Pro Tools 9 Mbox pro. What are realistic limitations for sample rate?

[Intuition]

So, been having fun in PT9 mixing my old songs and playing around. Generally everything seems to run great.

So I took the next step. I start a project with sample rate 96000 and plug in to record amplitube2.

I record a few riffs and then start another track to layer up amplitube 2 guitars.

Well, quickly after starting the recording PT9 stopped it error'ing out saying I need to reduce the sample rate.

I didn't think the mBox pro would hit a wall this fast. I mean its rated at 24bit/ 192K resolution and the box says.... up to 96 simultaneous stereo audio tracks.

My first assumption is that I have some settings that are not right for the best throughput. It has to be. I mean, the old firewire m-audio 1814 didn't error out this quickly.

Is running two stereo tracks at 96khz too much to ask? Is that still pretty heavy? If so I may take this back and get an HD system. I really want no trouble recording high end frequency with tons of plug-ins. I figure I could do this now if I set it up right but maybe I am asking too much.

So... here are my system specs.
----------------------------------------------
SiSoftware Sandra

Computer
Model : Supermicro X7DAL
Workgroup : WORKGROUP
Host Name : KC-PC
User : KC

Processor
Model : 2x Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5420 @ 2.50GHz
Speed : 2.5GHz
Cores per Processor : 4 Unit(s)
Type : Quad-Core
Integrated Data Cache : 4x 32kB, Synchronous, Write-Thru, 8-way, 64 byte line size
L2 Cache : 2x 6MB, ECC, Synchronous, ATC, 24-way, 64 byte line size, 2 threads sharing

Computer
Mainboard : Supermicro X7DAL
BIOS : Phoenix Technologies LTD 6.00 12/03/2007
Bus(es) : X-Bus PCI PCIe IMB USB FireWire/1394 i2c/SMBus
Multi-Processor (MP) Support : 2 Processor(s)
Multi-Processor Advanced PIC (APIC) : Yes
Total Memory : 4GB DDR2 FB-DIMM

Chipset
Model : Super Micro Computer 5000X Chipset Memory Controller Hub
Front Side Bus Speed : 4x 333MHz (1.33GHz)
Total Memory : 2GB DDR2 FB-DIMM
Channels : 1
Memory Bus Speed : 2x 266MHz (532MHz)

Memory Module(s)
Memory Module : Kingston 1GB ECC DDR2 FB-DIMM PC2-4300F DDR2-534 (4-4-4-12 2-16-4-2)
Memory Module : Kingston 1GB ECC DDR2 FB-DIMM PC2-4300F DDR2-534 (4-4-4-12 2-16-4-2)

Video System
Video Adapter : NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTS (112 SM4.0 1.25GHz, 640MB DDR3 1.8GHz 320-bit, PCIe 1.00 x16)

Graphics Processor
OpenCL Processor : NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTS (112SP 14C 1.35GHz, 640MB DDR3 1.8GHz 320-bit)
Compute Shader Processor : NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTS (112SP 1.25GHz, 640MB DDR3 1.8GHz 320-bit)
CUDA Processor : NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTS (112SP 14C 1.35GHz, 640MB DDR3 1.8GHz 320-bit)

Storage Devices
WDC WD3200AAJS-00B4A0 (320GB, SATA300, 3.5", 7200rpm, 8MB Cache) : 298GB (D:) (F:)
WDC WD10EACS-00D6B1 (1TB, SATA300, 3.5", 5400rpm, 16MB Cache) : 932GB (C:)
WDC WD3200AAJS-00B4A0 (320GB, SATA300, 3.5", 7200rpm, 8MB Cache) : 298GB (E:)
WDC WD10EACS-00D6B1 (1TB, SATA300, 3.5", 5400rpm, 16MB Cache) : 932GB (V:)
WIBU - CodeMeter-Stick 41.2MB (USB) : 39MB (I:)
HL-DT-STDVD-RAM GSA-H55L (ATA66, DVD+-RW, CD-RW, 2MB Cache) : 7GB (G:)

