for Logic and samples?

2004-01-08 by Nick Batzdorf

I wrote:

>  >Anyway, the important question is how many voices you can get through
>>Firewire 400's bandwidth, and I believe the practical limit is 350 -
>>400 mono voices.

I should add that this is very approximate, and in fact it may be 
optimistic. When I got about 180 stereo voices on a FW drive, someone 
mentioned to me that I may not be noticing dropped voices. That's 
possible.

>  My understanding is that the drive's transfer rate
>>isn't so important; it's the seek time that makes the difference.
>>That's why the Western Digital Raptor 10K RPM SATA drives
>>(approaching $300 for a 72GB drive) are best for maxing out the
>>number of voices, even though you can't use the throughput.
Show quoted textHide quoted text
From: Sean McCoy <osr@...>

>Ah, good to know.  I hadn't ever heard drive performances expressed in
>terms of voices---maybe we could get the manufacturers to add that to their
>specs!  Is there any advantage to mounting an SATA drive in a FireWire
>enclosure, as opposed to a standard ATA drive?

I don't think you can mount them in FW enclosures. They have 
different connectors.

>  Is it that the newer SATA
>drives have consistently faster seek times than their older counterparts?

Unless something else has come out in the past couple of weeks, the 
Western Digital Raptors are the only 10K RPM drives. They have a 
faster seek time than the other SATA drives, which are all max 7200 
RPM. The drawback is that there are only two Raptors: a 36 GB one and 
a 72 GB one. SATA is only one drive per bus.

>  >On the Vienna Symphonic Library forum, their resident computer guru
>>CM recommends using two 160GB drives for their roughly 230GB library.
>>You can fit it on one 250GB drive, but the drive is going to be too
>>full, and that will hurt its performance. He also says that drives
>>with 2MB buffers seem to be more responsive, but that may have been
>>an anecdotal off-cuff comment.
>
>I assume he's talking about external FireWire drives?

FireWire drives are IDE drives in FW enclosures. The drive performs 
the same either way; the difference is the bandwidth.

I think if all things are equal, you're better off mounting the 
drives internally. But they're not always equal, because there's a 
limit to the number of drives you can mount internally.

>  Has he made any
>comments about FW 400 vs. FW 800?

Not that I know of. But remember, the bus has no effect on how 
quickly the drive can read data off its platter.

>  (I don't frequent that forum since I
>can't justify the cost of that library to my wife!)

Did you know that they have a $1000 (list price) orchestra now? It's 
called Opus.

-- 

Nick Batzdorf
818/905-9101, cell 590-9101, fax 905-5434

RE: Different drives for Logic and samples?

2004-01-08 by Paul Levine

>    From: Nick Batzdorf <recording@...>

>He also says that drives
>with 2MB buffers seem to be more responsive, but that may have been
>an anecdotal off-cuff comment.

Nick,
I know ithis was an "anecdotal off-cuff comment," but was he making it in 
comparison to drives with 8MB buffers?  In other words, he was saying the 
smaller buffers are more responsive?  I ask because I am going to buy a 
firewire drive in the near future, and was wondering whether the extra cost 
for a drive with an 8MB buffer (only about $10 more) is worth it, or whether 
it might actually be a disadvantage (at least for streaming samples).
thanks,
Paul

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.