Laptop recording

[UpTilDawn]

Regardless of which computer format, consider using an SSD as the internal boot drive. Based on the superb results of updating my 4 year old HP laptop, I have tried and obtained similar improvements by switching to SSDs on my wife's laptop and the studio desktop. I presume that the enhanced speed of an SSD in a laptop will enable your 40 track count with ease, if you can accomplish the inputs.

The SSD may help with the equation - I don't know much about them yet - but the speed hangup is not with the boot drive, but instead with the data drive attempting to handle 40 tracks at once....... correct?

[Ed Snape]

The SSD may help with the equation - I don't know much about them yet - but the speed hang up is not with the boot drive, but instead with the data drive attempting to handle 40 tracks at once....... correct?

Correct, but I was thinking that the single SSD would fulfill both chores. After I imaged my original HDDs' over to SSD, and physically replaced them, I had the option to reinstall them as data drives, but have not yet done so. Originally I kept the originals as fall backs in case of problems with the SSDs, but the SSDs have miraculously rejuvenated the computers causing no problems.

[Ed Snape]

My math is pretty rusty, but it appears that 1 channel of 96k, 24 bit requires:
2304 kbps x 40 = 92,160 kbps = 92.169 Mbps
1012.5 MB = 40,500 MB/hour

Don't have Bob's HD Speed test handy, but did
run a CrystalDiskMark speed test on the Samsung SSD in this HP laptop.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
CrystalDiskMark 3.0.3 Shizuku Edition x64 (C) 2007-2013 hiyohiyo
Crystal Dew World : http://crystalmark.info/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
* MB/s = 1,000,000 byte/s [SATA/300 = 300,000,000 byte/s]

Sequential Read : 473.962 MB/s
Sequential Write : 477.731 MB/s
Random Read 512KB : 394.934 MB/s
Random Write 512KB : 443.575 MB/s
Random Read 4KB (QD=1) : 33.541 MB/s [ 8188.8 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=1) : 53.986 MB/s [ 13180.2 IOPS]
Random Read 4KB (QD=32) : 359.282 MB/s [ 87715.4 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=32) : 289.030 MB/s [ 70563.9 IOPS]

Test : 50 MB [C: 46.9% (218.6/465.7 GB)] (x2)
Date : 2015/04/22 16:41:17
OS : Windows 7 Professional SP1 [6.1 Build 7601] (x64)

[UpTilDawn]

Correct, but I was thinking that the single SSD would fulfill both chores. After I imaged my original HDDs' over to SSD, and physically replaced them, I had the option to reinstall them as data drives, but have not yet done so. Originally I kept the originals as fall backs in case of problems with the SSDs, but the SSDs have miraculously rejuvenated the computers causing no problems.

I remember reading many posts here and elsewhere about concerns people have over using ssd's as data drives. Again, I don't have much working knowledge about it, but isn't the constant writing/deleting of large amounts of data a concern?

I've run Bob's speed test for 48 tracks at 44.1k/24bit on the x60 (which is a 32bit system with 4GB RAM, by the way), but don't know how to capture and copy the resulting text display. Bob's tester doesn't include 96k, by the way.

I don't grasp the results in your test in a way that allows me to translate the info and compare to Bob's tester...... I'm just not that in depth of a thinker with these matters. Care to simplify for me?

[RBIngraham]

I've really liked using a ThinkPad with XP for some lower track count recordings. I pushed it to 24 tracks before, which worked really well - especially with SAC as a front end.

I recently changed the old hd for a larger capacity and 7,200rpm version. It recorded 24 tracks to the internal drive without breaking a sweat. But I haven't tried it to an external hard drive yet.

Have an opinion on whether or not it makes a difference as to what type of external setup you use - say, docking bay vs. a single drive aluminum enclosure?

I forgot that the thinkpad has a fw port....... Are there interfaces out there that can do more than 24 channels to a single laptop port? PCMCIA, or FW - either one should be able to work for me, right?... assuming there is something available. I'll have to do some research. It's been a while since I've looked for anything other than PCI.

Could I continue to use my 40 channels of Presonus preamps, with their ADAT/WC design? Or am I going to have to replace them as well?

I went with an external hard drive not for the speed but for the space. Plus since it was a clean drive I could also just sell the entire drive to the client if they wanted it. (none ever has, but I only do a recording gig about once every two years or so, so it's not like I have a ton of recording clients)

Most decent internal laptop drives will have plenty of speed for many tracks, probably easily doing the 40 you've mentioned.

The nice thing about a lot of the Lenovo Thinkpads is that you can remove the optical drive and replace it with a second hard drive and that's usually one of the first things I do. I now have a 500GB data drive in my current laptop so I might not even need an external. But I would still carry it so I could back it up right on site. I use an SSD for the system drive as well because it makes your laptop just so much more snappy. Particularly things like installing software and such are so much faster.

Frankly if you're mostly doing just recording and not the live mix, I would probably just go with a Dante based solution and forget the audio interface all together on the laptop by using Dante Virtual Sound Card. Yeah it will cost you some money for convertors that speak Dante but you could set up your split a lot easier and then you just run a single CAT5 to the laptop. Done.

