el-bo Posted November 22, 2010 Share Posted November 22, 2010 SO my saffire pro 24 arrived on friday and it will be gone by this coming friday i have had a weekend of problems, that i'm not prepared to live with.... i'm still wary of the advice they gave about presonus, especially considering i have discovered other reports of the same, on the interwebz...i could take my chances. and, if i lived in the same country as the place i'm buying from, i would....they offer 4 years worth of free repair (30 days replacement)...but, being that i live overseas, i would have to pay for the sending and return of the product if it failed me another option i have considered is the tc electronic twin...looks like a great unit but it's just too big...size is an issue for me as it needs to be able to travel well...it also brings it closer to the price of the duet which, by all accounts, is the best i'm gonna get in this bracket is anyone using an apogee duet on a non-unibody macbook pro ??...i have read of issues of problems when both fw800 and 400 ports are being used (drive and duet)...is the problem solved by daisychaning the duet to the drive ?? did you have to buy an expresscard fw bus ?? my fw800 drive also needs replacing and i'm considering replacing my internal superdrive with a s2nd hd...this would free up the firewire bus, but i'm considering all options any help would be greatly appreciated.... i need to make a decision within the next 3 weeks to qualify for a full refund/replacement on the saffire Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordi Torres Posted November 22, 2010 Share Posted November 22, 2010 First of all sorry to hear about the problems with the saffire, you seemed excited about getting it and now this.... is anyone using an apogee duet on a non-unibody macbook pro ??...i have read of issues of problems when both fw800 and 400 ports are being used (drive and duet)...is the problem solved by daisychaning the duet to the drive ?? did you have to buy an expresscard fw bus ?? I own a duet and use it with a pre-unibody MBP, I also use a fw800 drive at the same time and never experienced a problem. Sometimes it's just a drive where I keep sample libraries, and others a drive where I record audio to. All fine. You should be careful when buying expresscard adapters (to FW, esata, etc), as some are prone to cause kernel panics ocassionally. The really good ones are expensive. Probably a powered FW800 would be a good option. I'm really happy with my duet, the only things people usually don't like about it is the break-out cable and that the outputs are not balanced. That's fine with me. Check out RME stuff (like the new Duet look-alike, for example), or maybe MOTU interfaces? and i'm considering replacing my internal superdrive with a s2nd hd...this would free up the firewire bus, but i'm considering all options How exactly would this free up the firewire bus? J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Jackson Posted November 22, 2010 Share Posted November 22, 2010 and i'm considering replacing my internal superdrive with a s2nd hd...this would free up the firewire bus, but i'm considering all options How exactly would this free up the firewire bus? I think he means the second internal HD would replace the external HD allowing him to dedicate the firewire bus to his audio interface and avoid the need for daisy chaining. Sorry elbo, shouldn't speak for you but that's how I read/understood your post. Also, as Jordito said, sorry and it sucks that you're having problems with the Saffire. I still stand by my statements about the Presonus interface but hey, you gotta do what feels right to you. Good luck with the next one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordi Torres Posted November 22, 2010 Share Posted November 22, 2010 I think he means the second internal HD would replace the external HD allowing him to dedicate the firewire bus to his audio interface and avoid the need for daisy chaining. Oh, put that way it makes sense, I interpreted something else. Thanks. I alsolike like idea, but I'm not desperate to try it out. J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
el-bo Posted November 22, 2010 Author Share Posted November 22, 2010 and i'm considering replacing my internal superdrive with a s2nd hd...this would free up the firewire bus, but i'm considering all options How exactly would this free up the firewire bus? I think he means the second internal HD would replace the external HD allowing him to dedicate the firewire bus to his audio interface and avoid the need for daisy chaining. Sorry elbo, shouldn't speak for you but that's how I read/understood your post. Also, as Jordito said, sorry and it sucks that you're having problems with the Saffire. I still stand by my statements about the Presonus interface but hey, you gotta do what feels right to you. Good luck with the next one. i don't mind you speaking for me yes, i meant replacing the superdrive with a second, internal drive http://www.mcetech.com/optibay/ this is a 2nd S.A.T.A and will free up the firewire bus for the interface i'm really unsure what to do, now...i do trust what you