PC Audio Labs Rok Box MC64

[NightPick]

Hello all. Talk about opening Pandora's box. I have been building audio PCs for years. Until recently, I would describe my experience as nightmarish, software issues, hardware issues, upgrade issues, and so on. It would have been nice to have a forum like this dedicated to optimizing the PC Audio experience years ago.

 

It is extremely generous for PC Audio Labs to allow their pro review to be used for this type of forum, and so my thanks goes out to them. I would recommend that musicians who want a worry free PC DAW experience, buy a system from them. The time you will save, and the customer service is priceless.

 

First off, I recommend the Windows 7 Backup tool. I have used it to image SSDs and it worked flawlessly. No need to install extra software anymore. Here's a link:

 

http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows7/products/features/backup-and-restore

 

In my experience, the more RAM the better. 16GB can be had for less than $80 today. which brings up another important issue, namely timeliness. Everything we discuss in this forum will become dated, and obsolete. So when someone asks, how much RAM should I have? The answer is, as much as you can afford, and as much as your motherboard can handle. When buying RAM for your system, make sure it is compatible with your motherboard. Double check, there are so many similarly named types of RAM that it is easy to get mixed up. Always make sure the voltage is compatible also.

 

Let's go through a build. I am building a custom Audio PC. I already have the hardware, but let's say I did not.

 

First question:

 

What processor should I choose?

 

The answer is, the best you can afford.

 

Intel or AMD? Your thoughts please.

 

Your processor choice will limit your motherboard choices.

 

We've already covered RAM.

 

Hard Drives? 7200 RPM at least, the bigger the cache the better. At this time most drives used for audio will be at least SATA II (3GB/s). Your thoughts please. I will go into hard drives more in depth as I choose my file structure and storage design.

 

For this build I am going to use an SSD for my Windows drive. In my experience having the OS on a dedicated SSD, improves performance. Your thoughts please.

 

Onboard graphics or dedicated video card? Your thoughts please.

 

Power Supply? Your thoughts please.

 

Cooling? Your thoughts please.

 

Noise? Your thoughts please.

 

I will give you the hardware specs for this build next time.

 

Sheesh, we haven't even got to the OS yet. Maybe next time.

[PCAL-FRED]

 

I've done it with the PCAL x64 Vista laptop, and it does seem to make a difference. I haven't tried it with the desktop MC64 yet, but I can give it a try. Only issue is it's already so fast that if it becomes 20% faster, I'm not sure I'd notice any difference.

 

 

While we've seen an increase in CPU performance allow one computer to do the work of many and at lower ASIO latency, I think the most noticeable performance boost in the last 3-4 years has been the use of an SSD for the Operating System install. It's a pricey upgrade, but an SSD OS drive can make a Core i3 system feel like an i7 with a 7200rpm OS drive.

 

Craig, remind me which audio interface you use, but what sample buffer size and ASIO latency do you use with your Rok Box MC 64 with the new Intel SandyBridge-E processor?

[Jorge7]

SSDs are attractive for a number of reasons, speed, silent operation, shock resistance, low heat production, etc, but some have been problematic when using image backup and restore. Are there any specific brand and model # SSDs that you have tested and recommend for the OS drive that allow very easy and reliable image backups and restores? OCZ? Intel? Kingston? Sandisk? Any other model of Crucial besides the M4? Any that don't require resizing the partition after restoring and don't have issues with alignment? According to the very variable info I have seen on forums, brand seems to matter when doing image restores, but no one seems to want to recommend a specific model that restores as well as a spinning HD.

[Anderton]

Hey everybody - I'm baaaack from the Frankfurt Musikmesse, and editing videos as fast as I can. Of course, I'm using the PCAL computer and have noticed several things.

 

1. I loaded all my raw videos into my SSD drive. I may be imagining things, but it sure seems like it's smoothing out an already smooth process.

2. The PCAL is really quiet until the fan kicks in during long renders, mostly of HD material. With the SSD doing the hard work, I really don't have a lot of hard drives spinning. The overall decrease in ambient noise makes long editing sessions a real pleasure. I'm considering adding a sound absorbent panel hanging down from my desk (the computer is under the desk, but raised off the floor). There would still be plenty of room for ventilation around the back, so no worries there.

3. I mentioned the rendering earlier, but wow, what a difference it makes over the course of doing dozens of videos. It was very cool when I did a video and it rendered in a fraction of the time it rendered in before, but it's even cooler when you spend a whole day editing videos and realize how much time was saved over the course of the day.

4. Sony introduced several new effects to Vegas Pro a couple revs ago that are great, but were always a pain to use because they brought the system to a crawl. And by that I mean a sloooow crawl. With the PCAL, it's as if they're no different from the older effects. The difference is HUGE. I have no idea what about the new machine is making such a difference, but I suspect it might be the RAM or the faster data handling in and out of RAM? I dunno, but so far, that is the most dramatic difference in terms of taking something that was virtually unuseable in real-time and making it a smooth, fast real time process.