Things like the Yamaha Rio box have software you can run to manipulate the preamps and gain settings remotely when not hooked up to a console. Or you could just go with something like Focusrite RedNet units. And if you did need to mix live you slap their PCI card into a tower and that has low enough latency to operate a software mixer.

There are several Dante to MADI bridges now and between Dante and MADI most digital mixers can speak one of those two so that gives you the recording/FOH split.

Not inexpensive but if you did enough work it would probably pay for itself fairly quickly in time saved and audio quality.

[RBIngraham]

Thanks for the suggestion - got me looking into it in detail and looking around more for similar solutions.

This one falls short on inputs (since I've sometimes needed as many as 37 simultaneous inputs in the last few years) and as much as I've liked M-Audio stuff, I've also experienced consistently problematic FW drivers, which I couldn't risk at a live gig.

RME has products I've trusted from the start, but the price point goes waaaay up for me to get 30-40 channels into a laptop.

I've wanted to do something like this for awhile now - Maybe this is where I've stalled out in the past, when I get started thinking about going down this path...

I agree. I have worked with those before as well at a couple of theatres and they were always a huge hassle and unreliable. Maybe with time the drivers finally got better and I'm glad Richard seems to have good luck with his but I would never recommend those Lightbridges to anyone. The only interface M Audio made that seems to work well is the 2626 unit. At least in my experience.

RME is not inexpensive but at least you can usually rest well knowing that you buy once and cry once. Rather than buy something, cry several times because it sucks so bad and end up having to buy two or three times the gear in the long run.

I would also take a serious look at the new MOTU AVB gear. It is reasonably priced when compared to many other options and while it has only a USB interface in Windows that is probably fast enough for recording, since that doesn't require low latency, so you relax the buffer settings and let it roll. And again you could do a set up with split fairly easily and only run a single CAT5 to your recording station. If windows ever gets off it's ass and incorporates AVB directly you're golden. No audio interface needed. Echo Audio makes an AVB PCI card and again you could put that into a tower computer when you do require low latency. I have asked them if they have tried their stuff with the MOTU boxes and they said they have and it works, but they were having some troubles with the MOTU switch.

Of course if you just ditch SAW and get a Mac you could record directly via AVB right now, since Mac OS has AVB built in. And NO, I'm not an Apple fan boy, just ask anyone that knows me. But I do believe in going with whichever platform has the tools that make my job easier. So my Mac runs QLab and I use it for nothing else. (full disclosure I need to get a new Mac as my Mini is long in the tooth and can not run the latest version)

Anyway, those MOTU AVB units will likely be the next interface I migrate to as my MOTU PCI gears dies off. And it has already started to die and I probably won't spend money on fixing it unless it's simple repairs.

[Ed Snape]

I remember reading many posts here and elsewhere about concerns people have over using ssd's as data drives. Again, I don't have much working knowledge about it, but isn't the constant writing/deleting of large amounts of data a concern?

I've run Bob's speed test for 48 tracks at 44.1k/24bit on the x60 (which is a 32bit system with 4GB RAM, by the way), but don't know how to capture and copy the resulting text display. Bob's tester doesn't include 96k, by the way.

I don't grasp the results in your test in a way that allows me to translate the info and compare to Bob's tester...... I'm just not that in depth of a thinker with these matters. Care to simplify for me?

You are correct about SSD's potential to wear out. It would be interesting to get Sawyer's reports of an real world experiences.

From February 2015 PC Magazine

As far as longevity goes, while it is true that SSDs wear out over time (each cell in a flash memory bank has a limited number of times it can be written and erased), thanks to TRIM command technology built into SSDs that dynamically optimizes these read/write cycles, you're more likely to discard the system for obsolescence before you start running into read/write errors. The possible exceptions are high-end multimedia users like video editors who read and write data constantly, but those users will need the larger capacities of hard drives anyway. Hard drives will eventually wear out from constant use as well, since they use physical recording methods. Longevity is a wash when it's separated from travel and ruggedness concerns

SAW HD Speed Test Result on Samsung SSD
48 Tracks of 44.100 Stereo 24 bit files = 12,700.80 KBytes/Sec

[IraSeigel]

If you really really need to record high track counts like that, have you looked at the Tascam recorders? Simple to operate and my experience with them is that they're very reliable. I can't personally vouch for their roadworthiness, tho. You can give the client a HD with all tracks on it and let them work with the tracks themselves, or import them into SAW or the DAW of your choice and work with them yourself. I think you can find the non-96K machines (the older models) fairly reasonably priced on eBay or another outlet.

[studio-c]

USB 2 and 3 should be plenty fast enough for 40 stereo tracks.

If you're coming off a PA system, I'd think mono tracks would get you more solid results, as those channels are pretty much mono anyway.

[Dave Labrecque]

If you're coming off a PA system, I'd think mono tracks would get you more solid results, as those channels are pretty much mono anyway.

True 'nuff. I just meant to point out how much "headroom" there is, performance-wise these days. Should be a non-issue. Picking the right interface to handle all those inputs seems like the real challenge.