Please, what means HEAD and OTOH
----- Original Message -----
From: "Monty" <xiphmont@...>
Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2004 11:12 PM
Subject: Re: [Audacity-users] trouble with big projects
> On Thu, Oct 14, 2004 at 10:41:18AM -0700, allen haim wrote:
> > hi,
> > does anyone have experience working with a project of about 700MB - 1GB?
> Yes, HEAD contains quite a bit of work for large scale projects, where
> large scale is >1G (I've used it with projects as large as 60G).
> > my song consists of about 25 tracks, some mono and some stereo. at this
> > point, i simply can't work on it any more, which is really depressing.
> > scrolling takes 3 or 4 seconds. just hitting play takes about 10
> > of intense hard drive activity. then, the computer can't keep up with
> > the tracks, and they all fall out of sync. so i press stop, and it takes
> > about another 10 seconds to stop.
> > i have a Compaq Presario, 1.8 GHz, 1/2 GB RAM, and i have the same
> > in both WinXp and Linux.
> 1/2GB is not very much, not for operations this large; that memory
> directly affects how efficiently you computer can handle disk
> operations. The processor itself should be fine. However, the 'disk
> hammering' activity you refer to should be better handled by HEAD.
> Note that the new DirManager in HEAD can only work its file balancing
> magic on fresh projects (old projects are loaded in a compatability
> Other things to be concerned about: Audacity is nearly always a
> disk-bound application. Make sure the drive you're using is set up
> properly (lots of read ahead, big cache, using DMA, etc). If, for
> some reason, it's set up to use 'PIO' instead of DMA or UDMA, there's
> your problem right there.
> If you're not afraid of spending $100 to make a large dent in a disk
> performance problem, consider a second disk set up as a striping RAID
> (on a seperate channel from the first disk!), which will give you
> twice the disk throughput. A 25 track project (where each track is
> stereo) will be trying to pull a little under 10M/sec off the disk;
> yes, most disks can keep up wit that kind of sequential access, but it
> is trying to pull it a) through a filesystem and b) from different
> files. This is where having enough RAM for a sizeable disk
> buffercache helps.
> This also does bring up something worth mentioning (to Dominic et al):
> There appears the be some operation pre-play that is linear according
> to number of tracks. When I have 30-50 tracks open and press play,
> even with the new DirManager is is substantially slower to even
> acknowledge the click that with one track. I assume some amount of
> pre-caching is going on?
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: IT Product Guide on ITManagersJournal
> Use IT products in your business? Tell us what you think of them. Give us
> Your Opinions, Get Free ThinkGeek Gift Certificates! Click to find out
> Mailing list: Audacity-users@...
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, use the form at the bottom of this web page: