Anyone using Solid State Hard Drives yet?

Recording Techniques, People Skills, Gear, Recording Spaces, Computers, and DIY

Moderators: drumsound, tomb

User avatar
@?,*???&?
on a wing and a prayer
Posts: 5804
Joined: Wed May 07, 2003 4:36 pm
Location: Just left on the FM dial
Contact:

Anyone using Solid State Hard Drives yet?

Post by @?,*???&? » Mon Jan 24, 2011 12:04 pm

I see Apple is using OCZ Technology drives in their newer computers. Anybody have anything to report on them yet?

Their stock looks like a value:
http://www.nasdaq.com/aspx/dynamic_char ... symbol=OCZ

Anybody using one of these with an older Mac?

Should I order a few up and install them in a G4 with IDE adapters.

User avatar
antilog
george martin
Posts: 1359
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2003 4:34 pm
Location: Baltimore MD
Contact:

Post by antilog » Tue Jan 25, 2011 10:12 am

I am not using any in older Macs, but am using them for OS drives in newer PC laptops/netbooks, and whenever I build a new DAW PC. They are noticeably quicker, and in laptops they make good sense due to lack of mechanical parts to get knocked around.
"Artists to my mind are the real architects of change, and not the political legislators who implement change after the fact." William S Burroughs

http://www.electronmedia.org
http://www.antilog.org

User avatar
iamthecosmos
pushin' record
Posts: 205
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2008 4:20 am

Post by iamthecosmos » Tue Jan 25, 2011 11:30 am

I've heard very varied reports about the performance of these, has anyone used them for recording 16+ tracks?

User avatar
antilog
george martin
Posts: 1359
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2003 4:34 pm
Location: Baltimore MD
Contact:

Post by antilog » Tue Jan 25, 2011 11:38 am

Just to clarify - I do not record to SSD. I prefer to use large capacity HDD for audio recording, and modest-capacity SSD for the OS / applications.
"Artists to my mind are the real architects of change, and not the political legislators who implement change after the fact." William S Burroughs

http://www.electronmedia.org
http://www.antilog.org

User avatar
Snarl 12/8
ghost haunting audio students
Posts: 3323
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 5:01 pm
Location: Right Cheer
Contact:

Post by Snarl 12/8 » Tue Jan 25, 2011 1:59 pm

It seems to me like a modern HDD wouldn't be the bottleneck on a G4 system. Even if the HD was lickety split that system would still feel lumbering by today's standards. I've never had good luck upgrading any component of an old system more than a "generation" or two, OS, HD, cpu, video card, even if it is supposedly compatible. It tends to work best if you stick with stuff that's the same vintage as the overall system.

And I run really, really old systems. Win2k on my DAW, for example. And that replaced a G4 running 10.3 as a significant upgrade.

Once you start upgrading fundamental components that haven't failed yet (to eek out performance) you are always, always better off squeezing a little more dough out of your wallet for a brand new system. Or a new to you system that's at the level you're going for.

Blarg.
Carl Keil

Almost forgot: Please steal my drum tracks. and more.

exalted wombat
alignin' 24-trk
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 1:15 pm

Post by exalted wombat » Sat Jan 29, 2011 10:34 am

iamthecosmos wrote:I've heard very varied reports about the performance of these, has anyone used them for recording 16+ tracks?
People use them as system drives. OS and programs load satisfyingly quickly. Once loaded, it's difficult to see how there would be any effect on how the application actually RUNS

User avatar
Snarl 12/8
ghost haunting audio students
Posts: 3323
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 5:01 pm
Location: Right Cheer
Contact:

Post by Snarl 12/8 » Sat Jan 29, 2011 12:09 pm

exalted wombat wrote:
iamthecosmos wrote:I've heard very varied reports about the performance of these, has anyone used them for recording 16+ tracks?
People use them as system drives. OS and programs load satisfyingly quickly. Once loaded, it's difficult to see how there would be any effect on how the application actually RUNS
What if the program in question's main job is to write a whole lot of shit to the disk. The disk could very well become the bottleneck at that point. A sustained 16+ tracks (reading and writing at the same time, maybe) at 96khz/24bit is a lot of shit to write to a disk.
Carl Keil

Almost forgot: Please steal my drum tracks. and more.

exalted wombat
alignin' 24-trk
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 1:15 pm

Post by exalted wombat » Sat Jan 29, 2011 12:30 pm

Snarl 12/8 wrote:
exalted wombat wrote:
iamthecosmos wrote:I've heard very varied reports about the performance of these, has anyone used them for recording 16+ tracks?
People use them as system drives. OS and programs load satisfyingly quickly. Once loaded, it's difficult to see how there would be any effect on how the application actually RUNS
What if the program in question's main job is to write a whole lot of shit to the disk. The disk could very well become the bottleneck at that point. A sustained 16+ tracks (reading and writing at the same time, maybe) at 96khz/24bit is a lot of shit to write to a disk.
True. And if disk performance of a traditional drive WAS being a bottleneck, a farster drive would make the difference between the system functioning and not functioning. But if the traditional drive WAS coping, sufficient is sufficient. Faster potential performance would make no difference.

