The one point in the GS thread that I'd temper is the criticism of Noel's in-house benchmark, implying that it's not valid. For Noel's purposes, as well as ours, it's adequate. It tells us that Win8 will be OK with SONAR, and that's the main thing that he and we want to know. The idea that he'd rig it to make Win8 look good is preposterous.

 
That would be my criticism of that thread too.  Noel has to have a testing methodology that works during the development phase and I doubt any of that would be meant to be read as any kind of real-world benchmark.
 
Sure he's spoken of the internal test procedures on the blog but I think the context it has been taken in has largely been applied since those comments were recorded.
 
Was anyone seriously expecting W8 to offer a major performance breakthrough on the same hardware?  I certainly haven't been regardless of who's speculated what.  Vin has just highlighted the figures and from what I can gather if I've read the results right is they are pretty much on a par at this stage.
 
I certainly have no intention of going through the growing pains of an OS migration with no clear gains to be had and I'm happy enough that if I don't touch my system for at least 3 years it will still cover any requirements I have for it for any audio application that I'm called upon to perform.
 
For me to migrate from anything there has to be a compelling reason far greater than because 'it's the latest and greatest'. 
 
I personally think that it's brute force advances in hardware that have stolen the march in recent years and whilst there will always be a contingent that truly push the envelope so to speak many of us will be in a position just now of having the hardware resource capabilities to burn for the first time ever in respect of pure audio production requirements.
So while one application may indeed outperform another by different percentages in different scenarios for many it becomes moot if their largest project takes no more than 50% of the resources they have available.
 
Of course maximum efficiency should still be an important concern for developers but for many end users will the minutae and percetage differentials even be noticed?

Well said Jon.

I for one will be sticking with Win 7 until such time as there is a significant benefit in migrating to another OS.

And quite honestly, with 32Gb of RAM and a 64 bit system throughout, it will take a release of Sonar which won't even run on Win 7 to force that decision - in which case I'll probably stay with whatever version of Sonar I was running at the time.

The Windows 8 release has accelerated my laptop purchasing plans. I've just bought a new one while I can still get Windows 7 on it.

I'm assuming the option to upgrade to Windows 8 should I wish will be easier than downgrading. It'll be interesting to see how it goes but for my needs I'm very happy with Windows 7 at the moment.

Bristol_Jonesey


Well said Jon.

I for one will be sticking with Win 7 until such time as there is a significant benefit in migrating to another OS.

And quite honestly, with 32Gb of RAM and a 64 bit system throughout, it will take a release of Sonar which won't even run on Win 7 to force that decision - in which case I'll probably stay with whatever version of Sonar I was running at the time.

That's me as well, Jonesey. I'm perfectly happy with Win 7 and really don't feel like messing around with drivers and conflicts. If I were to do that, I'd have Jim Roseberry build me another box and take care of all that for me. I used Win 98 SE until I just couldn't run some of the super cool programs that were coming out. I used Sonar 2 for the longest time and one day decided to get a new box that had XP with Sonar 5 on it.
 
So I missed out on Sonar 3 and 4. But, in this field...when you have a well oiled machine and you can actually get work done without messing around with something for the sake of having the latest and greatest, sometimes less is more and I'm definitely in that camp and will remain there until I can't function.
 
It's a breath of fresh air to fire up my boxes and get work done without messing with anything other than the occassional gremlin once in a blue moon. To me, you can't put a price on that and I feel the most comfortable in that realm. If Win 8 blew the doors off of 7, I'd STILL not get it because I'm so content with what I have. If I didn't buy anything else for the rest of my life, I'd be a happy camper. I felt that way with Sonar 2 on Win 98 SE, and felt that way with Sonar 5 and Sonar 8.3. We get the X series like that and I'll probably never buy another pc or anything. LOL!
 
I got a friend that's a tweaker. Tweaker meaning...the dude is forever messing with his pc trying to get more out of it. When I go to see him, we spend 6 hours trying to fix him every time. It's to the point where I don't go over there anymore because I'm tired of fixing him up only to have to fix him up again. LOL! I just can't see living my life that way due to having the latest and greatest stuff all the time. ;)
 
-Danny

FastBikerBoy

mike_mccue


You might learn something Karl.