say, scott, but i also have to take into account what they have said ( i really have no reason to believe that they are motivated by personal gain, as they are not pushing anything else, in particular)... despite the many issues i had with the focusrite, which are clear faults, i did get enough use out of it to realise that it might not have been the best choice.....the 'vrm' didn't seem to be as useful as it might and the unit is so feature packed that the software just seems like a confused mess..it was nice to hear my sound through an interface, after some months...it made a lot of difference and it definitely sounded good to me.... on another positive, the rode nt2-a is a real beauty....gave it a little try, just to make sure it didn't need to go back with the interface and was very impressed i need to sleep on it...maybe for a few days Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
el-bo Posted November 22, 2010 Author Share Posted November 22, 2010 First of all sorry to hear about the problems with the saffire, you seemed excited about getting it and now this.... is anyone using an apogee duet on a non-unibody macbook pro ??...i have read of issues of problems when both fw800 and 400 ports are being used (drive and duet)...is the problem solved by daisychaning the duet to the drive ?? did you have to buy an expresscard fw bus ?? I own a duet and use it with a pre-unibody MBP, I also use a fw800 drive at the same time and never experienced a problem. Sometimes it's just a drive where I keep sample libraries, and others a drive where I record audio to. All fine. You should be careful when buying expresscard adapters (to FW, esata, etc), as some are prone to cause kernel panics ocassionally. The really good ones are expensive. Probably a powered FW800 would be a good option. I'm really happy with my duet, the only things people usually don't like about it is the break-out cable and that the outputs are not balanced. That's fine with me. Check out RME stuff (like the new Duet look-alike, for example), or maybe MOTU interfaces? and i'm considering replacing my internal superdrive with a s2nd hd...this would free up the firewire bus, but i'm considering all options How exactly would this free up the firewire bus? J. thanks for the answers.... i'm veering away from the expresscard idea, anyway....it is very unlikely that, when i have to replace this laptop, i'll get the 'flagship'...this will mean that the expresscard will be unusable...also, expresscard doesn't offer bus powering which means another power adaptor the firewire drive that i have been using is a powered fw800 (lacie)....i'm trying to minimise the size/weight of my setup as i move around, every so often...there are some nice owc drives that can be powered, but i really like the idea of an internal drive....it wouldn't make too much difference, sizewise, because i then have to carry an external dvd drive...the benefit is that the dvd drive is only used rarely and i get the benefits of sata speed for my recording drive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hwt Posted November 22, 2010 Share Posted November 22, 2010 Fwiw i use this setup also and have no problems.. of course i would like more imputs but two work great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
el-bo Posted November 22, 2010 Author Share Posted November 22, 2010 Fwiw i use this setup also and have no problems.. of course i would like more imputs but two work great. thanks for the reply can you clarify how you are using it do you daisychain off a firewire drive or just plug both into separate ports (of the same bus) ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Jackson Posted November 22, 2010 Share Posted November 22, 2010 Oh, put that way it makes sense, I interpreted something else. Thanks. You're always welcome J. I mean De Nada J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordi Torres Posted November 22, 2010 Share Posted November 22, 2010 You're always welcome J. I mean De Nada J. J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hwt Posted November 22, 2010 Share Posted November 22, 2010 I have duet plugged into my firewire 400 port and my external drive into my 800 port. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
el-bo Posted November 22, 2010 Author Share Posted November 22, 2010 I have duet plugged into my firewire 400 port and my external drive into my 800 port. you do realise this halves the speed of your drive, effectively making a fw800 drive run like a fw400 no, it wasn't a trick question...this is how i used my saffire le and lacie drive...it's only in the last couple of months, without the interface that i have realised about this speed thing..... if you are able, maybe you could try daisychaining off of the drive and checking the results...it could work out better for both of us, in the end Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hwt Posted November 22, 2010 Share Posted November 22, 2010 I,ve been thinking of doing this and just have,nt gotten to it yet alot of time my external hd. is off untill i,m ready for it. Is there a improvement in speed this way? I will try this myself and see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