When SSD devices become the cheaper option for large size drives, sure, we may as well use them. for everything. But if a system CAN cope with streaming 16 tracks in real-time, a faster drive can't add anything.

I'm more interested in hearing how a SSD performs with multiple streams of different sorts of data - audio and samples. Maybe sample playback will become less a matter of having ample RAM to cache everything and be about direct streaming from REALLY fast drives!

User avatar
thegeek
takin' a dinner break
Posts: 152
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 11:15 am

Post by thegeek » Sat Jan 29, 2011 2:35 pm

take a look at the speed tests on this system... would def be applicable to DAW situations... not always practical but def applicable.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=96dWOEa4Djs
theGeek

Springload - Juice Rock
Tremor Christ - Pearl Jam Tribute

Shouldn't you be practicing?

User avatar
@?,*???&?
on a wing and a prayer
Posts: 5804
Joined: Wed May 07, 2003 4:36 pm
Location: Just left on the FM dial
Contact:

Post by @?,*???&? » Fri Feb 04, 2011 8:52 am

Snarl 12/8 wrote:
exalted wombat wrote:
iamthecosmos wrote:I've heard very varied reports about the performance of these, has anyone used them for recording 16+ tracks?
People use them as system drives. OS and programs load satisfyingly quickly. Once loaded, it's difficult to see how there would be any effect on how the application actually RUNS
What if the program in question's main job is to write a whole lot of shit to the disk. The disk could very well become the bottleneck at that point. A sustained 16+ tracks (reading and writing at the same time, maybe) at 96khz/24bit is a lot of shit to write to a disk.
My understanding is that the buss speed will be the bottleneck here, but error -9073 in Pro Tools says perhaps not.

User avatar
@?,*???&?
on a wing and a prayer
Posts: 5804
Joined: Wed May 07, 2003 4:36 pm
Location: Just left on the FM dial
Contact:

Post by @?,*???&? » Fri Apr 08, 2011 11:47 am

fyi, OCZ Technology stock is at $9.91 right now.

In January 2011 it was at $5.80.

Did you guys take the stock tip?

DCrippa
ass engineer
Posts: 40
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 7:03 am
Location: USA
Contact:

Post by DCrippa » Wed Apr 13, 2011 9:40 am

wow you could have made a good amount with that one!
Just because you can doesn't mean you should.

fedexnman
gimme a little kick & snare
Posts: 98
Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2004 7:23 am
Location: mobile al

Post by fedexnman » Wed Apr 13, 2011 10:09 am

ssd is the future , still kinda pricey though + $120 for 60 gb drive , i would'nt want to go any smaller than 60 gb , even if the os takes only 20 gb of space . 120 gb and 128 gb seem to be the top sellers at newegg ive noticed . i dont own one .. yet ! 60gb ssd is like the same price of getting 2qty 1tb drives , the price is why i havent pulled the trigger on one .
is it beer 30 yet?????

DCrippa
ass engineer
Posts: 40
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 7:03 am
Location: USA
Contact:

Post by DCrippa » Thu Apr 14, 2011 7:55 am

I just like the fact that there are no moving parts - that seems to me to be a huge plus for durability... Though I'm still waiting as well - because I read about some read write errors that can happen... don't know enough about it.
Just because you can doesn't mean you should.

User avatar
casey campbell
buyin' a studio
Posts: 927
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 11:21 am
Location: hammond, louisiana

Post by casey campbell » Wed Apr 20, 2011 1:27 pm

DCrippa wrote:I just like the fact that there are no moving parts - that seems to me to be a huge plus for durability... Though I'm still waiting as well - because I read about some read write errors that can happen... don't know enough about it.
one thing that people don't know is that you can write only a certain amount of times on an ssd. it's alot, but there is still that limit. yea, i didn't believe it at first either, but it's true.

here's a something i copied from another site:

"This one major limitation of the SSD technology presents some problems:

Only 4Kb blocks can be erased at a time.
Changes to data cannot be overwritten, but is rather written as ?new? data
Blocks can (and usually do) have cells that are not used thus wasting ?space?

Depending on the operating system that a SSD is being used, a way around wasted space is through usage of ?cache?. This is done by writing smaller files or fragments of larger files to a cache and then actually written to the blocks. This helps to reduce wasted space.

Other limitations of SSD technology are:

Wear ? only a certain amount of write/erases can be performed before data corruption
Longevity ? SSD?s cannot be stored for significant amount of time (data will be lost through dissipation of the stored electrons)
After heavy usage SSD?s, will degrade over time and lose their performance"

http://blog.superuser.com/2011/02/10/th ... f-the-ssd/

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests