Re: 24bit/96khz: usb 1.1 too slow?
- From: "Arny Krueger" <arnyk@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 13:29:31 -0400
"Randy Adamczyk" <randy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
firstly, thanks for your reply!
On 2007-08-27 16:56:14 +0200, "Arny Krueger"
It probably means that your hard drive isn't the
bottleneck. Besides, on a USB 1.1-bound computer,
you're pretty well stuck with it, if for no other reason
than practical economics.
i could use an external firewire drive instead of the
internal drive. and i will try that, but i agree, i don't
think the internal drive is the bottleneck. unfortunately
i cannot use the m-audio interface with firewire, it's
I didn't put 2+2 together to get that this is a Mac with one of those
wonderful (I'm quite serious - I find FW far less problematical than USB!)
How does it work at 16/44? That should be enough sonicmore in this kind of situation.
overkill. If 16/44 works reliably, why pine for anything
i will try that. i used 24/96 because, i dunno, guess i'm
too old school or something.
Old school *never* had anything as good as 24/96. It's my recollection that
even 30ips half-track tape sort of ran out of gas around 30 KHz.
I try to keep the quality as
high as possible for as long as possible.
Good principle, but there are a lot of other more constructed paths in the
data flow. Mics, speakers, rooms, ears, pervasive stuff like that.
I'm not really a fan of hard disk recording.
As much work as I did on mag tape, nobody had to point anything threatening
at me to get me to switch over to digital, through and through.
i prefer printing to tape,
and then transferring the recorded material to logic or
Sounds like unecessary work to me!
i love the way protools and logic have made
handling and cutting audio easier, but i'm having a hard
time getting used to relying on a computer and a hard
disk when i'm recording.
I love my Microtrack.
especially when i end up with clicking noise on my tracks.
Those are problems that can be solved. Simply getting rid of redundant data
would probably do the trick.
i guess i should invest in a new mac book pro and i'd be happy. just seems
overkill for occasional experimental mobile recordings.
Did I mention my Microtrack? ;-)
anyway - thanks for your help, i will try different
bit/khz settings and report back.
24/44 will cut your data rate load on the USB port by over 50%, and 16/44
will cut it by another third.
- Prev by Date: Re: use a laptop as an amplifier
- Next by Date: Re: DIY Mic Slings (..on a budget!)
- Previous by thread: Re: 24bit/96khz: usb 1.1 too slow?
- Next by thread: Re: 24bit/96khz: usb 1.1 too slow?