 

Finally, I imaged the drive before I left, and props to PC Audio Labs for their online support materials. Very "hand-holding" stuff, and I have my emergency disk and image safely squirreled away

[Anderton]

 

Craig, remind me which audio interface you use, but what sample buffer size and ASIO latency do you use with your Rok Box MC 64 with the new Intel SandyBridge-E processor?

 

 

I'm primarily using the Roland Octa-Capture for "everyday" applications. I'm typically using 64 or 96 sample buffers when recording, however I'm still in "hit the deadlines" mode so I haven't done significant testing to see how low I can go with real-time processes like amp sims. Also, the projects I've been doing since getting the PCAL have been unusually complex (translation: the timing could not have been better!!) so I'm tending to be a little conservative rather than pushing the machine too hard. Once I start moving away from video somewhat and getting back into audio, I'll have a lot more info for you.

[Anderton]

Nightpick, you were trapped in a spam filter and I didn't see your post had been moderated until tonight. I approved it so it's visible now.

 

I agree whole-heartedly that PCAL is being very generous with their help here. Of course, it's to their advantage too because it's obvious they know that they're doing...as you say, if you want a hassle-free computer experience, that's indeed their expertise. In fact, I'd say the paramount difference with the new machine is that it just kind of melts into the background, both literally (noise levels) and figuratively (to quote another company, "it just works"

). It's interesting to go to the Sonar forums and see people complain about how Sonar crashes, is unreliable, etc. Then a whole bunch of posts follow from people who basically say "I have no idea what you're talking about, I don't have any problems" and then you see they're using a custom integrated computer, not something off the shelf. All I can say is that ALL my programs mysteriously became vastly more reliable when the Rok Box MC64 set up shop in my studio! I guess it has good diplomatic relations with software.

 

Anyway, I don't know if this thread is really about "how to build your own PC" so I would certainly understand if Fred would politely refrain from going in that direction. However, I do think your questions are a great springboard for him to answer why PCAL made the design decisions they did - e.g., Intel instead of AMD. Now, some of that might get into politics - Fred doesn't seem like the kind of guy who would ever want to trash a company - but I'm sure he'll answer to the extent that he feels is appropriate, and I respect any limits within which he needs to operate.

 

I think that the simpest way to look at it is that obviously, PCAL has the recipe down for how to make a Windows machine that's trustworthy and cost-effective. So I think the main value would be if they can elaborate on particular decisions they've made that have allowed this to happen, without of course revealing any trade secrets. I know some of what makes their machines what they involves operating system-based decisions, like mentioning that the machines ship with system restore off. That kind of advice is invaluable, as is the info on backing up and such.

 

It's good to be home and participating again, but it's even better to be popping the Frankfurt Musikmesse videos out with such ease. Maybe I'll even get to sleep a few hours this time around

[Anderton]

Stupid question: I was curious if the computer had a USB 3.0 interface. So, I looked in Device Manager, and there was an entry for Renesas Electronics USB 3.0 Host Controller. But I gotta say, one USB port looks pretty much the same to me as any other...is there some super-secret identifying mark that indicates which ports are 3.0 and which aren't? Or are they all 3.0?

[Bookumdano2]

 

I was curious if the computer had a USB 3.0 interface.

 

 

I'm still wondering what kind of worthwhile 3.0 peripherals are even out there. The first computer I had with usb on it was in 1997 or so, but I don't remember having anything to use with it till about five years later.

 

I wish I could get behind ssd, but I can't... yet. I can't accept the price (compared to my choices for spinning drives), don't quite understand the concept of trim, and REALLY don't like the concept that when the ssd drive dies, it dies like NOW. with absolutely no warning. A mechanical drive can die like that too, but for me, it doesn't often happen that way.

 

Is water cooling another way to get quieter operation? I have six or so pcs down below, all the sides off, central quiet fan blowing across all of them, and whatever low noise there is, I'm used to it.

 

But I've wondered about water cooling. Only for gamers? Are water systems quieter yet? Necessary or useful at all for the newer fast systems like Craig has?

 

I'm all for having a quiet environment. I could move the computers over one room, but it's a hassle.

[Anderton]

The main reason I asked is because I just received a USB 3.0 portable drive, a client needs uncompressed videos and they would be way too big to transfer online. So I'm going to bounce to the hard drive, and wanted to make sure I was using the right port.

 

Hopefully it will be faster and overall More Wonderful, although if it has to throttle down and transfer at 2.0 speeds, I'll cope.

 

I do remember trying to transfer a video using USB 1.1. I started sometime during the French revolution, and it ended just about when the Berlin wall fell. It was sloooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooower than wi-fi at a Motel 6.

