28 Jan
2003
28 Jan
'03
3:20 p.m.
Greetings:
I'm configuring a system for a friend whose musical needs are quite
simple, but in the course of things he asked me which motherboards are
preferred by Linux audio people. I confess I'm not very savvy about the
subject, but I figured some of you folks would lend your opinions
regarding suitable boards for either amateur or professional use. Of
course I'd also like to know if there are particular boards I should
avoid. TIA !
Best regards,
== Dave Phillips
The Book Of Linux Music & Sound at http://www.nostarch.com/lms.htm
The Linux Soundapps Site at http://linux-sound.org
28 Jan
28 Jan
5:12 p.m.
On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 02:14:03 -0500, Dave Phillips wrote:
Greetings:
I'm configuring a system for a friend whose musical needs are quite
simple, but in the course of things he asked me which motherboards are
preferred by Linux audio people. I confess I'm not very savvy about the
subject, but I figured some of you folks would lend your opinions
regarding suitable boards for either amateur or professional use. Of
course I'd also like to know if there are particular boards I should
avoid. TIA !
Avoid VIA KT333 based boards if you want to be able to rip cds with
cdparanoia, I had to add another IDE card to my machine. Other than that
its a good chipset though.
- Steve
5:34 p.m.
On Tue, 28 Jan 2003, Steve Harris wrote:
Avoid VIA KT333 based boards if you want to be able to
rip cds with
cdparanoia, I had to add another IDE card to my machine. Other than that
its a good chipset though.
If you're going IDE, avoid Maxtor like the devil. I run a lab and their
harddrives DIE. They start beeping(!!!) during startup and won't mount.
Maxtor is cheap, but sucky.
Taybin
--
http://www.piratesvsninjas.com
5:49 p.m.
On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 04:27:10PM -0500, Taybin Rutkin wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jan 2003, Steve Harris wrote:
OTOH Seagate Barraccuda IVs are highly recommended, quiet and fast. I've
not had any reliability prblems yet...
- Steve
Avoid VIA KT333 based boards if you want to be
able to rip cds with
cdparanoia, I had to add another IDE card to my machine. Other than that
its a good chipset though.
If you're going IDE, avoid Maxtor like the devil. I run a lab and their
harddrives DIE. They start beeping(!!!) during startup and won't mount.
Maxtor is cheap, but sucky. 
6:04 p.m.
On Tue, 28 Jan 2003 21:42:17 +0000
Steve Harris <S.W.Harris(a)ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:
It seems as though all full-size IDE disks are going to pot. Our campus
computer store has recently swithched to using 2.5" drives in their
desktop boxes because those still have a 3-year warranty.
James
--
James Tappin, O__ "I forget the punishment for using
james(a)tappin.me.uk -- \/` Microsoft --- Something lingering
http://www.tappin.me.uk/ with data loss in it I fancy"
If you're
going IDE, avoid Maxtor like the devil. I run a lab and
their harddrives DIE. They start beeping(!!!) during startup and
won't mount. Maxtor is cheap, but sucky.
OTOH Seagate Barraccuda IVs are highly recommended, quiet and fast. I've
not had any reliability prblems yet... 
6:17 p.m.
On Tue, 2003-01-28 at 13:42, Steve Harris wrote:
OTOH Seagate Barraccuda IVs are highly recommended,
quiet and fast. I've
not had any reliability prblems yet...
I'm getting a replacement Barracuda IV 60GB for one that died on me a
couple weeks ago. I think it was just a fluke: it didn't go out
gradually the way a dying hard drive would. I had been doing some OS
installation and I had the case open with stuff hanging out. It died
abruptly overnight.
I heartily echo Steve's sentiments about them being quiet and fast,
though they are a bit warm.
Josh
29 Jan
29 Jan
2:05 a.m.
On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 09:42:17PM +0000, Steve Harris wrote:
On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 04:27:10PM -0500, Taybin
Rutkin wrote:
My IT day job is a place that uses tons of IDE drives. I've been
building RAID arrays out of IDE since the days when 8.4G was huge.
There really isn't a correllation between manufacturer and reliability
(with of course, the exception of IBM's Deathstar series, but that's due
to known manufacturing defects). We've run Seagate, Western Digital,
and Maxtor heavily. It's just a reality that all drives suck.
RAID arrays are your friend. We use them everywhere. It's way better
to skimp a bit on space and double your redundancy - not only is your
data safer, it makes your life that much easier.
--
Ross Vandegrift
ross(a)willow.seitz.com
A Pope has a Water Cannon. It is a Water Cannon.
He fires Holy-Water from it. It is a Holy-Water Cannon.
He Blesses it. It is a Holy Holy-Water Cannon.
