Korg Forums

biggrime wrote: After reading this loonng thread(I read most of it) This is the reason I like hardware. People talking bout this software that software. You got to have this many cores. Oh no the software only supports a certain amount of core. Give me a good workstation that allows me to program and make that keyboard my own. This is why I own a Korg m3. I do agree that software sounds good and you have a lot of options. Some people may enjoy figuring out all this computer stuff. I did it for years. However now I want to make music. I am a musician not a nerd.
Oh by the way I have a 1 core computer lol

I think in your case it make sense to just stick to a keyboard, but not for me. I create orchestral mock-ups and even if you own all the keyboards in the universe, you won't have access to convincing articulations and techniques to record something. You need specialized libraries for that kind of job. Keyboard is great if you want to record quick ideas though.

SSDs are the BEST choice for sample streaming. Period.


Check out OCZ RevoDrives. Depending how deep your pockets are - they go from 400-1400 MB/s! That's an OBSCENE speed for sample streaming!

I use a regular Caviar Black at 7200RPMs, i do projects up to 40 Tracks and
using multiple Sampled Libraries at the same time...never ran into a problem.

EvilDragon wrote:SSDs are the BEST choice for sample streaming. Period.


Check out OCZ RevoDrives. Depending how deep your pockets are - they go from 400-1400 MB/s! That's an OBSCENE speed for sample streaming!

The dual SSDs I am using in my MacBook are ridiculously fast but hey also cost almost more than the MacBook. The new Macs can take advantage of the 6g too. Can't wait for thunderbolt external storage for high speed external storage.

Assyrianpianist wrote:

biggrime wrote: After reading this loonng thread(I read most of it) This is the reason I like hardware. People talking bout this software that software. You got to have this many cores. Oh no the software only supports a certain amount of core. Give me a good workstation that allows me to program and make that keyboard my own. This is why I own a Korg m3. I do agree that software sounds good and you have a lot of options. Some people may enjoy figuring out all this computer stuff. I did it for years. However now I want to make music. I am a musician not a nerd.
Oh by the way I have a 1 core computer lol

I think in your case it make sense to just stick to a keyboard, but not for me. I create orchestral mock-ups and even if you own all the keyboards in the universe, you won't have access to convincing articulations and techniques to record something. You need specialized libraries for that kind of job. Keyboard is great if you want to record quick ideas though.

Yea if you are really trying to do orchestral stuff that have a bunch of articulations then software would be the way to go. I produce back tracks for artist to sing on. I do not need all that. Give me some nice strings, brass, woodwinds I can work with and I am good. Then by some chance I need something more real I will get players for that.

You can get much less expensive SSD's, which are smaller (128 gig, for example), and which are perhaps not the "latest" technology....yet are still blistering fast, for far less money. And as EvilDragon said....there is NOTHING better for sample streaming than SSD. The "latest" tech would be more relevant to using SSD as a system drive...than it would to using it as a sample streaming container. The previous gen tech, which is now heavily discounted, is unbelievably fast for sample streaming.

However, you can build up a system with these smaller drives at a much lower cost, and put only your most intensive samples on them. I have found that you can split almost any library this way......for example...in EW Hollywood Strings, which is generally accepted as perhaps the most intensive library on the market today....it contains patches with varying streaming requirements. There are some trimmed down "light" patches, which are intended to work on slower systems....some mid patches for moderate systems...and then the real HOGs which require the fastest hardware. Even though the full library is utterly huge altogether.....you can move only the HOG's onto your SSD's (to save valuable cost and space....at the SSD cost per gigabyte), and leave the rest of the library, which requires less power to run, on a conventional HDD. Those "lighter" patches are indistinguishable on the HDD vs SSD. All that is required is to point PLAY (the interface) to the file locations the first time you select them. It will remember the directory assignment thereafter.

Same can be done with almost any library.....sometimes using an alias, but usually the interface will remember the location. So even though you may have 500 gig of samples, I bet if you carefully review what is what, you may only need 250 gig of it to run from SSD....thus 2x128 gig SSDs will suffice, and cost much less, and the resulting performance will be virtually equal to having purchased 500 gig of SSD.

...

> You can run Windows NATIVELY

Are you sure about this?

From their website:

"Run Windows programs like they were native to your Mac"

"Use Run Windows programs like they were native to your Mac"

It's been a while since I ran Parallels. It was so buggy that I gave up. Maybe it's way better now.

Hi Sina,
I was actually thinking about that a while ago, but when i read the horror stories about it on Avid's website, I totally dropped the idea. Maybe it's improved now, but still i'd be more comfortable with running windows on a PC.

You can run parallels, meaning you pretty much run Windows within a Mac environment - while you're actually running Windows, Windows doesn't have full access to system resources and thus it doesn't qualify as "natively". You can, however, use Boot Camp (a computer boot up application) to create a dual boot on your Mac, which means you can choose at start up whether to run Windows or OSX. That would be the native running of Windows which Sina is talking about.

You can, however, with some googling, do the same on a PC, ever since Mac switched to Intel CPUs. Not that I would know anything about that *cough* google "hackintosh" *cough*. Steve Jobs isn't overly enthused with the idea of people running his precious OS on hardware costing a third as much.

RonF wrote: Same can be done with almost any library.....sometimes using an alias, but usually the interface will remember the location. So even though you may have 500 gig of samples, I bet if you carefully review what is what, you may only need 250 gig of it to run from SSD....thus 2x128 gig SSDs will suffice, and cost much less, and the resulting performance will be virtually equal to having purchased 500 gig of SSD.

That's my plan. To get a few smaller size SSDs and load only certain instruments.

Aside from these SSD drives, what do you think of this drive:

http://www.google.com/products/catalog? ... CFEQ8wIwAA#

...

Sina, I think generally "natively" in the OS-world is construed to mean "with full access to hardware resources and no go-in-between". That's not the case with parallels. While running parallels, your MacOS is still there in the background, and you can always close parallels and shut down Windows. You can't really "shut down" MacOS (though it might appear that way) because parallels is running on it. Running Windows natively requires booting in Windows (through Boot Camp for instance) and therefore of course buying and installing Windows.

And using a dual boot system to run both OS's can also be done on a PC.

SanderXpander wrote:And using a dual boot system to run both OS's can also be done on a PC.

For a much cheaper price than getting a Mac, too.

FYI. Komplete 8 is out. I received mine via UPS today.

Only $399 for the cross grade as a Maschine user.