Avid Pro Audio Community

Avid Pro Audio Community

How to Join & Post  •  Community Terms of Use  •  Help Us Help You

Knowledge Base Search  •  Community Search  •  Additional Resources


Avid Home Page

Go Back   Avid Pro Audio Community > Pro Tools Post Production > Post - Surround - Video

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 05-07-2011, 03:01 PM
MIKEROPHONICS's Avatar
MIKEROPHONICS MIKEROPHONICS is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: TWICKENHAM (South West London) UK
Posts: 2,014
Default FTP Server: Rumpus Or Crush

Dear All

Mobile me, nice as it is just doesn't cut the mustard - so with digidelivery no longer really a viable option, I ma thinking of setting up my own ftp server.

Does anyone have any experience with Crush or Rumpus? I am leaning towards Rumpus rather heavily - but as always would like to solicit others experience.

Before anyone pips in with drop box or you send it, no thanks - can't bear either (especially drop box)

many thanks
__________________
cheers

Mike Aiton BSc (hons)
Dubbing Mixer/Sound Designer

BAFTA member
IPS member

former Post Production Expert at www.pro-tools-expert.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------
www.mikerophonics.com
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 05-07-2011, 05:30 PM
reichman's Avatar
reichman reichman is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: New York
Posts: 1,807
Default Re: FTP Server: Rumpus Or Crush

I suppose Rumpus would make a better client front-end, but communicating via HTML or FTP is pretty crude. We did a project recently which didn't require a sexy client front-end (only the sound team was accessing the server), and we used AFP. This was great, because it felt like any external hard drive, and we were able to use tools like Chronosync to keep large Pro Tools sessions up-to-date in different studios. This was on a NAS, but if I did it again, I would use a Mac mini server.

I also use MobileMe extensively, but my biggest problems with it are a lack of separate password-protected client areas. Why do you think it's lacking mustard?
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 05-07-2011, 05:46 PM
Pirate Post Pirate Post is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Studio City, CA USA
Posts: 639
Default Re: FTP Server: Rumpus Or Crush

I have a working DigiDelivery LT server and as a backup I set up an FTP on a MiniMac in my studio. First with Crush then settled on Rumpus. Both are good, Rumpus is prettier to look at.

Recently purchased a 5 bay DS1511+Synology NAS with 5-3TB drives that has FTP capabilities. Currently only using it as a redundant backup for my 8 bay Drobo but the Synology has FTP capabilities that I have yet to tap. Really happy with the Synology.

Also I'm investigating the technology at www.storageDNA.com
__________________
Peter Cole - Head Pirate
http://www.beforenoonpost.com
http://www.piratepost.net
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 05-07-2011, 08:15 PM
EarHole EarHole is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 764
Default Re: FTP Server: Rumpus Or Crush

We've been using Rumpus for a few years and have been happy with it. If you can network to your "server", an old studio g4 in our case, it makes uploads so fast. Downloads for the client are dependent on your connection speed. We went with a t3 line for that machine.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 05-08-2011, 12:20 AM
MIKEROPHONICS's Avatar
MIKEROPHONICS MIKEROPHONICS is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: TWICKENHAM (South West London) UK
Posts: 2,014
Default Re: FTP Server: Rumpus Or Crush

I have a 50mb fibre connection (down) and 1.6 mb up (soon to go to 5mb).

Mobile me got very grumpy recently with a 1.7GB transfer that was time critical for a source connect session with LA. I had used source zip pro - which I love, despite its mac to mac limitation, and this failed for some reason. I had to use a plain vanilla zip in the end and Andy's ftp server. Due to the heat of battle I never chased up what went wrong.
I also find mobile me very slow and the password protection thing is a bit of a worry for some clients.

One of my clients (a large european satellite broadcaster) has a painfully slow ftp server - as it is behind so many firewalls.

I have vpn access to their sound suites and can tunnel in via afp to their pro tools macs to be able to use synchronise x - but again that is slow due to their network, and I tend to do this at night only when the cooperate orifice bods have gone home. These are the only people that have to sync with as I am a single studio entity.

I would like to do my uploads to a machine on my network via gigabit ethernet and let the client do the download at their leisure.

I have a spare macbook that I can use or a pc laptop. I am more tempted to use the mac due to the ease of networking and security in generally.

I have been thinking also of getting a synology NAS as a network backup of my pt drives and wondered about its ftp capabilities. The lazy part of me also considered getting an airport extreme and a usb drive.

cheers
__________________
cheers

Mike Aiton BSc (hons)
Dubbing Mixer/Sound Designer

BAFTA member
IPS member

former Post Production Expert at www.pro-tools-expert.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------
www.mikerophonics.com
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 05-08-2011, 12:29 AM
MIKEROPHONICS's Avatar
MIKEROPHONICS MIKEROPHONICS is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: TWICKENHAM (South West London) UK
Posts: 2,014
Default Re: FTP Server: Rumpus Or Crush

Peter

I checked out storageDNA.com, but it went slightly over my head.


cheers
__________________
cheers

Mike Aiton BSc (hons)
Dubbing Mixer/Sound Designer

BAFTA member
IPS member

former Post Production Expert at www.pro-tools-expert.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------
www.mikerophonics.com
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 05-08-2011, 01:51 AM
Frank Kruse Frank Kruse is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: old europe
Posts: 5,237
Default Re: FTP Server: Rumpus Or Crush

One side-note. While rumpus might be nicer to look at with a browser most of the browser-based front-ends have a maximum file-size limitation of 2GB so you wonīt get around a "real" FTP-client for larger transfers.
I put my server (DD-GT) into a computing centre. Just paying for the rackspace and direct connection to their 1Gbit/s (up and down!) back-bone. No bottleneck. Also very cost effective and more relieable compared to a super-fast local line. I havenīt physically touched or seen my server in 3 years now. Has been running 24/7.