He Blesses the Hell out of it. It is a Wholly Holy Holy-Water Cannon.
He has it pierced. It is a Holey Wholly Holy Holy-Water Cannon.
He makes it official. It is a Canon Holey Wholly Holy Holy-Water Cannon.
Batman and Robin arrive. He shoots them.
If you're going IDE, avoid Maxtor like the
devil. I run a lab and their
harddrives DIE. They start beeping(!!!) during startup and won't mount.
Maxtor is cheap, but sucky.
OTOH Seagate Barraccuda IVs are highly recommended, quiet and fast. I've
not had any reliability prblems yet... 
8:40 a.m.
On Wed, 29 Jan 2003 00:58:11 -0500
Ross Vandegrift <ross(a)willow.seitz.com> wrote:
My IT day job is a place that uses tons of IDE drives.
I've been
building RAID arrays out of IDE since the days when 8.4G was huge.
There really isn't a correllation between manufacturer and reliability
(with of course, the exception of IBM's Deathstar series, but that's due
to known manufacturing defects). We've run Seagate, Western Digital,
and Maxtor heavily. It's just a reality that all drives suck.
I believe the drive manufacturers all take turns at being the ones that
suck. People today are swearing at Maxtor (though I use maxtors all the
time with no significant jump in the # of failed drives) and recommending
Seagate.
I'm old enough to remember the 105MB (yes, MB - go ahead and laugh at my
advancing age now!) drives that Sun shipped with their IPC/IPX machines
that had the "stiction" problem. The lube used on the spindle would
congeal when the drive was shut down, and the drive may or may not have
the angular momentum to break the seal cause by this thickened goo.
The fix was to impart a short, sharp shock to the drive just as you
turned the power on to it. This was so prevalent that when we had to
shut Suns down, I'd carry a rubber mallet with me. When a machine didnt
come up because of this problem, I'd rap the drive enclosure gently on
the side as I turned it on, and voila! The machine started fine.
It definitely added to my SysAdmin "mystique" to actually fix computers
with a hammer routinely!
--
======================================================================
Joe Hartley - Senior Unix Admin - Ingenta inc.
111R Chestnut St., Providence, RI 02903 - cell 401.338.9214
Joe.Hartley(a)ingenta.com - AOL IM: JoeHartley
Without deviation from the norm, "progress" is not possible. - FZappa
9:49 a.m.
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 07:33:18 -0500, Joe Hartley wrote:
I believe the drive manufacturers all take turns at
being the ones that
suck. People today are swearing at Maxtor (though I use maxtors all the
time with no significant jump in the # of failed drives) and recommending
Seagate.
Seagate drive are particularly suitable for audio due to thier low
vibration bearings and quiet mode.
I've seen the sticking problem you mentioned on lots of old SCSI discs,
I've solved it before by power cycling them lots, i'l try the mallet trick
next time it happens, cheers!
- Steve
11:28 a.m.
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 01:42:20PM +0000, Steve Harris wrote:
I've seen the sticking problem you mentioned on
lots of old SCSI discs,
I've solved it before by power cycling them lots, i'l try the mallet trick
next time it happens, cheers!
I've always heard of the mallet solution, but I chickened out whenever i
had to do it. A safer way I read about - hold the drive so that the
spindle is parallel to your arm. Wit a few sharp twists of your wrist,
sprin the drive back and forth around the spindle. The back and forth
motion would decongeal the grease and things could power on normally
again.
The mallet is 10,000 times cooler though ::-)
--
Ross Vandegrift
ross(a)willow.seitz.com
A Pope has a Water Cannon. It is a Water Cannon.
He fires Holy-Water from it. It is a Holy-Water Cannon.
He Blesses it. It is a Holy Holy-Water Cannon.
He Blesses the Hell out of it. It is a Wholly Holy Holy-Water Cannon.
He has it pierced. It is a Holey Wholly Holy Holy-Water Cannon.
He makes it official. It is a Canon Holey Wholly Holy Holy-Water Cannon.
Batman and Robin arrive. He shoots them.
28 Jan
28 Jan
8:31 p.m.
On Tue, 2003-01-28 at 15:27, Taybin Rutkin wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jan 2003, Steve Harris wrote:
> Avoid VIA KT333 based boards if you want to be able to rip cds with
> cdparanoia, I had to add another IDE card to my machine. Other than that
> its a good chipset though.
Peronally, I've had nothing but good luck with both of mine...
It looks like most of the software out here is Intel oriented...
Demudi's low latency kernel comes in intel and... intel, and I've had
really good luck with linux on half a dozen or so intel machines...
