Jump to content


Please note: You can easily log in to MPN using your Facebook account!

Carillon DAW's. Are they that great?


Recommended Posts

I've read about Carillon PC's as well as others who do custom PC DAW's. To read the ads you'd think they all have some top secret info that the average Joe (or even techie Joe) doesn't know about. Great components? Yeah. Quiet and well built? Yeah. All the configuration conflicts debugged? Hope so. Good tech support? Hope so. OK, they make great products, and you get what you pay for, but what if you're cheap (like me)? Top quality quiet components and assembly aren't a mystery. But, is there some magic to debugging system conflicts or optimizing the OS that isn't readily available from knowledgeable sources if I'm willing to invest some time and persistence?
Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Replies 7
  • Created
  • Last Reply
If you read the ProTools user forum there is a huge base of sharp PC users who swear by AMD as a kick-ass system (which absolutely kicks the dog snot out of Mac's). I'm running Sonar and Cakewalk's site links to Carillon and states that Sonar is specifically written for the P4 architecture. What's a guy to do? All I know is that Cakewalk seems to be sort of "who gives a rat's ass" about questions regarding optimizing XP (which they claim to be down with). Steinberg on the other hand has extensive support for tricking out an XP system. Aren't these optimization resources basically sound for ANY system, regardless of the software platform?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I use Sonar w/AMD with no problems,in fact there are a lot of plugs out there still affected by the P4 denormal problem causing spikes.Personnally,counter to software manufacturer claims,I don't believe that Sonar or Steinberg stuff is optomized specifically for AMD or Intel these days since performance claims are pretty close with AMD getting about 20% more plugs.You don't need to optomize XP or 2K that much for DAW,just a few simple tweaks here and there.You basically paying Carillion for the nice case,to assemble it,and recieve tech. support,for that you pay roughly 3 times what it costs to build an AMD system.
"A Robot Playing Trumpet Blows"
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote]Originally posted by mjmclane: [b]Aren't these optimization resources basically sound for ANY system, regardless of the software platform?[/b][/quote]Yes,and optomizing XP isn't really that much of an issue,choosing and assembling the correct components is 98% of the battle.You can either pay someone or do the research your self.I do believe that it's long overdue for magazines like Electronic Musician to have a section regarding this issue,with motherboard/chipset reviews ect,after all,this subject has become as much of an issue as any other tools were using these days,if not more.
"A Robot Playing Trumpet Blows"
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I use Sonar and Cubase with multiprocessor AMDs. No problems, except some VST plugs don't like working with Cubase in multiprocessing mode. Music computers are a whole other animal compared to what you find at OfficeMax. One of the best articles to detail these issues was the one by Pete Leoni in the August 2002 EQ, on Building the Ultimate Music Computer. I built his model and it absolutely rocks. I'm using XP, BTW. XP doesn't require as many tweaks as older versions of Windows. I must say I have been very pleased with the performance, and also, that Pete really knows his stuff.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe that the tweaks listed on the Steinberg Knowledgebase or [url=http://www.musicxp.net]www.musicxp.net[/url] will work for any DAW software. The Carillon case is something I envy but I wouldn't cry about not wanting to spend the money for it. I build PC's with very nice (expensive) rackmounts and if you use quiet power supplies like Enermax the computer is acceptably quiet. You can get the noise surpressing drive sleeves from [url=http://www.quietpc.com]www.quietpc.com[/url] if you want to. Intel systems are generally more quiet since the CPU doesn't generate as much heat. I've read unbeleivable claims by someone at Carillon that said that they had access to drivers that no one else had. Sounds like hogwash to me. In any case I haven't had any problems consistantly building reliable DAW computers for professional studios. The current spec is: -Intel P4 2.4 ->3.06GHz B-Step -Asus P4PE mobo with audio/LAN (audio disabled) -512MB Crucial Tech PC-2700 DDR-SDRAM -Promise ATA-133 TX-2 Controller Card -40GB Maxtor Plus9 System Drive ATA-133 -120 GB Maxtor Plus9 Data Drive ATA-133 -Matrox G-550 AGP -Yamaha CRW F1 CDRW Drive -Enermax 435 watt P.S.U. -WindowsXP Pro RME Hammerfall-DSP Audiocard

Mac Bowne

G-Clef Acoustics Ltd.

Osaka, Japan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote]Originally posted by gtrmac: [b]Intel systems are generally more quiet since the CPU doesn't generate as much heat. [/b][/quote]Not after 2.4 ghz though,Intels core remained while Amd came up with the newly revised T-Bred B core.At 2.8ghz and above the noise is now even.The quiet PC link is a good one.Either water cooling or the Vantec fans with quiet PSU's are now vital for DAW as we get into the 2800-3,000 ghz level.
"A Robot Playing Trumpet Blows"
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...