Logical Storage Devices
Vista64 (D:) : 154GB (NTFS) @ WDC WD3200AAJS-00B4A0 (320GB, SATA300, 3.5", 7200rpm, 8MB Cache)
Content (E:) : 298GB (NTFS) @ WDC WD3200AAJS-00B4A0 (320GB, SATA300, 3.5", 7200rpm, 8MB Cache)
Music (V:) : 932GB (NTFS) @ WDC WD10EACS-00D6B1 (1TB, SATA300, 3.5", 5400rpm, 16MB Cache)
CODEMETER (I:) : 39MB (FAT32) @ WIBU - CodeMeter-Stick 41.2MB (USB)
XP64 (F:) : 72GB (NTFS) @ WDC WD3200AAJS-00B4A0 (320GB, SATA300, 3.5", 7200rpm, 8MB Cache)
New Volume (C:) : 493GB (NTFS) @ WDC WD10EACS-00D6B1 (1TB, SATA300, 3.5", 5400rpm, 16MB Cache)
3.5" 1.44MB (A:) : N/A
Pro Tools (G:) : 7GB (CDFS) @ HL-DT-STDVD-RAM GSA-H55L (ATA66, DVD+-RW, CD-RW, 2MB Cache)

Peripherals
LPC Hub Controller 1 : Super Micro Computer 631xESB/6321ESB/3100 LPC Interface Controller
LPC Legacy Controller 1 : Winbond W83627HF/F/HG/G
Audio Device : Super Micro Computer Enterprise Southbridge AC'97 Audio
Audio Codec : Realtek Semi 0020h
Serial Port(s) : 2
Parallel Port(s) : 1
Disk Controller : Super Micro Computer 631xESB/6321ESB/3100 Ultra ATA Storage Controller
Disk Controller : Super Micro Computer 631xESB/6321ESB/3100 Serial ATA Storage Controller
USB Controller 1 : Super Micro Computer 631xESB/6321ESB/3100 Chipset USB Universal Host Controller #1
USB Controller 2 : Super Micro Computer 631xESB/6321ESB/3100 Chipset USB Universal Host Controller #2
USB Controller 3 : Super Micro Computer 631xESB/6321ESB/3100 Chipset USB Universal Host Controller #3
USB Controller 4 : Super Micro Computer 631xESB/6321ESB/3100 Chipset USB Universal Host Controller #4
USB Controller 5 : Super Micro Computer 631xESB/6321ESB/3100 Chipset USB2 Enhanced Host Controller
FireWire/1394 Controller 1 : ADS Technologies TSB43AB23 1394a-2000 OHCI PHY/link-layer Controller
SMBus/i2c Controller 1 : Intel 5X00/7X00 XMB Ch 21-0 SMBus
SMBus/i2c Controller 2 : Intel 5X00/7X00 XMB Ch 21-1 SMBus
SMBus/i2c Controller 3 : Intel 5X00/7X00 XMB Ch 22-0 SMBus
SMBus/i2c Controller 4 : Intel 5X00/7X00 XMB Ch 22-1 SMBus
SMBus/i2c Controller 5 : Intel ICH SMBus

Printers and Faxes
Printer : Microsoft XPS Document Writer (600x600, Colour)
Fax : Microsoft Shared Fax Driver (200x200)

Network Services
Network Adapter : Intel(R) PRO/1000 EB Network Connection with I/O Acceleration (Ethernet)
Network Adapter : Intel(R) PRO/1000 EB Network Connection with I/O Acceleration #2 (Ethernet)
Wireless Adapter : D-Link DWA-552 XtremeN Desktop Adapter (802.11g (ERP), TKIP, 54Mbps)

Power Management
Mains (AC) Line Status : On-Line

Operating System
Windows System : Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate 6.01.7601 (Service Pack 1)
Platform Compliance : x64

Windows Experience Index
Current System : 5.9
---------------------------------------------------------

[Intuition]

A few questions about the playback engine options.

Is it better to have the full Host engine processors available? Like I have 8, should I have 8 selected in the options? Or is this taking work off of the mBox and placing it on the CPUs?


Should the sample rate be low like 64 because of latency or is it better to have a large sample rate like 256-512?

[chrisdee]

Originally Posted by Intuition

A few questions about the playback engine options.

Is it better to have the full Host engine processors available? Like I have 8, should I have 8 selected in the options? Or is this taking work off of the mBox and placing it on the CPUs?

If you have 8 processors avalible it's reccomended to set it to 7.

