New Audio Workstation

[typezero303]

Hi all,


Just finished building my new machine to replace my aging Opteron workstation that I've been using since 2003. I mostly use my machine for music production, with the odd side of gaming.

New machine Specs:

- Six Core Intel Xeon (E5-2640) @ @2.5Ghz
- 16GB 1600 DDR3 ECC
- XFX Radeaon Hd 7970 Core Edition
- 3 x Western Digital VelociRaptor (10,000RPM) SATA6 Drives (RAID 5)
- CoolerMaster Cosmo-II Case
- SeaSonic X-Series 850W 80+ Gold PSU
- CoolerMaster Hyper 212 EVO CPU Cooler

Full Studio Specs can be seen here: http://www.zero-trance.com/studio

Studio Wide Shot: http://zero-trance.com/studio/studio1.jpg (Don't want to embed, it's a rather large image)

http://www.zero-trance.com/studio/comp1.jpg
http://www.zero-trance.com/studio/comp2.jpg
http://www.zero-trance.com/studio/comp3.jpg
http://www.zero-trance.com/studio/comp4.jpg
http://www.zero-trance.com/studio/comp5.jpg
http://www.zero-trance.com/studio/comp6.jpg
http://www.zero-trance.com/studio/comp7.jpg

 

[Fud]

Looks good my buddy has a similar setup but without the triple monitors.

 

[PNWSGM]

Looks sweet. I love looking at EQs while playing music.

 

[Concentric]

I've never dealt with any music production software, is it resource intensive? Or are you just going for a powerful machine so that it lasts you another 10 years?

 

[DeathPrincess]

I've never dealt with any music production software, is it resource intensive? Or are you just going for a powerful machine so that it lasts you another 10 years?

Depends.
In creation "sample" driven instruments (ones that just play notes from "real" instruments that have been recorded) are pretty light. But synthesized instruments were it's made of maths can get heavy (though it depends on the complexity). Then additional effects can vary in impact, though in general it's not bad (though lots of software can be single threaded, and it depends on the length and number of stages and complexity of the chain). Pretty much it's not that each thing is resource heavy, but when there's 300+ it can be.
Recording is usually in experience fairly light on the CPU, and is more HDD based, especially when going for deep bitrates and multiple tracks.

 

[typezero303]

Really comes down to complexity of the project.

As noted above, fairly "sample" driven production tends to be pretty light CPU wise, but can start consuming a decent RAM footprint, depending on the sizes of the samples being used.

In terms of tone generation and synthesis, specially in the case of Analog modeling synthesizers, they can be very CPU intensive.

Specially when you get to the more complicated projects that use a combination of synths, samples and combination of the two (Romplers), you'd be amazed how quickly it can bring a computer to it's knees if it doesn't have the grunt to handle all of it.

Add all of that, plus effects on channels (Reverbs, EQ, Maximizers, exciters, delays, tube modeling, spacial effects, etc)... You can quite easily get to a project with some 80+ layers, all with different effects, and audio mixing and routing options.

It gets even more complicated if you're using hardware components such as pre-amps, or synthesizers, because then not only do you have to a machine that compute everything that's going on, but the machine also has to be able to do it quickly enough with a small buffer, in order to keep the outboard gear in sync with what's going on. I usually work with a 3 millisecond to 5 millisecond delay... at 5+ it really starts to bug me, and I find it very audible. Some people go up to 10 milliseconds.


This machine is designed to last me 5 years, likely with a videocard upgrade down the line. Beyond that, we'll see how the music software goes, and what the requirements are. The old machine, which was Opteron based lasted me 10 years, which I'm quite happy about, ultimately, the RAM speed ended up being the biggest issue; and caused major latency problems.

Not to mention the FireWire chipset wasn't supported by most of the major hardware manufacturers anymore. So new components often didn't work at all. She had a tought 10 years, but now the old production rig, is sitting happy in her retirement as a media computer. lol =P

 

[Filter]

im confused why you went with that cpu?? i mean its weak compared to 3930k and the 3930k is alot cheaper.

 

[typezero303]

System was built for longevity and stability.

Server components have always performed long term way better for me then consumer/pro-sumer components.

 

[Filter]

System was built for longevity and stability.

Server components have always performed long term way better for me then consumer/pro-sumer components.

longevity 3930k would last longer due to higher frequency the extra 800mhz would of went a long way.. and stability is the same.

and you went with a pro-sumer motherboard.

i would understand you logic if you would of went with a dual cpu server grade board. and added one later.