I have to agree with Tom. My C:\ 240gb SSD drive space is slipping away...

not to change the subject, but is there any performance benchmarks that say installing instruments on a separate drive is better? theoretically, I understand there *would* be a difference, but aside from space space restrictions, is there any *significant* advantage to be gained? Sonar does kind of annoy me with multiple install paths and when you're installing VSTs from other companies, they have their own default install locations as well. if you've got OS/Software/Samples/Songs spread across 2-3 drives, it just makes the backups more annoying; you have to perform 3 separate backups and potentially have to restore from three different backups to find something you want.

You pays your money and takes your choice.
I like to "image, image, image"; but that's just the OS, that's one reason I want it "lean and mean".
I do have external backups for my sample drive and for my projects.
2 drives will work, 1 for OS and 1 for projects.But that's bare a$$ minimum IMHO.
I have 5 drives on my office system, at least that in the studio...
 
T

Backup management is my primary reason for wanting choice.  Moving back to Sonar added 10G to my C drive, and that's after more/less successfully coaxing most content onto a different drive.
 
Still - I wonder how much code work is actually being done these days.  Installation flexibility has been a user complaint forever; 10-15 years that I personally am aware of.
 
I guess there is an argument that says that if they're still selling software to people that have been having the same complaints for 15 years ... is there really a need to change anything?
 
Maybe we need a users union to go on strike until they actually open the core code base and make some basic changes.  I wonder how much leverage would a skipped upgrade cycle have ...

mudgel
I just use the (now famous scook's) mklink Dos Command to create a link that allows me to put Multisamples and kits where I want but allowing the installer and the various programs think the data is still in the default location.
 

I was going to ask how, but decided to check google with this search: "site:forum.cakewalk.com mklink" and came up with this post from scook: http://forum.cakewalk.com/m/tm.aspx?m=1120449&p=3
 
Thanks, scook, for the help!
 

Here's another link just giving instructions on mklink (not specific to SONAR)
http://www.sevenforums.com/tutorials/278262-mklink-create-use-links-windows.html
 
 

I tried moving the SI samples to my Sample drive.
Then I changed the paths in the registry. Still did not work.
 
I decided that the studio instruments just were not good enough for me to waste my time.
 
If I need to get some midi out put quick for whatever reason I just use TTS-1.

With Dim Pro and stuff like that-the reg edit is so simple-just change the C:| to in my case E:\

mcdoma2000

mudgel
I just use the (now famous scook's) mklink Dos Command to create a link that allows me to put Multisamples and kits where I want but allowing the installer and the various programs think the data is still in the default location.
 

I was going to ask how, but decided to check google with this search: "site:forum.cakewalk.com mklink" and came up with this post from scook: http://forum.cakewalk.com/m/tm.aspx?m=1120449&p=3
 
Thanks, scook, for the help!
 

Dim pro and such-it's so simple just to change the C:\ to your sample drive , in my case E:\ in the register. Takes all of 2 minutes.
 
So either way I guess. I like the reg edit because it's very plain and I can "see" it
JMHO

Si does work if you change registry paths, but I think there may be more than one to be changed (I've done this and it works fine).  Worth persevering with them, as they're incredibly useful workhorses (well, the bass and strings are anyway).