Mac OS 9 Lives
General => Off Topic => Topic started by: Knezzen on March 17, 2014, 09:00:47 AM
-
Just wanted to share some pictures of my studio build as it's wrapping up. It's soon ready for some music producing awesomeness ;)
-
8) Nice room!
-
This is how 5 MIX Core cards and 5 MIX Farm's look together in a 13-slot Magma chassis ;)
Two Pro Control's in the background. The one with the silver palmrest is for sale, btw.
Im in the middle of fabricating a 10-node TDM cable. Should be ready in one hour or so.
I'll soon be done... Soon.... Or something 8)
-
That is fucking amazing... Setting up the Magma shit was always my favorite... especially Marathon Racking the G4 and racking the magma... it always looked so much better than a server rack... That is why my Audio clients always got more attention than the business ones... It was more fun than Novell or Windows racks
great job :)
-
Thanks man! :)
This is the Magma chassies with the Pro Tools logo on the front instead of the Magma logo. Looks great together with all the interfaces in the rack.
Im getting a bit tired of all the building... Have been doing it since late december and now I just want everything to work for once so I can get to work.
-
My space isn't too far from what you have but you've got more room than me. Is that treatment built into/mounted into the walls? The black stuff. I've got about $4.5k of trapping and diffusion in my studio. It's dead and dry as hell so it's more of a listening/mixing space for sure. One of these days I'll have a 3-room studio. One for mixing, one live room, and a smaller room for noisy machines.
-
The black stuff behind the rack is a wood wall with insulating material behind it. The room is concrete, so we wanted to remove as much of the sub-bass as possible.
The wall where the pro control stands is built 4ocm from the actual concrete wall and it's filled with insulating material.
We actually have a 6 room studio. This will be the "big" control room and tacking envoirement.
We have one live room, one really damp room for dry drum recording or vocals, one "small" control room with ALOT of synthesizers, an iMac i7 running Logic 9, an Atari 1040STe for MIDI and some other stuff. Can post a picture of it later.
One room is for storage and repairs, and one is for partying and relax. We have a DJ booth in there and some other stuff :P
-
Heres pictures of the small control room and a list off synthesizers and other stuff ;)
On top of the rack:
Roland MC-505 Groovebox
In the rack:
EMU E5000 Ultra
Yamaha A5000
Novation Supernova
Kawai K4r
Kawai K3m
Generic patchbay
Emagic AMT8 MIDI-interface (for the iMac)
PSU for the Behringer Eurodesk MX8000
NAD amplifier for the NS10's
To the right of the rack is just a MIDI-keyboard with weighted keys
Roland Juno 2 on the desk
The keyboard shelf, from the top:
Kawai K1
Atari 1040STe 4mb
Korg 01/W FD
Yamaha EX7
Yamaha DX7 II FD
Not seen in the picture is some drum machines, like my Alesis SR-16 etc.
This was bought over the last 10 years or so.
-
More pics as the build comes along... What do you guys think? :)
-
holy shit man.. is that one big controller? is that the u control 24 ? or afew of them? it looks like one piece!
-
It's actually two pro controllers. One is unplugged (the one with the silver palmrest) and just there for measurements until I get the two fader packs I bought.
The plugged in one is a Pro Control with one added fader pack and one edit pack.
Everything works great in Pro Tools 5.1.3cs11 on Mac OS 9.2.2.
-
I'll have an expanded Pro Control someday. The difficult thing about it however is that I don't know how I'm going to fit both a 24 channel mixer and an expanded Pro Control on my desk.
Maybe I should just save up for 10 years and buy a used SSL instead -afro-
-
Progress has been slow due to money issues (and me buying a house in the middle of the build), but we are near the finishing line right now.
Have a look at the pics. Taken minutes before I wrote this post ;)
This is turning out to be one of the most creative places I know of. It's a wonderful place to be! :)
-
Awesome new Pics... I am looking forward to my vacation... keep a room open for me :)
-
Where are all the cables? -afro-
Hidden ;). I hate the clutter that comes from shitloads of cables. Everything is labeled and then hidden.
There are custom back panels on the racks as well, so you don't see any of the cables :P
I actually spent a lot of time yesterday testing Pro Tools 6.4.1 on the machine and I really like what I have seen so far.
Found a working iLok trial resetter as well, and I finally found quite a large amount of plugins. Bought some from a couple of people here in Sweden.
The problem I'm facing now is making a final decision on which version of Mac OS and Pro Tools I'm going to use.
Both of them have pro's and con's. Let me list them and have you guys give me some tips on which version to choose ;).
So... One of the systems is Pro Tools TDM 5.1.3cs11 on Mac OS 9.2.2.
Pros:
- Got a shitload of GREAT sounding TDM plugins
- Plugins have no hardware lock (iLok)
- Does pretty much what I need it to do (almost)
Cons:
- No "proper" way to share files with the server running Mavericks and the iMac running Mavericks
- Have to disable the second processor by removing the Multiprocessor extensions from the extensions folder
- No multiprocessor support in Pro Tools
- It's LOUD since I can't use CHUD and the NAP extensions within it
- No USB 2.0 support (we get mix jobs on USB flash sticks sometimes)
The second system I can run on the MDD is Pro Tools 6.4.1cs4 on Mac OS X 10.3.9.
