PDA

View Full Version : Faux Time Line Cache without HD


Sugarnutz
04-02-2015, 09:17 AM
I recently purchased a 4TB Seagate "Hybrid" hard drive witch includes an 8GB SSD on the controller card which is supposed to keep the most recent files loaded to the SSD portion for quick retrieval. I moved a copy of the Kelly Malone - Earth & Stars demo session to this new drive and monitored the disk activity when I first played the session and then again after I had played it 4-5 times. The differences are noticeable; The 1st time disk activity showed up to 7% max with an average of 4-5%, each subsequent playback saw it decrease a percent or two each time with the 5th time playing back it averaged 0-1% with a max of 2%. The pics below are the 1st & 5th time showing the disk activity substantially different at the same place in the song. I'm using Pro Tools 12 for this experiment. This may all be an accident or I may be on to something here (this is how my mind works when I have nothing to do). All always; YMMV!

http://i364.photobucket.com/albums/oo84/nikonjunkie/Time%20Line%20Cache%201_zpsexabfz8h.jpg

http://i364.photobucket.com/albums/oo84/nikonjunkie/Time%20Line%20Cache%202_zpslivwzz9j.jpg

Shan
04-02-2015, 10:28 AM
If you have the RAM, you could also create a RAM drive for the audio folder. There are a few RAM drive programs out there that will also mirror the audio to a hard drive at the same time. RAM drives also work great for sample based VI's and even video. The PTLE Win crowd trail blazed these workflows years before Disk Cache became a PT HD feature. :-)

Shane

Sugarnutz
04-02-2015, 10:37 AM
If you have the RAM, you could also create a RAM drive for the audio folder. There are a few RAM drive programs out there that will also mirror the audio to a hard drive at the same time. RAM drives also work great for sample based VI's and even video. The PTLE Win crowd were doing these workflows years before it became a PT feature. :-)

Shane

Thought about that too since this new PT Vanilla machine has 32 GB of RAM. I bought this Seagate drive 'cause I'mma pack-rat and throw nothing away, hell I've got 15000 emails in Outlook going back 10 yrs or so. Curiosity got me me with Seagate's claims of improved performance from a 5900 RPM drive. I wouldn't track to a drive like this (I've got two 10K WD spinners for that), but for an archival drive that you can recall mixes from I believe it would be fine (4TB for $145).

killah_trakz
04-03-2015, 08:04 PM
I've been using ram drives for a LONG TIME. It's the best thing ever, and ram speeds a super freaking fast.