[RWP] getting a mac for reaper what's the deal??

Fri May 16 08:17:18 EDT 2014

Hahaha, following the links Overloud gave Roy to the Juce forum, I can
tally up dates with emails in my sent folder and link them to specific
conversations with a fair few of those developers. Small world! Really
good to know that those people are doing what they say they'd do, but
a bit disappointing that none of the Juce devs seem to be
investigating beyond acknowledging that it'd be nice if it happened.
I'm gonna bump both those threads and throw some links to info on how
to hook into a few accessibility APIs, seeing as them not knowing
where to start seems to be the first hurdle.

Thanks for the links Hadi, interesting reading for sure.

Scott

On 5/16/14, Patrick Perdue <patrick at pdaudio.net> wrote:
> Does Jim do stuff with memory voltage, timing and such? I have a DAW
> that uses a Gigabite motherboard with not so awesome DPC latency, though
> it generally runs OK for the projects I do. Looked around on some forums
> where people with my board were able to get values in the low single
> digits (2/5) under Windows 7, so was wondering if there is something to
> that.
> I turned of HPET, which helped slightly.
>
> On 5/15/2014 3:38 PM, Chris Belle wrote:
>> Well, problem is with many of these new motherboards, things like
>> defeating the hpet and such are no longer an option.
>>
>> And mac ofcourse uses a custom uefi and you can't tweak it.
>>
>> Well, if you had the right tools, you cold tweak anything, but the
>> average person can't tweak it.
>>
>> 100 is right a the break point, I had a student who got a machine from
>> Jim, but Jim isn't always thke fastest because he's a one horse
>> operation, and this cat got impatient and sent his machine to someone
>> else to fix.
>>
>> Well it dcame back, and the machine that used to run at 30 or less with
>> dpc ran at 100 and all his sonar projects wouldn't run anymore unless he
>> froze tracks and such.
>>
>> so yes, you can get by with middling dpc latencies, but you will be
>> bothered with resource management much more than if your machine ran at
>> 30 or lower.
>>
>> The motheboards that Jim uses allow for some tweaking, in respect to
>> Jim, I won't give out a parts list, but I'm sure if you went and talked
>> to him, he's very forth comming, and especially if you buy stuff from
>> him, he isn't so close and precious like some of these daw makers are.
>>
>> Like that guy over at adk,
>> Scot what ever his name is, him and me went round and round because they
>> never would tell me what parts I was getting when I was going to buy a
>> machine from dancing dots, I still bought ct from them but went to Jim
>> for my hardware.
>>
>> I think it's a customer's right to know what your getting, and there's a
>> certain amount of trust implied and a relationship when you work with
>> someone like that.
>>
>> JIm always tells me anything I want to know, and though he states 80
>> dollars for consulting fees, he gives away much more knowledge than most
>> of these guys ever do and doesn't charge exra for overclocking and such,
>> and all the little things and doesn't put a 10 percent charge on his
>> hardware, when you get from him you just pay a straight out fee
>> for his time, I priced it out and it works out to about 4 or 5 hours of
>> time, but he often works longer on it, but he does the burn in test, and
>> anything you want as a courtesy,
>> you just can't beat that.
>>
>> I've bought about 6 machines from him now and all my students are
>> getting from him, but don't get in a hurry sometimes it takes him a
>> month or so to get caught uup.
>>
>> but this cat sells machines to everybody, people like Harry Potter's
>> crew, and bb king's daughter, and you just wouldn't believe who.
>>
>> And he's not biassed either, the man has mac products, and he's used amd
>> processors when they were better way back,
>> my one and only gripe about his builds is that we difer just a little
>> bit in our ideas about burners.
>>
>> I tend to like archival grade burners and he thinks off the shelf models
>> are ok, which for the most part they are, but I have older clients who
>> still like cds, and some of them have older cd players, some vintage
>> models from the land of audiophyle gear,
>> which likes cds burned slow and the latest offerings from lg and samsung
>> don't go down below 16 or 24, but the sony's and some of the pioneer
>> bluray burners and such will go down to 8 and 4x, which makes a big
>> difference.
>>
>> Also I use theese military grade stone disc m disc which are a
>> non-organic non dyte rock llike substance for archival purposes, and
>> these special sony burners, which are needed to burn them, and he can
>> get those, but i like to work with duplication specialty folks for that
>> kind of thing.
>>
>> But that's a very small part of the deal, and he knows about all of it,
>> I'm just a bit of a hardware snob when it comes to burners.
