Help me to decide on upgrading please

Post by **Neil B** » Mon Jul 31, 2006 12:55 am

I'd be grateful for some serious feedback from fellow "Z" members:

My PC has reached retirement age. It's a Pentium III 700 running Windows 98, with Pulsar II and 3.1c
Software-wise I use Cubase VST 5.1/32, Wavelab 4, Recycle and a few other applications.

First of all I have to say that I'm happy with the software and I'm also on a budget.
I'm not one of those people who upgrades for the sake of it, nor am I the sort of person who wants to buy every new VST synth/effect/widget that comes out.

My philosophy is that when I can produce music to a standard that you guys were achieving 4 or 5 years ago (on a similar setup), and when I've learned and exhausted everything I've got in my armoury, then I may get a bigger wallet out.
In the end it's a hobby which gives me pleasure.

Basically, I'm more or less comfortable, but there are problems to keeping the setup that I have:

The PC is underpowered.
Synths such as Vanguard (some patches), Superwave etc overload the CPU at times, particularly on big pads.
I can't upgrade Atmosphere to the latest version because 98 isn't supported by it.
There are a few small additions I'd like to buy but again 98 isn't supported.

So, onto my questions.
I see the need to upgrade my PC and also to move to XP:

1: I've heard that 5.1/32 has latency problems and other glitches under XP - is anyone happily running this version of Cubase under XP?
2: Same for Wavelab 4 - is it stable under XP?
3: what are the benefits of upgrading 3.1c to 4.0?
4: What else should I be getting for my Creamware side of things (Modular III etc)?
5: Finally I suppose I should ask for a decent PC spec for my setup, with a bit of room for growth and taking into account that I'm on a budget.

Thanks to anyone who can help

dawman · Post by **dawman** » Mon Jul 31, 2006 1:26 am

I would most definately buy NF3 w/ AMD. The costs have dropped to a ridiculously cheap level due to the new Intel's sucsess, and putting a new kick ass machine together now is very smart thing to do. Or the P4/865 series is also dirt cheap.

Long Live The Queen,

Jimmy V.

hesnotthemessiah · Post by **hesnotthemessiah** » Tue Aug 01, 2006 9:18 pm

On 2006-07-31 01:55, Neil B wrote:

1: I've heard that 5.1/32 has latency problems and other glitches under XP - is anyone happily running this version of Cubase under XP?

Hi Neil. I am using Cubase VST5.2 PB1 Beta 7 under Windows XP - (not the "32 version" though). The only real problems I have with my Cubase are:-

1) having to reload the Syncrosoft License Control software a couple of times a month because Cubase can't find my license key stored on my LPT port dongle (not too much of a prob - just a small pain in the arse when it happens).

2)having to select "reset devices" everytime before I record and then the timing going more and more out of sync the longer I record. By "out of sync" I mean the notes I play are not actually entered into the Cubase sequencer arrange page (or whatever edit screen I use) as I play them - they are added later and later the longer I record for. This is a well documented phenomenum on the Cubase VST5 forum and has something to do with different clocks being used to sync the midi or something (check the Cubase forum for details - I need my bed!!). There are two modes in which you can set your PC - mine is set in ACPI which is the mode where the problem occurs (sorry, I can't remember the other mode!). This has all been fixed with Cubase SX having some sort of preference or something to solve the problem. Cubase VST5 "Professional Music Creation and Production" has not been updated to solve the problem.

Sorry if this is all a bit vague or doesn't even relate to your questions. I have just finished my night shift and am heading for my bed..............

[ This Message was edited by: hesnotthemessiah on 2006-08-01 22:20 ]

Post by **Neil B** » Tue Aug 01, 2006 10:34 pm

Thanks for the tip about 5.2.
I've read that it's an unsupported beta version so I'll stick to 5.1r1 (mind you they aren't supporting this either are they?)

Enjoy your sleep

Post by **garyb** » Wed Aug 02, 2006 12:27 am

sx, scope and xp are VERY nice and worth it compared to 5.1 and 98, but that's just my opinion.

for cheap, i still think a 3.2ghz or so p4 prescott or northwood and an intel d865perl still can't be beat, but there are a number of other good choices as well. i don't see how you can lose in an upgrade at this point, but yes, i agree that it's best to not upgrade without a good reason....

tgstgs · Post by **tgstgs** » Wed Aug 02, 2006 4:08 am

look at cw summerspezial now for upgrade!
im happy with:
asus p4p800se
samsung 4gb ram
2x 74gb raptor HDs
matrox dualhead
liteon dvd RW
in a chieftech case with 450W supply
1 fan for each HD
3 fans blowing in case 3 fans out
3 scope (pulsar1,2,srb)

i tried a worst case szenario with only 1 scope ( pulsar1) not tweaced XP all active in bios (lan usb on board sound)
i installed from officePC
internet asusprobe soundmax photoshopcs pinnacle studio10 xpoffice tvcard nero suite etc. . .
i take a pcislot where Pulsar1 shares irq with usb and still was able to record 18 audiotracks have no more IO on that card;
only thing i dont get to work was the soundcarddest only distortion comming out;

good luck with your new toy
greetings from vienna

alfonso · Post by **alfonso** » Wed Aug 02, 2006 5:00 am

VST 32/5.1 works perfect on XP here. I don't use rewire or VST plugs, so I don't know of every possible situation, but 5.1 going out through separate busses is great.