Frank.
__________________
PTHDn 12.8.2HD (OSX10.12.6), 8x8x8, MacPro 5,1 3.33Ghz 12-Core, BM DeckLink SDI, SYNC HD, all genlocked via AJA GEN10, 48GB RAM
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 05-08-2011, 02:07 AM
MIKEROPHONICS's Avatar
MIKEROPHONICS MIKEROPHONICS is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: TWICKENHAM (South West London) UK
Posts: 2,014
Default Re: FTP Server: Rumpus Or Crush

Hi Frank

I did like the digidelivery service, I made ESPN buy one for their suites I ran and it has been very successful.
I thought Aspera were bailing on this technology? What happens when we all move to Snow Lion (or whatever the next OSX is called)? I am not keen on unsupported tech - but i suppose I do run a pro control and fader pack.....

I was unaware of the 2Gb file size limit - I will check this out. Thanks for the heads up. Does this apply to using an ftp client as well?

cheers
__________________
cheers

Mike Aiton BSc (hons)
Dubbing Mixer/Sound Designer

BAFTA member
IPS member

former Post Production Expert at www.pro-tools-expert.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------
www.mikerophonics.com

Last edited by MIKEROPHONICS; 05-08-2011 at 02:08 AM. Reason: poor grammar - "an ftp" not "a ftp"
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 05-08-2011, 02:23 AM
Frank Kruse Frank Kruse is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: old europe
Posts: 5,237
Default Re: FTP Server: Rumpus Or Crush

Quote:
Originally Posted by MIKEROPHONICS View Post
Hi Frank

I did like the digidelivery service, I made ESPN buy one for their suites I ran and it has been very successful.
I thought Aspera were bailing on this technology? What happens when we all move to Snow Lion (or whatever the next OSX is called)? I am not keen on unsupported tech - but i suppose I do run a pro control and fader pack.....
Iīve asked the same question over in the DD-section of this forum. Donīt have an answer yet. Aspera decided not to provide a unibersal client via the DD website so sooner or later new clients that run 10.7 and are taken to the Aspera site wonīt be able to obtain a working client.
Iīve looked into the DD-faspex offer and also SmartJog but neither offer the same functionality and price efficiency that DD has done for me so to keep my current speed and covenience specs It would mean a massive investment/month. I am willing to pay for such a service in general but more money for a slower service is not very tempting at the moment.

Iīm really hesitant to go the FTP-route since itīs sensitve to packet losses and slower than DD, SmartJog, faspex and other specialized file-distribution systems. FTP has no notification system and FTP folder tend to get VERY messy over time and need serious maintenance unlike DD.

Still thinking what to do. At the moment the fact that 10.7 is going to drop rosetta is just a rumour I think but itīs unlikely that apple will support rosetta for ever so sooner or later DD will be dead for sure. Itīs a shame that aspera never released the "new" (actually at least 2 years old) beta-client.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MIKEROPHONICS View Post
I was unaware of the 2Gb file size limit - I will check this out. Thanks for the heads up. Does this apply to using a ftp client as well?

cheers
No, this only applies to up/downloads via a browser, AFAIK.
__________________
PTHDn 12.8.2HD (OSX10.12.6), 8x8x8, MacPro 5,1 3.33Ghz 12-Core, BM DeckLink SDI, SYNC HD, all genlocked via AJA GEN10, 48GB RAM
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 05-08-2011, 04:58 AM
Vedat's Avatar
Vedat Vedat is offline
Quiet Art Ltd.
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Auckland, NZ
Posts: 872
Default Re: FTP Server: Rumpus Or Crush

We have been running Pure Ftpd, a free solution: http://www.pureftpd.org/project/pure-ftpd
on a G4 for 6 years now. Never had a problem, solid as a rock.
It does not have a front end though, needs to work with a client.
__________________
Vedat

Check out WaveRider + Defaulter:
QuietArt.co.nz

Catchin' SYNC app
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
500 Internal Server Error We're sorry but the web server encountered an unexpected c DrumEatDrum Getting Started 10 07-09-2013 11:47 AM
Slow compared to Rumpus FTP? blumediaprojekt Aspera DigiDelivery 1 09-13-2011 12:25 AM
Files transfered server-server relay still downloaded from remote server Phill Barrett Aspera DigiDelivery 1 03-19-2010 01:58 AM
USB 3 will crush eSata and Firewire800 dr sound Post - Surround - Video 25 03-03-2010 01:52 PM
10.5.3 crush joerusi 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac) 5 05-29-2008 05:18 PM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:29 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited. Forum Hosted By: URLJet.com