I've only been running this athlon for a month or so now. Debian,
Progeny Debian, Redhat 8 and Mandrake 8.2 had no problems with this
machine. Mandrake 9 had some problems with the fact that the hard drives
are {were} on ide2 {out of 4... I think the raid was confusing it.}
Corel linux and the newest HURD distribution have major problems with
this machine... Corel runs like {frozen} molasses and HURD just gives me
a Matrix-like screen. {I'm not sure if that's my fault or not though. {I
need to set it up again and take my time with it.}
If you want a nice solid setup I'd suggest going with a p3 on a
no-nonsense board {there are several hardware compatibility lists out
here... check at google. {I have an older Gigbyte that's been the best
board I've ever owned... never given me a problem or balked at anything
I've tortured it with. They're cheap...}}
Soundcards...
http://www.alsa-project.org/~goemon/
Download the base Debian distribution from www.debian.org {or do the
jigdoo thing, whatever}... at the end of the install you'll be asked if
you want to run dselect {provided you have a network card} you can
define a few local download spots, select a desktop and a windowmanager,
pick out a couple of audio editors and after a short download and
answering a few questions you'll have everything set up and ready.
On the other hand... Redhat 8 rocks, takes 15 minutes to set up the
base package and is as stable as it gets. {I don't like dealing with the
rpms though... dselect's just so much easier.}
If you're going IDE, avoid Maxtor like the devil.
I run a lab and their
harddrives DIE. They start beeping(!!!) during startup and won't mount.
Maxtor is cheap, but sucky.
Maxtor's not particularly bad... If you take a look at their page...
they've got several very nifty mirrored drive setups that are very nice.
I prefer Western Digital to anything though. I've just had better luck
with them.
29 Jan
29 Jan
6:26 a.m.
On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 06:25:23 -0600, Rick Taylor wrote:
On Tue, 2003-01-28 at 15:27, Taybin Rutkin wrote:
Athlon's can run i686 kernels with no problems, I've only noticed very
marginal performace improvements when building athlon specific binaries over
generic i686, even in very float heavy code.
I'm /very/ happy with my Athlon, its float mangling / $ is amazing. OTOH
if you want dual CPU I'd go with PIII.
I've no experience of PIV's yet.
- Steve
On Tue, 28 Jan 2003, Steve Harris wrote:
> Avoid VIA KT333 based boards if you want to be able to rip cds with
> cdparanoia, I had to add another IDE card to my machine. Other than that
> its a good chipset though.
Peronally, I've had nothing but good luck with both of mine...
It looks like most of the software out here is Intel oriented...
Demudi's low latency kernel comes in intel and... intel, and I've had
really good luck with linux on half a dozen or so intel machines...
6:59 a.m.
On Wed, 2003-01-29 at 04:19, Steve Harris wrote:
On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 06:25:23 -0600, Rick Taylor
wrote:
I built the k7 kernel that Debian have up. I didn't notice a huge
difference. Things did run slightly smoother. Right now I'm running the
Demudi intel kernel. It seems fine. I don't know all that much about
them. :} I figure I'm lucky if the machine boots after I rebuild one.
It's nice that the Demudi folk have taken the time to do the low latency
stuff for folk like myself that really just don't want to mess with it.
On Tue, 2003-01-28 at 15:27, Taybin Rutkin
wrote:
Athlon's can run i686 kernels with no problems, I've only noticed very
marginal performace improvements when building athlon specific binaries over
generic i686, even in very float heavy code.
I'm /very/ happy with my Athlon, its float mangling / $ is amazing. OTOH
if you want dual CPU I'd go with PIII. On Tue, 28 Jan 2003, Steve Harris wrote:
> Avoid VIA KT333 based boards if you want to be able to rip cds with
> cdparanoia, I had to add another IDE card to my machine. Other than that
> its a good chipset though.
Peronally, I've had nothing but good luck with both of mine...
It looks like most of the software out here is Intel oriented...
Demudi's low latency kernel comes in intel and... intel, and I've had
really good luck with linux on half a dozen or so intel machines... I've no experience of PIV's yet.
I've used them with 2000. Athlons are cheaper, easier to upgrade and
seem just as capable to me.
7:39 a.m.
Steve Harris wrote:
I'm /very/ happy with my Athlon, its float
mangling / $ is amazing.
OTOH if you want dual CPU I'd go with PIII.
Dual-PIII seems to work out quite a bit more expensive than dual-
Athlon. I have a dual Athlon on an MSI motherboard and it works
very well -- I previously had a dual-Celeron Abit motherboard
which was nothing like as reliable (tolerable, but not faultless).
The MSI board seems better put together, too.
But it may be excessively hard to cool two Athlons quietly
enough for a recording environment. My machine is pretty noisy
and I don't know whether there'd be enough headroom to install
a much quieter cooling system.