BTW, I'm a legitimate owner of SX 3.1 too, but I often end using VST32, I prefer it visually and as workflow. Maybe when I finish the work I import the song in SX if I need some of it's editing features.

hesnotthemessiah · Post by **hesnotthemessiah** » Wed Aug 02, 2006 10:51 am

Hi there Neil. Here is a link to the Cubase VST5 forum about installing Cubase VST onto a Windows XP machine and the problem of using ACPI XP PC mode (rather than the Standard PC mode). This problem can occur with certain soundcard/motherboard/sequencer combinations. I run Cubase VST5 on a Windows XP machine in ACPI mode with an ABIT BD7II(RAID) motherboard and two Creamware Scope Professional cards. I should have installed in Standard PC mode! Checkout what mode would be best for you before installing Windows XP.

LOW99 gives very good advice here:-

http://forum.cubase.net/phpbb2/viewtopi ... sc&start=0

[ This Message was edited by: hesnotthemessiah on 2006-08-02 11:54 ]

Post by **Neil B** » Sat Aug 05, 2006 2:39 am

Many thanks everyone for all your tips and replies.

I’m confident now after lots of trawling and asking around that Cubase 5.1r1 will run okay on XP.
I certainly don’t want to shell out £500 for SX3 when I’m comfortable with 5.1 for my needs, my hobby.

I’ve digested everyone’s replies and would like to pose this final question:

My current PC is a Pentium III 700 with 512 Mb ram.

I’ve sieved through all the recommendations and propose the following spec (in simple terms):

P4 3.6 Ghz Intel.
1 Gb mem DDR (or should I go for 2 Gb?)
256 Mb PCI express graphics
2* 250Gb Sata II 7200 rpm hard drives
Obviously case, dvd R/W, usb ports etc.
XP Home

Scope Project 4.0 (later 4.5)

Question: Is this set up going to get me out of the prehistoric age? Will it be as different to me as changing from dial-up to Broadband by comparison?

Any final (simple) tips appreciated

ChrisWerner · Post by **ChrisWerner** » Sat Aug 05, 2006 3:19 am

darkrezin · Post by **darkrezin** » Sat Aug 05, 2006 3:22 am

It will be a decent improvement over a P3 700. I don't really rate P4's though personally... P4 CPU's and chipsets have always been dog-slow and prone to bandwidth problems for me. If I was buying a system now I'd be looking into either:

1. Nforce3/Athlon64 (this is what I built a few months back and it screams)

2. Intel 965/Core2Duo (this is the cutting edge)

Shroomz~> · Post by **Shroomz~>** » Sat Aug 05, 2006 4:54 am

This machine we're using for the net is an old P3 733. We used to run it (years ago) with 2 DSP factory cards, Cubase & lots of other apps' & from the experience of moving over (quite some time ago) to a good NF2 mobo + Athlon 2200XP, the major difference apart from raw CPU power for VST was the ability to run lots more apps at once. For example, we couldn't run 4 or more serious apps simultaneously on the P3, but can on the faster Athlon without a problem. You'll also notice a massive difference in CPU processing speed when applying certain tasks to audio that require processing. You also really notice the big processing power difference in a big way with serious 2 & 3D design apps, which run & process slow as hell on the P3.

Post by **Neil B** » Sat Aug 05, 2006 7:03 am

My computer shop have just given me the final bit of gen:

Memory is 2* 1Gb in dual channel mode - can Cubase 5.1 recognise this?

The motherboard is a Gigabyte GA8I-915P

Thanks for your help again - will make my final decision by Monday afternoon.

Post by **garyb** » Sat Aug 05, 2006 9:12 am

i'd go with the 955, 965 or 975 chipsets over the 915....i remember some having the same problems with the 915 as with early nforce4, too many resources dedicated to the pci-e bus....

[ This Message was edited by: garyb on 2006-08-05 10:12 ]

Post by **Neil B** » Sat Aug 05, 2006 11:57 pm

Gary B

Thanks for your timely intervention at the 11th hour.

Now, me being a simpleton (!) can you explain the effect of this problem with a 915/Nforce 4 please in layman's terms (only if you have the time of course).

Thanks

Post by **garyb** » Sun Aug 06, 2006 12:35 am

well, i can't give you any solid knowledge. all i know is of second hand reports in the tech forum. it seems that the early pci-e motherboards suffered from very poor pci performance and instability. the pci-e bus was suspected as the prime problem spot(as i remember..). it's possible later bios updates allow proper operation with those chipsets as the latest nforce4 users report proper operation(not with dual core, however).

i have personal experience with the 955 and 975 chipsets, as does andreD(considerably more than me), and i know those work well....

i'm not saying that the 915 won't work, but i would choose one of the other 9xx chipsets to be safe, especially since there's not nessesarily a price difference.

Post by **Neil B** » Sun Aug 06, 2006 1:39 am

Thanks for the rapid response Gary.

I'm glad I asked for it in layman's terms and not the technical explanation

Seriously I AM a real Luddite so at the risk of embarrasing myself to the whole world (who cares)
What is the net effect of a poor PCI performance?
What does the pci thingy do?

Oh I am SOOOOOOOOOOO red in the face

Post by **garyb** » Sun Aug 06, 2006 12:22 pm

the scope card is on the pci bus. the performance of the card is directly related to how well the computer handles traffic on that bus.