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  •  Learn & Support


Avid Home Page

Go Back   Avid Pro Audio Community > Legacy Products > Pro Tools TDM Systems (Mac)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 11-03-2010, 01:16 PM
jeremyroberts jeremyroberts is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: New York, NY, USA
Posts: 3,020
Default GUID vs. APM partition scheme question

I'm gonna be working on a G5 system and bringing hard drives with me. Is it correct that only APM partitioned drives will record with a G5 and GUID formatted drives will fail?

OK, if so, is there any downside when bringing an APM partitioned drive to an Intel mac?

Am I better off formatting the drive GUID and simply use it as a transfer drive (no recording to the drive)? THIS DRIVE WILL NEVER be a boot drive, NEVER have an operating system on it. Data only.

Is there a BENEFIT to having the drive as GUID?

Is there a down side to having the drive as APM (working on intel) ?

Does it matter -- should I just cover my ass and format as APM and keep working?

Never really thought about this before -- since I never tried to record to an external drive....

Thx in advance for the guidance.

J
__________________
--Jeremy
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 11-03-2010, 07:57 PM
JC925602 JC925602 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Montreal
Posts: 769
Default Re: GUID vs. APM partition scheme question

APM is the way to go, work on both, PPC an Intel.

Quote:
Am I better off formatting the drive GUID and simply use it as a transfer drive (no recording to the drive)?
For some reasons you will need to record on it, so go for APM.

JC
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 11-04-2010, 02:35 AM
suicune suicune is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Wolverhampton, UK
Posts: 896
Default Re: GUID vs. APM partition scheme question

Quote:
APM is the way to go, work on both, PPC an Intel.
Whilst this is true for a transfer only drive as the OP specified, I should point out that Digitechsupt have stated quite clearly in a number of threads that using APM partition schemes on Intel mac audio drives and vice versa can/will cause disk errors. If you have to move a drive between PPC/Intel then use APM, but for audio and system drives use APM for PPC and GUID for intel.
__________________
M2 Studios
Wolverhampton, UK
http://www.madhat.co.uk
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 11-04-2010, 07:19 AM
jeremyroberts jeremyroberts is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: New York, NY, USA
Posts: 3,020
Default Re: GUID vs. APM partition scheme question

Still confused.

I see my options as:

1. make the drive GUID. ONLY use it as a transfer drive. Period.
2. make the drive APM. If I have to record to it on PPC, it will work great, but may have record issues on Intel - but works great for transfer on both platforms.

What would you do -- My HD rig is G5.
Outside studio is Intel.

We plan on tracking to their internal drives, and these external drives will only be for transfer. That's the plan right now.

SO -- maybe #2 is my better choice? IF we wanted to record to this on my G5 rig, we could, but it will definitely work for transfer, yes?

Thanks for your guidance. I have also discovered other threads around the net on this, and there are usually circumstances specific to each person's workflow. Thanks to all for sharing.

J
__________________
--Jeremy
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 11-04-2010, 07:31 AM
suicune suicune is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Wolverhampton, UK
Posts: 896
Default Re: GUID vs. APM partition scheme question

Yes I think APM is the way to go in your scenario. You shouldn't have any problems using it as a transfer drive.

I've got a number of old APM partitioned firewire drives which I've never updated to GUID and have even recorded them a few times without errors - it's just not recommended by AVID.
__________________
M2 Studios
Wolverhampton, UK
http://www.madhat.co.uk
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 11-04-2010, 07:51 AM
humpback humpback is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Los Angeles, USA
Posts: 304
Default Re: GUID vs. APM partition scheme question

Hi Jeremy,

Since it is so easy today to format drives, and drives and enclosures themselves are so cheap, I'd just create an APM drive, do what needs doing on it and then just reformat it GUID (or preserve it for times when G5s are being used) - after xfering the data, of course. At the school where I work as a Mac Tech, we service over 100 macs iMacs and Mac Pros with PT on them, and for quick re-formats and xfers we use several of these

http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/Newer...ard_Drive_Dock

(we have the Voyager Q's) and keep stacks of raw drives of various formats. I've even been known to use the bay itself as the main connection point for record drives on my rig at home. No glitches, no problems. We've found these enclosures to be really stable, and can even be used to externally boot machines without issue. Just my 2¢!

Best

Nathan
__________________
Studio:
Mac Mini 2.6 GHz i7
16GB RAM
10.8.4/PT 11 an 10.3.7 (CPTK2)
UA Apollo Quad
Outboard:
2 x Summit Audio 2BA-221>TLA 50>EQF-100
2 x dbx 165a
4
x Shadow Hills GAMA

Mobile:
MBPro 2.6 GHz i7
8 GB RAM
10.8.4/PT 11 and 10.3.7 (CPTK2)
http://humpbackmedia.net

Last edited by humpback; 11-04-2010 at 07:53 AM. Reason: Grammar - yes, I check it!
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 11-04-2010, 07:56 AM
jeremyroberts jeremyroberts is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: New York, NY, USA
Posts: 3,020
Default Re: GUID vs. APM partition scheme question

Hi Nathan,

Yes, I have a couple of docks... but for transfer, I prefer to use the AWC Mercury Elite AL Pro case, since they have a quad interface, and are pretty much the sure-thing.

We also have to deliver the production drives to the label when we're done (by contract) and I don't want any FUps for a few $ saved.

I think these drives will be APM.

Thanks for all the guidance on this.
__________________
--Jeremy
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 11-04-2010, 08:53 AM
humpback humpback is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Los Angeles, USA
Posts: 304
Default Re: GUID vs. APM partition scheme question

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeremyroberts View Post
We also have to deliver the production drives to the label when we're done (by contract) and I don't want any FUps for a few $ saved.

I think these drives will be APM.

Thanks for all the guidance on this.
Ah... this changes things. And makes perfect sense. IMO, you're right - APM is the way to go, then.

Best

Nathan
__________________
Studio:
Mac Mini 2.6 GHz i7
16GB RAM
10.8.4/PT 11 an 10.3.7 (CPTK2)
UA Apollo Quad
Outboard:
2 x Summit Audio 2BA-221>TLA 50>EQF-100
2 x dbx 165a
4
x Shadow Hills GAMA

Mobile:
MBPro 2.6 GHz i7
8 GB RAM
10.8.4/PT 11 and 10.3.7 (CPTK2)
http://humpbackmedia.net
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 11-04-2010, 09:20 AM
Rich Breen Rich Breen is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Burbank, CA USA
Posts: 1,927
Default Re: GUID vs. APM partition scheme question

Quote:
Originally Posted by suicune View Post
Whilst this is true for a transfer only drive as the OP specified, I should point out that Digitechsupt have stated quite clearly in a number of threads that using APM partition schemes on Intel mac audio drives and vice versa can/will cause disk errors. If you have to move a drive between PPC/Intel then use APM, but for audio and system drives use APM for PPC and GUID for intel.
Every project I've worked on in the last year has been APM shuttling between outside studios and my place on mostly MacIntels (I'm on a MacPro PT8.1) - I probably have 50 APM drives here, mostly large projects/high sample rate - no issues whatsoever with this formatting.

best,
rich
__________________
http://www.richbreen.com

----------------------------------------
MacPro 5,1 Dual Hex, OS 10.14, PT 2021.3 HDX, Avid HD I/Os and Metric Halo ULN8, Avid C24, 3xS1/Dock.
Also running a 2013 nMP / HDX / S6
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 11-04-2010, 09:23 AM
analog orange analog orange is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Midwest
Posts: 73
Default Re: GUID vs. APM partition scheme question

Just got done pulling my hair out over an upgrade to our 8 drive fibre channel raid. We had been using this raid with a G5 HD system for 4 years and a year ago moved to an Intel machine. It was APM and had no problems. Worked fine on both. HOWEVER, drive size vs the number of partitions can be a tricky variable which I found out the hard way. When we replaced the old drives with larger ones things got bad. What I found works is that you don't want to partition a large drive into more than 3 partitions. When you hit 4 or more all hell can break loose in both GUID and APM setups. We're currently GUID and it works fine on our intel. But we can work off an APM drive as well. Just be careful if you partition.
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 Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
GUID Partition vs Apple Partition Mount Royal Pro Tools TDM Systems (Mac) 2 08-18-2010 07:20 AM
Apple Partition, Master Boot, GUID?????? whitelabellt 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac) 8 10-01-2009 12:34 AM
Partition question neatguys 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Win) 3 03-16-2004 11:38 AM
To partition or not to partition, that is the question bzldzl 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac) 8 03-27-2003 06:59 AM
To partition or not to partition, that is the question. DTJ Digidesign Hardware & Software 2 11-14-2000 10:51 PM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:30 AM.


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