>>
>> for mos folks it wouldn't matter a hill of beans.
>>
>>
>> On 5/15/2014 2:18 PM, Scott Chesworth wrote:
>>> Yup, no doubt that the knowledge that those chaps designing purpose
>>> built DAWs have wracked up is valuable man. I haven't owned a purpose
>>> built and used that day in day out yet, but I've tracked in studios
>>> running machines that were purpose built from two different venders
>>> and they were both solid as a rock. In this case though, where build
>>> quality was the first thing that sprung to mind, you'll probably pick
>>> up on why I recommended what I recommended from your time tutoring.
>>>
>>> BTW, I've been keeping an eye on the DPC latency of that Boot Camped
>>> Macbook Pro I posted about a few days ago using the tool you
>>> recommended. Seems to be running somewhere around 80 to 100. Could be
>>> worse, but it could be better too. Haven't found time to read up on it
>>> and see if there's anything I can tweak to get that lower yet, so if
>>> you know of a good starting place, feel free to lay it on me.
>>>
>>> On 5/15/14, Chris Belle <cb1963 at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>> Scot, you can read a lot about dpc latencies on the net, a great
>>>> machine
>>>> with lots of power will be a dog with a daw if processes are demanding
>>>> too much time in the kernel, and a lesser well tuned machine with the
>>>> right parts and software will run circles around this.
>>>>
>>>> Don't mean to sound like a know it all, but I've been doing this lots
>>>> of
>>>> years, and been there and done that, and went through the torture with
>>>> my students.
>>>>
>>>> That high dpc latency is what kills more windows machines for daw work.
>>>>
>>>> YOu want 30 m us or less Jim's machines get in the single digits or
>>>> lower double digits, your usual windows machine is usually about 250 or
>>>> 300, you can do things on some motherboards like turn of high
>>>> precission
>>>> event timer and get lower dpc, but it's much more than that.
>>>>
>>>> these daw vendors know what to tweak and they keep up with all the
>>>> motherboard revissions, and it's something even experienced pc builders
>>>> don't often know about.
>>>>
>>>> I went through it with a custom shop,
>>>> several times, them when I got my first purpose built daw, which didn't
>>>> cost really anymore than the shop machine it was like going from a
>>>> buggy
>>>> airplane that sort of work to a rocket ship which could go off planet
>>>> without getting out of 2nd gear.
>>>>
>>>> I did 100 plus tracks in xp without having to freeze tracks, it made me
>>>> smile when these guys over on hrs were talking about 30 tracks being a
>>>> heavy load for their imacs,
>>>>
>>>> windows can be a real piece of crap, but with the right stuff and
>>>> properly configured it's obscenely powerful.
>>>> that's the beauty and the other side of windows people don't realize,
>>>> our hardware choices allow us to pick beter not just bargain, and the
>>>> os
>>>> allows to tweak in ways the mac can't easily be done.
>>>>
>>>> But with all that, the mac still has many things to drool over, if we
>>>> weren't blind and didn't have to take thing on an accessibility and
>>>> useability first option, the world would be our oister.
>>>>
>>>> but that's just the way it is out west.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 5/15/2014 12:18 PM, Scott Chesworth wrote:
>>>>> Ah, gotcha. Used to be the case, but not so much nowadays is the
>>>>> answer to
>>>>> that.
>>>>>
>>>>> That's a pretty powerful machine you're running there already, so I
>>>>> guess the first thing to do is ask what isn't working out with the
>>>>> current setup?
>>>>>
>>>>> On 5/15/14, trahern culver <sound.warrior20 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> I just thought the hardware would be better.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Does any one have recommendations for good laptops to run reaper on
>>>>>> kind
>>>>>> regards trey.
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> RWP mailing list
>>>>>> RWP at reaaccess.com
>>>>>> http://reaaccess.com/mailman/listinfo/rwp_reaaccess.com
>>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> RWP mailing list
>>>>> RWP at reaaccess.com
>>>>> http://reaaccess.com/mailman/listinfo/rwp_reaaccess.com
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> RWP mailing list
>>>> RWP at reaaccess.com
>>>> http://reaaccess.com/mailman/listinfo/rwp_reaaccess.com
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> RWP mailing list
>>> RWP at reaaccess.com
>>> http://reaaccess.com/mailman/listinfo/rwp_reaaccess.com
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> RWP mailing list
>> RWP at reaaccess.com
>> http://reaaccess.com/mailman/listinfo/rwp_reaaccess.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> RWP mailing list
> RWP at reaaccess.com
> http://reaaccess.com/mailman/listinfo/rwp_reaaccess.com
>