el-bo Posted November 23, 2010 Author Share Posted November 23, 2010 I,ve been thinking of doing this and just have,nt gotten to it yet alot of time my external hd. is off untill i,m ready for it. Is there a improvement in speed this way? I will try this myself and see. the fw800 drive will run at the speed it was designed to, if you daisychain the interface to the back of it...it will run at 50% of the correct speed if you keep them connected as you and i do... this is why i'm curious to find out how the duet 'plays' in this configuration..there is much internet babble about hiss and pops, clicks and some have reported the solution to run it off it's own buss and some have had success with daisychaining.... but if it works for you, you're much better off keeping it like that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slamthecrank Posted November 23, 2010 Share Posted November 23, 2010 I run an external HD off a FW800 port with my Duet daisychained to it. I've never had a problem at all. It's very fast and super-efficient. Wait - I take that back - I *did* have a problem once: I would sometimes experience a strange distortion if I "woke" my computer from sleep (Iv'e since stopped letting my computer go fully to "sleep"). Unplugging the Duet and re-instantiating it would clear the problem. I called Apogee about it and they suggested that it wasn't a problem with the Duet, but with the Firewire port of the HD I was daisychaining from. I sent the HD back (still under warranty) and with the new HD, not a problem at all. So yes- it was a bad Firewire port on the back of the external HD. other than that, everything "just works" as it's supposed to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
el-bo Posted November 23, 2010 Author Share Posted November 23, 2010 I run an external HD off a FW800 port with my Duet daisychained to it. I've never had a problem at all. It's very fast and super-efficient. Wait - I take that back - I *did* have a problem once: I would sometimes experience a strange distortion if I "woke" my computer from sleep (Iv'e since stopped letting my computer go fully to "sleep"). Unplugging the Duet and re-instantiating it would clear the problem. I called Apogee about it and they suggested that it wasn't a problem with the Duet, but with the Firewire port of the HD I was daisychaining from. I sent the HD back (still under warranty) and with the new HD, not a problem at all. So yes- it was a bad Firewire port on the back of the external HD. other than that, everything "just works" as it's supposed to. thanks....i'm warming more to the duet....it's hard to ignore the praise that's 'heaped' on this thing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Jackson Posted November 23, 2010 Share Posted November 23, 2010 the fw800 drive will run at the speed it was designed to, if you daisychain the interface to the back of it...it will run at 50% of the correct speed if you keep them connected as you and i do... Incorrect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
el-bo Posted November 23, 2010 Author Share Posted November 23, 2010 the fw800 drive will run at the speed it was designed to, if you daisychain the interface to the back of it...it will run at 50% of the correct speed if you keep them connected as you and i do... Incorrect. i don't see, where it shows what i was saying as false i suggested that running the fw400 into the back of the 800 was fine as it's the slowest, last both he and i were using the two separate ports on the older macbook pros....unlike the hub of your diagram, this DOES have the effect of halving the fw800 speed...i have tested this when i last cloned my boot drive...if i cloned it with just the drive, connected to the fw800 port it gave an eta of ???...with another unit plugged into the firewire 400 port (the same bus) the cloning time eta was doubled had i suggested, plugging the drive into the back of the interface (technically impossible with the duet), then it would be wrong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Jackson Posted November 23, 2010 Share Posted November 23, 2010 the fw800 drive will run at the speed it was designed to, if you daisychain the interface to the back of it...it will run at 50% of the correct speed if you keep them connected as you and i do... Incorrect. i don't see, where it shows what i was saying as false i suggested that running the fw400 into the back of the 800 was fine as it's the slowest, last both he and i were using the two separate ports on the older macbook pros....unlike the hub of your diagram, this DOES have the effect of halving the fw800 speed...i have tested this when i last cloned my boot drive...if i cloned it with just the drive, connected to the fw800 port it gave an eta of ???...with another unit plugged into the firewire 400 port (the same bus) the cloning time eta was doubled had i suggested, plugging the drive into the back of the interface (technically impossible with the duet), then it would be wrong I bordered my example in red on my attachment. I'm not referring to the example of using a hub