Don't be afraid of it... 

I'm always learning have no fear.

I asked about real life total round trip latency on the ZED in another thread here... and not a single person choose to answer.

It appears, from your response, that you wish to appear as if you do not care about a stat like that.

Not only do I appear not to care, but................. brace yourself for the shock........ I actually don't care.

I bought it, plugged it in, set it up so it works without hassles and use it. I'm far too busy making music and having fun to get bogged down in what is to me a completely meaningless bunch of figures.

Life's far too short to take it as seriously as you do Mike, if you want some really good advice, chill out a bit and stop trying to convince others (or me at least) that I need to be as uptight as you are. I'm living the dream, making enough money for my needs and having fun along the way.

One day it'll all be over and I'm pretty sure when my end does come I'm not going to be thinking I wish I'd have spent more time trying to find out if my chosen interface's claimed round trip latency is as accurate as claimed or if they got it wrong by 3 or 4 msecs. Fill your boots if you want but don't expect me to join you.

Well said FBB. 

This is one of the main things that I cannot understand in this forum. I don't have enough time to create the music I want to. That is my pain. Others seem to have hours to debate PC mathematics.

For me, a computer is a means to an end =  to make music. I agree it's important to get that computer up to spec for this task but come on.   

RTL, ZED, R2-D2 is not what makes the magic... 

I used Win 98 SE until I just couldn't run some of the super cool programs that were coming out. I used Sonar 2 for the longest time and one day decided to get a new box that had XP with Sonar 5 on it.

Lol... I look after computers as a bit of a side line and believe it or not one embroidery company are still running all their machines on a Windows 98 based system.

The owner doesn't like the new versions of the software he uses so he's still on version 3 that won't run on anything more advanced than Windows 98. He even had me build him two completely new machines with Windows 98 all installed ready to go should his current one go pop. I built those about 5 years ago and even then tracking down drivers was a nightmare.

I reckon if his current computer lasts another 5 and each spare lasts ten each, he'll still be on Windows 98 in 25 years time. He his by his own admission a "bit of a dinosaur". 

I guess it just goes to show if something is working for you it is possible to stick with it. There's plenty of embroiderers going pop in the current market place but he's busier than ever working, rather than chasing the latest and greatest embroidery software.

FastBikerBoy

I used Win 98 SE until I just couldn't run some of the super cool programs that were coming out. I used Sonar 2 for the longest time and one day decided to get a new box that had XP with Sonar 5 on it.

Lol... I look after computers as a bit of a side line and believe it or not one embroidery company are still running all their machines on a Windows 98 based system.

The owner doesn't like the new versions of the software he uses so he's still on version 3 that won't run on anything more advanced than Windows 98. He even had me build him two completely new machines with Windows 98 all installed ready to go should his current one go pop. I built those about 5 years ago and even then tracking down drivers was a nightmare.

I reckon if his current computer lasts another 5 and each spare lasts ten each, he'll still be on Windows 98 in 25 years time. He his by his own admission a "bit of a dinosaur". 

I guess it just goes to show if something is working for you it is possible to stick with it. There's plenty of embroiderers going pop in the current market place but he's busier than ever working, rather than chasing the latest and greatest embroidery software.

I really think that's important. I too had to update some of my software due to OS upgrades and let me tell you, some of the new stuff definitely doesn't impress me like some of my old stuff did. They try to make things better and lose what made them great to begin with.
 
Ah man, this is why I never take part in the science stuff. I appreciate and respect those that do, but for me, if something works...it works. If it doesn't I try and remedy the problem to the best of my ability and usually fix it 98% of the time. I had one of my new boxes recording audio a bit late...simple fix was to adjust the manual offset by 73 samples for that card. Works like a charm.
 
