Machine Control COM Ports: Sync I/O vs CPU

[Tom Smith]

Is using the COM ports of the computer rather than the ports on the Sync I/O still the recommended (required) practice?

I was thinking that maybe this was something that had been "solved" recently...

BTW, does anyone know what the reason was/is?

[DigiTechSupt]

Yes, you should continue to use the COM ports on the computer.

I can't say for sure why this is - it's been a very long time since I asked, though I think I recall it had something to do with too much data trying to be sent to the SYNC IO if MC was used.

Don't quote me on that, though!

[5Moes]

FWIW, I've been using the Sync I/O ports for two years now with v7.x and have had no problems. HD1 rig with Windows XP.

[not2tech]

On the non Sync I O the Comm ports had to be used,b but we've gone to the Sync I O HD's we are using the 9 pin ports NO PRoblems.

[Tom Smith]

I've been using the serial ports on the Sync I/O (non HD) as well with no apparent problems. But I was re-reading the manual recently & came across the parts where it recommends using the serial ports on the CPU & was curious as to why.

Mostly, I've been laying off whole shows (or whole parts) but I'd like to be able to do tighter, insert edits to fix problems here and there in a tape. So, I was wondering if I might get better performance using one set of serial ports over another.

Has anyone been doing really tight inserts, like one or two frames? Is that even feasible? I suppose it depends a lot on the VTR in question...

[DigiTechSupt]

The issues we saw were that it didn't work on some systems and trying to determine exactly why was taking up way too many resources. Scrubbing also seemed to be much less reliable when using the ports on the Sync IO.

However, if it's working for you, you needn't worry - when it works, it seems to work just as well as the COM port.