Chris
5:53 p.m.
Hi Chris
I'm curious how much work you get out of your second processor. This
freebsdbox I'm on has the dual Abit Celeron. I've found to put the
second processor to work generally requires more effort than to leave it alone.
The first cpu can be 95% employed and the second will be at 0% unless you
start another intensive task while the first is still running. This was true
for me on Linux 2.2 kernels also. I've moved to single processor Athlon.
Cheers.......Al
On Wed, 29 Jan 2003, Chris Cannam wrote:
Steve Harris wrote:
I'm /very/ happy with my Athlon, its float
mangling / $ is amazing.
OTOH if you want dual CPU I'd go with PIII.
Dual-PIII seems to work out quite a bit more expensive than dual-
Athlon. I have a dual Athlon on an MSI motherboard and it works
very well -- I previously had a dual-Celeron Abit motherboard
which was nothing like as reliable (tolerable, but not faultless).
The MSI board seems better put together, too.
But it may be excessively hard to cool two Athlons quietly
enough for a recording environment. My machine is pretty noisy
and I don't know whether there'd be enough headroom to install
a much quieter cooling system.
Chris
30 Jan
30 Jan
8:08 a.m.
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 01:46:48 -0800, al goldstein wrote:
Hi Chris
I'm curious how much work you get out of your second processor. This
freebsdbox I'm on has the dual Abit Celeron. I've found to put the
second processor to work generally requires more effort than to leave it alone.
The first cpu can be 95% employed and the second will be at 0% unless you
start another intensive task while the first is still running. This was true
for me on Linux 2.2 kernels also. I've moved to single processor Athlon.
Under JACK the second processor generally gets to do all the non-dsp work
(UIs, disk i/o etc.), so it is quite busy.
There is the possibility to split the JACK tasks among the available
processors, but no-ones really looked at it, its not really neccesary.
- Steve
9:01 a.m.
Steve Harris wrote:
On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 01:46:48 -0800, al goldstein
wrote:
The main thing for me really is just that I spend so much time
compiling code. With a dual processor setup I can either
parallelise this (reducing the build time to about 60% of a
single-processor time) or just enjoy the fact that the system
responds as if the compile wasn't happening.
It is a nice thought that something like JACK can ensure it
gets all the CPU it needs while a GUI-based application (say)
is using the other CPU, but actually I don't have a terribly
good feel for how much difference that makes.
With the old Celeron machine I probably felt having two CPUs
made more difference than it does with the new Athlons, which
are quick enough still to make fairly easy work of most of the
stuff I do anyway. (The Celeron was not a particularly quick
processor even when I built that machine, I just fancied having
a cheap dual-processor system. And though not fast, it did
feel very responsive.)
Chris
I'm curious how much work you get out of your
second processor.
Under JACK the second processor generally gets to do all the non-dsp
work (UIs, disk i/o etc.), so it is quite busy.
29 Jan
29 Jan
6:39 a.m.
On Tue, 2003-01-28 at 18:25, Rick Taylor wrote:
On Tue, 2003-01-28 at 15:27, Taybin Rutkin wrote:
Sorry... I somehow managed to misinterpret that Mine are kt400s.
On Tue, 28 Jan 2003, Steve Harris wrote:
> Avoid VIA KT333 based boards if you want to be able to rip cds with
> cdparanoia, I had to add another IDE card to my machine. Other than that
> its a good chipset though.
Peronally, I've had nothing but good luck with both of mine... 
28 Jan
28 Jan
5:44 p.m.
On Tue, 28 Jan 2003 14:14:03 -0500
Dave Phillips <dlphilp(a)bright.net> wrote:
Greetings:
I'm configuring a system for a friend whose musical needs are quite
simple, but in the course of things he asked me which motherboards are
preferred by Linux audio people. I confess I'm not very savvy about the
subject, but I figured some of you folks would lend your opinions
regarding suitable boards for either amateur or professional use. Of
course I'd also like to know if there are particular boards I should
avoid. TIA !
Dave,
I have used Tyan motherboards on a number of self-assembled machines
(including dual CPU) and have found the quality to be excellent and
the reliability impeccable.
Erik
--
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
Erik de Castro Lopo nospam(a)mega-nerd.com (Yes it's valid)
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
"There is no reason why anyone would want a computer in their home"
Ken Olson, DEC, 1977
7969
days inactive
7971
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
18 comments
11 participants
participants (11)
-
al goldstein -
Chris Cannam -
Dave Phillips -
Erik de Castro Lopo -
James Tappin -
Joe Hartley -
Josh Haberman -
Rick Taylor -
Ross Vandegrift -
Steve Harris -
Taybin Rutkin