At the end of the day man, half the scientists (or whatever they want to call themselves) either produce absolute crap audio projects or don't share at all. Most of them have 0 credibility with me...so I'm with you....I simply don't care. Numbers, math, bah...it's all moot to me. I'm a crappy wannabe engineer that's making a great living from it without knowing or giving a rats @ss about science or numbers and I'm proud. :) Again, that's not to take away from anyone that has done some serious testing that can make a difference. I just really can't be bothered with it. I'd rather play my guitar.
 
The biggest scientific mouths in my experience are *USUALLY* the biggest failures when it comes to creating their "incredible scientifically based audio" songs. There are of course a few that totally deliver the goods...but it's few and far between really. Just think about it a little and then go listen to some of the tunes created by know-it-all scientists....you'll hate most of their work and you'll be looking for the others that don't exist or they have some reason for not being able to share. :)
 
-Danny

Ah man, this is why I never take part in the science stuff. I appreciate and respect those that do, but for me, if something works...it works. If it doesn't I try and remedy the problem to the best of my ability and usually fix it 98% of the time. I had one of my new boxes recording audio a bit late...simple fix was to adjust the manual offset by 73 samples for that card. Works like a charm.
 
At the end of the day man, half the scientists (or whatever they want to call themselves) either produce absolute crap audio projects or don't share at all. Most of them have 0 credibility with me...so I'm with you....I simply don't care. Numbers, math, bah...it's all moot to me. I'm a crappy wannabe engineer that's making a great living from it without knowing or giving a rats @ss about science or numbers and I'm proud. :) Again, that's not to take away from anyone that has done some serious testing that can make a difference. I just really can't be bothered with it. I'd rather play my guitar.
 
The biggest scientific mouths in my experience are *USUALLY* the biggest failures when it comes to creating their "incredible scientifically based audio" songs. There are of course a few that totally deliver the goods...but it's few and far between really. Just think about it a little and then go listen to some of the tunes created by know-it-all scientists....you'll hate most of their work and you'll be looking for the others that don't exist or they have some reason for not being able to share. :)
 
-Danny

I know exactly what you mean Danny. Some can talk a good recording and the techniques required but can't apparently practice it. I guess regurgitating stuff from books and websites is easy though.

I've learned an awful lot from this site by listening to those such as yourself, that obviously do know their stuff. I gauge who is worth listening to by having a listen to the stuff that they produce. If I think it sounds good and is something I want to aspire to myself I'll listen to the advice and comments that are given out, even if I then find some of it doesn't work for me. The Walter Mitty character(s) though I just ignore.

I'm glad some have time to be measuring some of these things but I'm far too busy earning a living, learning and enjoying myself with music to waste time like that. As I'm getting busier and busier with the audio/video side of my life I'm hoping at some point I can make the jump to music being my full time income. That day seems to be getting closer, whether it actually ever arrives is another matter though.

Lets not beat about the bush here we're specifically talking about Mike McCue right?
 
Where he was totally off the mark here about the latency issue when he was being so condescending in his latest pontification was that he was talking about audio not syncing because of a hidden amount of latency that isn't reported to the DAW.
 
He was actually talking absolute crud when he insisted you might learn something from tolerating his pig-headed manner.  It doesn't matter a jot if your interface is adding 25 ms of unreported latency it wont make a bit of difference because the figure is constant.  The next track you put down will line up exactly with the first one (provided the sample rate hasn't been changed).
 
As I already mentioned earlier in the thread the only time it would matter is if you are looping back an the RTL is mis-reported and like I said it will only be by a matter of a few samples and the required connection is so easy to work out using CEntrance for an ASIO driver or by manually working out the offset required using a WDM driver it's hardly worth mentioning.
 
The man is a complete blagger, trying to make himself sound more impressively knowledgeable than he actually is.  If he actually bothered to listen rather than constantly bloviate it is indeed he that might learn something, rather than keep side-tracking unsuspecting people into his penchant for irrelevance under the guise that because he's saying it it must be important.
 
I'm not surprised he laments some of the knowledgeable folks that have left here as their leaving has exposed him as being the empty vessel he is.
 
My two cents.  The only reason I mention it here is because his relishing the thought that he had the upper hand over Karl earlier in the thread was completely out of order IMO.

LOL Jonbouy...........I am to subtlety what you are to sledgehammers.