Re: [linux-audio-user] kernel in ram partition.

New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Other groups

Subject: Re: [linux-audio-user] kernel in ram partition.
From: Jason (hormonex_AT_yankthechain.com)
Date: Sun Nov 04 2001 - 08:47:08 EET


I disagree about the cable length thing. professional studios regularly
run tens of yards of cable all over the place between their mic sources,
the recording consoles and the rooms that they have their tape machines
in. So long as everything is
balanced, interference is at a minimum, and you just need to makesure that
the cables are twisted properly ( like in a commercial high quality snake)
to make sure that you don't get too much cross talk between the wires. I
don't see why working with a digital recording source in an analogous
position to a studer deck would be any different.

For instance, at the Berklee Performance Center in Boston- which I use as
an example because I know how long their cabling runs are- the mix desk is
about fifty feet above, and 200 feet in front of the stage where the
microphones are. There are also tie lines that run from, I think, the
front of house mixer,
drop another thirty feet or so down to an old Sony recording console,
whose
tape outs can feed tie lines which can go to an SSL G series and A studer
2" machine in another room another 40 feet away, or so.
There was a record that was taped there by the Klezmer Conservatory
Band for Rounder a few years back, and it sounds wonderful.
 So I doubt just having a snake to another room for harddrives would
really be that unacceptable. particularly considering the considerable
gains of not having to listen to the damn drives any more.

On Sat, 3 Nov
2001, [iso-8859-1] Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:

> Daniel James wrote:
> >
> > > you might want to fiddle with ramdisks for libs and applications
> >
> > What sounded interesting to me was the idea of doing all your file
> > access from a ramdisk which enabled the use of diskless workstations
> > (and therefore silent boxes for recording or audiophile
> > environments.) RAM is so cheap now, it's almost a joke.
> >
> > So the theoretical system might be:
> >
> > 1. diskless workstation with eg. 1 GHz processor (liquid cooled), 1GB
> > RAM, Gigabit ethernet, multi-channel soundcard.
> >
> > 2. Conventional NFS server outside studio, also with gigabit ethernet
> > or whatever.
>
> nfs is dead slow. you won't even be able to saturate a 100mb link
> with nfs, so you can go cheap with the network hardware.
> but don't even think about playing back or recording 32 channels of
> digital audio via nfs.
>
> i'd say forget it.
> AFAICT, the only viable solution is to have external a/d in the
> recording room, go digital to a server in the machine room (which
> has a hammerfall or something like that), and control the machine
> with a diskless x-terminal.
> this might even be possible for analog soundcards, but for pro
> studios, the extra cable length is probably not acceptable.
>
>

-- 
YankTheChain.com - You can pretend we're not here. That's what I do.

,


New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Other groups

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Sun Nov 04 2001 - 08:43:07 EET