[PCAL-FRED]

 

The main reason I asked is because I just received a USB 3.0 portable drive, a client needs uncompressed videos and they would be way too big to transfer online. So I'm going to bounce to the hard drive, and wanted to make sure I was using the right port. Hopefully it will be faster and overall More Wonderful, although if it has to throttle down and transfer at 2.0 speeds, I'll cope. I do remember trying to transfer a video using USB 1.1. I started sometime during the French revolution, and it ended just about when the Berlin wall fell. It was sloooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooower than wi-fi at a Motel 6.

 

 

USB 3.0 ports are typically blue. USB 2.0 ports are either black or red. Intel has yet to integrated USB 3.0 into their chipset, which is why there are a number of 3rd party USB 3.0 chipset manufacturers. I expect USB 3.0 audio interfaces to hit the market when Intel integrates them into their chipset (my guess is Q4 2012 or Q1 2013). USB 3.0 is best for hard drives, keyboards and mice. I don't recommend USB 3.0 ports for dongles or audio/MIDI interfaces.

[Anderton]

USB 3.0 ports are typically blue. USB 2.0 ports are either black or red.

 

Wow, you know all the secret handshakes, don't you?!?

 

USB 3.0 is best for hard drives, keyboards and mice. I don't recommend USB 3.0 ports for dongles or audio/MIDI interfaces.

 

Your post was just the answer I needed. I've now shifted the right peripherals to the right ports. Thanks, Fred!

[Anderton]

So...time for a USB 2.0 vs. USB 3.0 test. It's somewhat unscientific, but you'll get the point.

 

I used two separate external hard drives, one USB 2.0 and one USB 3.0. Both are Western Digital 7200 RPM drives. The test was rendering part of a Vegas video file to disk (about 10 seconds of uncompressed AVI, or 2.33GB).

 

The USB 2.0 drive took 53 seconds, and the USB 3.0 drive took 34 seconds. I think that pretty much tells you all you need to know

[Anderton]

A USB 3.0 anomaly: When I booted up the computer, it didn't see the drive. I re-started...no go. Went into Device Manager, and there was the dreaded exclamation point and it said the "service couldn't start."

 

I disabled the USB 3.0 Host Controller then re-enabled in, and it worked fine. Go figure.

[Anderton]

Hey Fred - got a question for you. Even though I've installed a lot of programs, the Rok Box boots up much faster than previous machines, especially my XP one with the eight cores. I'm curious as to why - it can't just be the speed of the machine, can it? Do you disable things that make for a faster boot? Do you have any secret mojo tricks for faster booting? Or do MS really get it together with Windows 7?

[PCAL-FRED]

 

Hey Fred - got a question for you. Even though I've installed a lot of programs, the Rok Box boots up much faster than previous machines, especially my XP one with the eight cores. I'm curious as to why - it can't just be the speed of the machine, can it? Do you disable things that make for a faster boot? Do you have any secret mojo tricks for faster booting? Or do MS really get it together with Windows 7?

 

 

The fast boot-up time is more a combo of the speed of the machine and Windows 7. But, our secret mojo tricks optimize Windows 7 for audio performance.

[G Haines]

Ordered a PC Audio Labs machine because I saw that Craig A. spoke so highly of them. Arrives soon, and I'll be glad to share my experiences. I use it for commercial purposes and am reasonably rough on machines.

 

I wanted to add that in mastering circles the rumor is SSDDs can't take the constant write/erase/re-write that audio systems employ. The rumor is we would burn up a SSDD many times faster than a "normal" user. Can anyone confirm/deny that? Thanks, GH

[Anderton]

Ordered a PC Audio Labs machine because I saw that Craig A. spoke so highly of them. Arrives soon, and I'll be glad to share my experiences. I use it for commercial purposes and am reasonably rough on machines. I wanted to add that in mastering circles the rumor is SSDDs can't take the constant write/erase/re-write that audio systems employ. The rumor is we would burn up a SSDD many times faster than a "normal" user. Can anyone confirm/deny that? Thanks, GH

 

I've asked Fred to weigh in with an expert opinion, but here's my take and bear in mind some of this may already be out of date...SSDs face their greatest challenges with recording, not playback. Hard drives with decent-sized memory caches can deposit data on a disk very rapidly—several hundred microseconds for typical 4 kilobyte random writes (without caching, it’s several milliseconds). SSDs are limited to two types of technology: dynamic RAM and flash memory. Dynamic RAM is fast, but expensive both in terms of initial cost and power consumption. As a result flash memory is the preferred technology for SSDs, and this immediately brings up two bottlenecks.