Originally Posted by Intuition

Should the sample rate be low like 64 because of latency or is it better to have a large sample rate like 256-512?

When you install PT9 the default H/W Buffer Size is set to 512 samples. I would reccomend you leave it at 512 samples. There is no need to mess with lower settings when you have near zero latency through the Mbox Pro Software Mixer.

[chrisdee]

Originally Posted by Intuition

So I took the next step. I start a project with sample rate 96000 and plug in to record amplitube2.

I record a few riffs and then start another track to layer up amplitube 2 guitars.

Well, quickly after starting the recording PT9 stopped it error'ing out saying I need to reduce the sample rate.

Consider rendering your guitar parts with Amplitube from Audio Suite instead of using rtas.
Any rtas guitar amp emulation plugin will hog up your computer!

I have tried recording many sessions (20 tracks and more mixed with audio/instrument tacks) at 192k without any problems. But then I have rendered the most cpu hungry
effects with audio suite rather than using RTAS.

[Intuition]

Hmm. now even in my old projects the sound is just cutting out. I still see the signal but the mbox pro just stops playing sound from PT9 all together. If I jump to you tube it still plays sound but in PT9 I have to restart to get sound back...

... UGH...

I think PT HD is probably the ony real solution for me. :-/

I am seriously in need of being able to have at least 2 guitar tracks 48KHZ running amplitube2 a single bass track running amplitube 2. A stereo drum tack running reason for drum kits. And a couple tracks for vocals.

I honestly didn't think this was going to be this much trouble for the mbox pro.

I have setup my windows 7 64bit with the getting started guide as well.

I'll run through the guides some more for optimization but I figured I could get more oomph out of this.

It really is having trouble with just amplitube 2 by itself (not even in ProTools but standalone mode) in 96khz mode. I wonder if AMplitube 3 would be more stable since the last amplitube 2 driver update was in 2008?

[Intuition]

Ok, will try these ideas. Thanks.

I just figured by this day and age we would be past having so much trouble running this kind of setup. Not sure how I got away with it for so long with my m_audio box. The M_audio box is looking pretty good now if it didn't pop so much running reason.

[Intuition]

The 7 procs setting seems to have helped. It got through the song ok. Last night I didn't have any of these problems on my old songs. Played through them easily. Added plugs... etc.

For some reason its touchy today. I wonder if its because I started playing with 96khz settings?

[albee1952]

You don't need HD. You need a compatible system that is tweaked properly. Are those XEON's dual or quad core? Are there 2 physical processors on the motherboard? 2GB of RAM is drop dead minimum for any computer, and with 4-8 cores, you should really run 8GB of RAM(in dual channel mode). I also have no idea if the mobo chipset is compatible with Pro Tools, but generally, intel processors want to be paired with intel chipsets. I hope you are not recording to this drive: Music (V:) : 932GB (NTFS) @ WDC WD10EACS-00D6B1 (1TB, SATA300, 3.5", 5400rpm, 16MB Cache) as Pro Tools must record to a 7200 rpm drive(minimum! Doubly important at higher sample rates which move double the data).Also, you are confusing sample rate with buffer. Sample rate relates to how many times per second that the analog audio is sampled. Buffer setting relates to how mu buffer(time) the processor gets to process, before spitting the audio out the other side(buffer settings are from 64, which is very little time[very low latency and takes a lot of horsepower], and 1024(or more0 which is a lot of time(high latency but easier on the processor].

[chrisdee]

Originally Posted by Intuition

I wonder if its because I started playing with 96khz settings?

96kHz does take up more resources, but i dont think that is the problem.
Iv also had a hard time making amplitube work on my system. Iv tried diferent versions (all updated) but no luck.

Maby its just my system or maby there are some problems with amplitube on PT9 and windows 7.
Maby its a combination of the two. I dont know. But the solution for me is to render with audio suite.

[Intuition]

Yes I am recording to the music V: drive. I am going to go buy a 7200 RPM or faster set of drives now. I can't believe I have that same 5400 rpm for the OS too. SHEESH. Going to set this up correctly today.

It is a dual quad core system. total 8 cores. It is intel matched for the mobo.

Ok I have the default buffer setting which I think is 512. But I bet the drives are responsible for the slowdown.