Ibanez JEM Forum banner

Whats the best OS (Windows) for music production?

11K views 16 replies 13 participants last post by  Cowboy49 
#1 ·
I am setting up my computer for recording at the moment. -P3 800, 384 Mb RAM, 80 GB Hard Disk and a Sound Blaster Live Platinum 5.1. Would it be best to dual boot and run a seperate OS just for music production? Which would OS be best? I plan to use Cubase VST and maybe Sonar?

Thanks in Advance..
 
#2 ·
IMHO Windows 2000 Pro

The Windows 9x series don't handle memory issues very well, aren't
stable, and don't handle large hard drives well.

Windows XP is basically Windows 2000 with lots of eye candy. It's OK, but
I find it's more for home use then anything else.

Where as Windows 2000 Pro can be as "home use" or "commercial use"
as you want it to be.

It's been out long enough that drivers are out there for whatever you
need to get running in it (assuming the company still exists).

It handles large capacity hard drives very well.

It has built in RAID features allowing you to use multiple hard drives
linked together as one large one.

It's networking is very solid and relitivly reliable. So if you have to connect
it to other PCs in the house (or studio) it's really easy and solid.

Overall Windows 2000 is fast, reliable, and handles memory and crashes
VERY well.
 
#4 ·
If you're using Cubase, try using Cubase SX with Win2k or XP (both are about the same.. I use 2k at work and XP at home with different gear and they work pretty well once you get everything ironed out). Cubase uses an ASIO driver setup and its pretty good with a decent pro card... SB Live! won't get you far if you're recording MIDI though.

If you're using Sonar, it'll give you great low latency WDM speed with almost any card in 2k and XP.

Good luck!

-Alex
www.ionstorm.com
 
#10 ·
Cycovision said:
I am setting up my computer for recording at the moment. -P3 800, 384 Mb RAM, 80 GB Hard Disk and a Sound Blaster Live Platinum 5.1. Would it be best to dual boot and run a seperate OS just for music production? Which would OS be best? I plan to use Cubase VST and maybe Sonar?

Thanks in Advance..
Instead of spending $300-$400 on Cubase or Sonar, and running it with a SB Live, why don't you get Cubasis VST 3.0 for $80, and buy a better sound card with better converters?

You'd still have 32 tracks, and the sound quality, which is the important part, would be much better.

Running Cubase SX or Sonar 2.0 on an SB Live is like running a Vette on 13" wheels with 75 Series tires.
 
#15 ·
On an 800 meg machine XP might be a bit too heavy on your resources (although far more stable than W 9X platforms).

I've had a version of 98SE running for about 4 years which has been upgraded with various flavours of Cubase. Very stable as long as you don't add in tonnes of unneccesary programs (Word etc.).

If I was you and given your processor speed I'd:

Run Cubase 5 under 98SE (that should give you headroom to run effects which I'm not convinced you'd get with XP)

Buy one of the soundcards recommended earlier in the thread - low latency drivers are essential for mixing and running any virtual instruments that you're going to play live.

Dual booting ideal if you want say 98 for a stable system for running music and a 'office' partition for net etc.

If you do want to run under XP (which is excellent despite it being souped up 2000) have a look at http://www.musicxp.net/ which should give you some useful tweaks. Just watch your processor load!!
 
#16 ·
I'm going to take a risk here. Maybe I'll suffer for it but I'm prepared for the consequences. Ok here we go : Mac! Yes, emagic logic on a mac osX. Ok, I was just kidding but I wish I had it. For the moment I use cakewalk Sonar XL on windows XP with a SB live 5.1 and I think it's pretty good, but that's just me.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top