 

The first is that flash memory cells have to be erased before you can re-write to them. Normally this wouldn’t be a big problem except that erasing is done to blocks of RAM, not individual cells, and this takes time. I first noticed this phenomenon when I recorded to a brand-new USB stick with nothing stored in it, and it recorded plenty of tracks. Over time, operation seemed to slow down and I couldn’t figure out why—until I realized that all the memory had been written by that point, so anything I recorded had to first erase existing data. There are ways around this, like “cordoning off” part of the flash as a sort of buffer reserved for high-speed writes. Another technique employed in Windows 7 is to “know” when files are deleted, whereupon it can erase the SSD pages holding the files and return them to virgin condition (it also does this when formatting an SSD; in fact, Windows 7 has multiple tweaks and optimizations to accommodate SSDs).

 

The second bottleneck is that flash requires error correction to compensate for the slippery nature of flash-based storage, and error correction takes time. There’s really no way around this until/unless the fundamental nature of flash memory physics changes.

 

Another problem involves reliability. While we’re used to thinking of solid-state devices as having an almost infinite life, flash memory cells wear out. The SSDs that last the longest avoid re-writing to the same cells over and over, and instead distribute the writing over different cells at different times. This is not a trivial task, and even if done perfectly, you really can’t expect an SSD to last more than several years (then again, hard disks don't last as long as they used to...). However, given that I believe most SSDs are rated to read and write millions of cycles, you're probably set for a while

[fsr76]

 

Ordered a PC Audio Labs machine because I saw that Craig A. spoke so highly of them. Arrives soon, and I'll be glad to share my experiences. I use it for commercial purposes and am reasonably rough on machines. I wanted to add that in mastering circles the rumor is SSDDs can't take the constant write/erase/re-write that audio systems employ. The rumor is we would burn up a SSDD many times faster than a "normal" user. Can anyone confirm/deny that? Thanks, GH

 

 

SSDs do wear out from constant write/erase/re-write faster than a 7200rpm drive would, assuming standard wear-and-tear on both.

 

The majority of our customers use SSDs for the OS drive and for storing a particular sample library that takes a long time to load up on a 7200rpm drive or 7200rpm RAID.

 

The questions I like to ask is:

 

1. Do you want your audio files to load up really fast in your mastering program?

 

2. Do you mind that an SSD might wear out faster than a 7200rpm drive (assuming standard wear-and-tear)?

 

3. Do you have the funds to purchase an SSD and will the speed of an SSD allow you to work faster, thus making more money in less amount of time?

 

4. Does the type of audio work that you do necessitate the use of fast SSDs?

 

Having said all that, I have an 80GB SSD for my OS install. It makes the system feel very responsive to mouse clicks, and that's what usually counts at the end of the day. Most SSDs come with at least a 3 year warranty if they break down, so don't forget to invest in a backup hard drive as well.

[fsr76]

 

Ordered a PC Audio Labs machine because I saw that Craig A. spoke so highly of them. Arrives soon, and I'll be glad to share my experiences. I use it for commercial purposes and am reasonably rough on machines. I wanted to add that in mastering circles the rumor is SSDDs can't take the constant write/erase/re-write that audio systems employ. The rumor is we would burn up a SSDD many times faster than a "normal" user. Can anyone confirm/deny that? Thanks, GH

 

 

 

And lastly, if you use your computer to earn a living, the computer you purchase today will most likely not be the same one you're using in 3-5 years.

[Anderton]

Hey Fred - If I wanted to add Firewire 800 capaibilities to my system, what's the best option in terms of adding a card? Would that be the way to go?

[daningjewelry]

i'm really do not good at this sapect.

several month ago i tried to use some software like yours but seams the system does not fit.

finally get it off.....so disappeared.

[fsr76]

 

Hey Fred - If I wanted to add Firewire 800 capaibilities to my system, what's the best option in terms of adding a card? Would that be the way to go?

 

 

Adding a Firewire 800 card would be the best way to go. But either USB 3.0 or eSATA would be faster than Firewire 800. I suspect you have an older external hard drive with Firewire 800 capabilities....

 

Two cards to choose from:

 

PCIe version: SIIG NN-E38012-S3

 

PCI version: SIIG NN-830112-S2

[Anderton]

 

Adding a Firewire 800 card would be the best way to go. But either USB 3.0 or eSATA would be faster than Firewire 800. I suspect you have an older external hard drive with Firewire 800 capabilities.... Two cards to choose from: PCIe version: SIIG NN-E38012-S3 PCI version: SIIG NN-830112-S2

 

 

Actually it's because the Universal Audio Apollo interface prefers FW 800. It will run at half the bandwidth with FW 400.

 

This is more of an anticipatory question because currently, it runs only on the Mac. But they're supposed to have it Windows-compatible this Summer. Interestingly, my Mac has a FireWire 800 port but UA says that with my particular Mac Pro desktop (quad core Intel), it can really only transfer at FW 400 speeds. This was the case with their Satellite DSP farm, so I'm not surprised.

 

Thanks for the info!