and by your statement... the fw800 drive will run at the speed it was designed to, if you daisychain the interface to the back of it...it will run at 50% of the correct speed if you keep them connected as you and i do... This suggests (in fact it doesn't just suggest but you wrote those exact words) quite clearly to me that you are referring to daisy chaining your Duet to your FW800 external HD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordi Torres Posted November 23, 2010 Share Posted November 23, 2010 you do realise this halves the speed of your drive, effectively making a fw800 drive run like a fw400 I'm not so sure this is true, at least according to the benchmarks I did one time: http://www.logicprohelp.com/viewtopic.php?p=263282#263282 Whatever the truth is, you're not going to record more than 2 mono tracks at the same time with the duet...so I wouldn't worry too much about this if I were you. J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
el-bo Posted November 23, 2010 Author Share Posted November 23, 2010 the fw800 drive will run at the speed it was designed to, if you daisychain the interface to the back of it...it will run at 50% of the correct speed if you keep them connected as you and i do... Incorrect. i don't see, where it shows what i was saying as false i suggested that running the fw400 into the back of the 800 was fine as it's the slowest, last both he and i were using the two separate ports on the older macbook pros....unlike the hub of your diagram, this DOES have the effect of halving the fw800 speed...i have tested this when i last cloned my boot drive...if i cloned it with just the drive, connected to the fw800 port it gave an eta of ???...with another unit plugged into the firewire 400 port (the same bus) the cloning time eta was doubled had i suggested, plugging the drive into the back of the interface (technically impossible with the duet), then it would be wrong I bordered my example in red on my attachment. I'm not referring to the example of using a hub and by your statement... the fw800 drive will run at the speed it was designed to, if you daisychain the interface to the back of it...it will run at 50% of the correct speed if you keep them connected as you and i do... This suggests (in fact it doesn't just suggest but you wrote those exact words) quite clearly to me that you are referring to daisy chaining your Duet to your FW800 external HD. sorry, that's just a quirk of mine...i use multiple full stops in place of one... this is how it SHOULD be read - the fw800 drive will run at the speed it was designed to, if you daisychain the interface to the back of it - it will run at 50% of the correct speed if you keep them connected as you and i do does that help ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
el-bo Posted November 23, 2010 Author Share Posted November 23, 2010 you do realise this halves the speed of your drive, effectively making a fw800 drive run like a fw400 I'm not so sure this is true, at least according to the benchmarks I did one time: http://www.logicprohelp.com/viewtopic.php?p=263282#263282 Whatever the truth is, you're not going to record more than 2 mono tracks at the same time with the duet...so I wouldn't worry too much about this if I were you. J. WELL the thing is that, i may not be recording more than 2 tracks at a time, but the drive will still be playing back more tracks on a drive with lower transfer rate thing is, i've not done much audio work in the past...it has been mostly midi...i have had no issues even though what i thought was a fw800 speed was, for all that time, actually running at half speed (due to how i had my interface and drive connected) i'll check your link, now, but as i said the clearest test to me came when i was using superduper to clone my boot drive to the fw800 external...with the fw800connecte, only, i had an estimated time that was, literally halved when i tried the same procedure with the interface plugged into the fw400 port at the same time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
el-bo Posted November 23, 2010 Author Share Posted November 23, 2010 the audio situation is becoming more important to me, now, as i'm planning on recording a guitar-based cd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Jackson Posted November 23, 2010 Share Posted November 23, 2010 this is how it SHOULD be read - the fw800 drive will run at the speed it was designed to, if you daisychain the interface to the back of it - it will run at 50% of the correct speed if you keep them connected as you and i do does that help ?? Yes. Now I get what you were saying. But, I still question (as Jordito does) why, if you have two FW ports, you would be losing 50% speed. If Apple places two separate speed FW ports in the machine I would think that they could both be utilized to their full potential. Otherwise, what's the point? And, firewire can support up to 63 devices (don't know who would have that many peripherals but that's the stat). I wonder if you are confusing bus speed with bus power. Obviously if you are using bus powered devices each device takes up a portion of the overall bus power and would eventually drain the power resources. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
el-bo Posted November 23, 2010 Author Share Posted November 23, 2010 this is how it SHOULD be read - the fw800 drive will run at the speed it was designed to, if you daisychain the interface to the back of it - it will run at 50% of the correct speed if you keep them connected as you and i do does that help ?? Yes. Now I get what you were saying. But, I still question (as Jordito does) why, if you have two FW ports, you would be losing 50% speed. If Apple places two separate speed FW ports in the machine I would think that they could both be utilized to their full potential. Otherwise, what's the point? And, firewire can support up to 63 devices (don't know who would have that many peripherals but that's the stat). I wonder if you are confusing bus speed with bus power. Obviously if you are using bus powered devices each device takes up a portion of the overall bus power and would eventually drain the power resources. it is the same bus...your logic is quite correct.....and it seems, apple rectified the situation by losing the fw400 port, effectively clearing up any confusion and allowing people to get the speeds they should be from their equipment i don't know if i could get any clearer a result than the 'superduper' clone experiment that i tried Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordi Torres Posted November 23, 2010 Share Posted November 23, 2010 Yes. Now I get what you were saying. But, I still question (as Jordito does) why, if you have two FW ports, you would be losing 50% speed. If Apple places two separate speed FW ports in the machine I would think that they could both be utilized to their full potential. Otherwise, what's the point? Exactly. Are we dealing with a design flaw here then? Are we forced to daisychain devices in order to enjoy their full speed? Again, I've never had a problem when working with audio-based projects with this configuration. I'm not talking about 100-track projects...but 20 at the very least. J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Jackson Posted November 23, 2010 Share Posted November 23, 2010 it is the same bus If you design a machine with a FW800 and a FW400 port that are on the same bus then all I can say is, that's a serious design flaw if using two devices on two separate FW ports cuts the data transfer speed in half. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Jackson Posted November 23, 2010 Share Posted November 23, 2010 Are we dealing with a design flaw here then? You slipped that one in while I was typing J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
el-bo Posted November 23, 2010 Author Share Posted November 23, 2010 Yes. Now I get what you were saying. But, I still question (as Jordito does) why, if you have two FW ports, you would be losing 50% speed. If Apple places two separate speed FW ports in the machine I would think that they could both be utilized to their full potential. Otherwise, what's the point? Exactly. Are we dealing with a design flaw here then? Are we forced to daisychain devices in order to enjoy their full speed? Again, I've never had a problem when working with audio-based projects with this configuration. I'm not talking about 100-track projects...but 20 at the very least. J. a design flaw..an oversight... a mistake....call it what you will it isn't that we need to daisychain to get full speed (unless you have the mbp, that we do), but look at the diagrams scott posted...short of a separate fireewire bus for each unit, it seems daisychaining (highest speed, first) or hub are the next best thing If Apple places two separate speed FW ports in the machine I would think that they could both be utilized to their full potential. Otherwise, what's the point? you'd think that, wouldn't you...why do you think they would lose this 'advantage' in the next incarnation ?? Again, I've never had a problem when working with audio-based projects with this configuration. I'm not talking about 100-track projects...but 20 at the very least. it isn't that you CAN'T use this configuration effectively fro small-medium sized projects...i've even heard of people getting close to that many tracks on a 7200 internal drive..the point is you are only using 50% capacity of your hard drive speed.....so when you do start needing 50 tracks of audio, try daisychaining, before looking for a 10,000 rpm drive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordi Torres Posted November 23, 2010 Share Posted November 23, 2010 it is the same bus...your logic is quite correct.....and it seems, apple rectified the situation by losing the fw400 port, effectively clearing up any confusion and allowing people to get the speeds they should be from their equipment i don't know if i could get any clearer a result than the 'superduper' clone experiment that i tried This makes sense, too. But keep in mind that cloning a drive is not the same as recording (writing) 2 mono tracks at the same time. Or playing back (reading) a bunch of already recorded tracks. J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.