Pros:
- Got proper and fast networking with the newer machines
- Multiprocessor support (can use more RTAS plugins for instance)
- Can use CHUD tools to make the processors "NAP", hence making the CPU's cooler and the computer more quiet
- A lot of nice new features not present in Pro Tools 5.1.3
- USB 2.0 support
Cons:
- All plugins use iLok for authorization
- Have to use a trial resetter every 7 days or so
- Nag screens from trial plugins when starting Pro Tools and loading projects using plugins in trial mode
- A lot less plugins in general
So what do you guys think? The biggest issue for me is by far the networking. We are going to record shitloads of stuff starting this year (at least two LP's/week) so we need to be able to make backups and transfer files over the network. USB 2.0 would be nice but I can live without that. I could transfer the files from the iMac if I just had some proper networking going on.
Sorry for the long post, but I would like to hear your point of view. Try to be objective ;)
-
Os X or Os 9 is your choice. But may be you haven't explored the full range of networking capabilities of Mac Os 9 yet.
By example: I use netatalk (Apple Talk server for Unix/Linux) on Linux and iOs and usually mount its HD volumes on the Mac Os 9 desktop exactly as it was a Mac Os 9 machine...
-
Os X or Os 9 is your choice. But may be you haven't explored the full range of networking capabilities of Mac Os 9 yet.
By example: I use netatalk (Apple Talk server for Unix/Linux) on Linux and iOs and usually mount its HD volumes on the Mac Os 9 desktop exactly as it was a Mac Os 9 machine...
I have had it on my mind, but I can't get it to run under Mavericks Server. Might downgrade the Mac Mini or something just to get it to work.
Mac OS 9.2.2 + Pro Tools 5.1.3cs11 is what I want to use, but we are more people in the company, so I really need to get networking to work properly if I'm going to use it.
-
We should focus on Os9, but the hardware we have (PowerMacs with professional pci $$$ hardware) make my heart divided on how good is Logic 5 and 6 and Protools 5 with Os9 and how good it goes in OsX same equipment. It is simply different and equally good (with less performance in OsX sometimes). I have differents RTAS/VST in Os9 that on OsX and mixes sounds different and I have my sound oppinion on LE system. I think here is the only forum where we can talk about it and about pirated plugs without been banned.
We should welcome any Os9 non DAW users to create "Wikis" based on ImageManipulation, Video, Office based on any "macintosh garden" Os9 software and workflows. Final cut pro 3, Adobe Ps and Premiere, Macromedia, ... the list of productive software is HUGE.
I came into macos9lives from my retrodaw love.
The Mac OS 9 Lives Forum will now be dedicated to...
1) Installing, Maintaining, and Extending the functionality of Mac OS 9
2) Installing Digital Audio Software & Music/MIDI Hardware interfaces
3) General questions for Mac OS 9 enthusiasts.
I actually spent a lot of time yesterday testing Pro Tools 6.4.1 on the machine and I really like what I have seen so far.
Found a working iLok trial resetter as well, and I finally found quite a large amount of plugins. Bought some from a couple of people here in Sweden.
The problem I'm facing now is making a final decision on which version of Mac OS and Pro Tools I'm going to use.
Both of them have pro's and con's. Let me list them and have you guys give me some tips on which version to choose ;).
So... One of the systems is Pro Tools TDM 5.1.3cs11 on Mac OS 9.2.2.
Pros:
- Got a shitload of GREAT sounding TDM plugins
- Plugins have no hardware lock (iLok)
- Does pretty much what I need it to do (almost)
Cons:
- No "proper" way to share files with the server running Mavericks and the iMac running Mavericks
- Have to disable the second processor by removing the Multiprocessor extensions from the extensions folder
- No multiprocessor support in Pro Tools
- It's LOUD since I can't use CHUD and the NAP extensions within it
- No USB 2.0 support (we get mix jobs on USB flash sticks sometimes)
The second system I can run on the MDD is Pro Tools 6.4.1cs4 on Mac OS X 10.3.9.
Pros:
- Got proper and fast networking with the newer machines
- Multiprocessor support (can use more RTAS plugins for instance)
- Can use CHUD tools to make the processors "NAP", hence making the CPU's cooler and the computer more quiet
- A lot of nice new features not present in Pro Tools 5.1.3
- USB 2.0 support
Cons:
- All plugins use iLok for authorization
- Have to use a trial resetter every 7 days or so
- Nag screens from trial plugins when starting Pro Tools and loading projects using plugins in trial mode
- A lot less plugins in general
So what do you guys think? The biggest issue for me is by far the networking. We are going to record shitloads of stuff starting this year (at least two LP's/week) so we need to be able to make backups and transfer files over the network. USB 2.0 would be nice but I can live without that. I could transfer the files from the iMac if I just had some proper networking going on.
Sorry for the long post, but I would like to hear your point of view. Try to be objective ;)
You can have both system in one machine, make transfers via USB 2.0 on panther/tiger/leo and use the Protools version you like. But this method is not recommended by Die Hard, (OS9 and OSX together), so maybe a external firewire OSX system just for file transfer or having an OSX machine just for transfer are good choices too.
For me, having LE versions there are some things to add on Pro/cons list
Protools 5 LE on OS9
Pro: plugs, stability
Cons: I can not use keyboard focus mode. I mean, when you use keycommands, a lot of them works only for TDM/HD users. No way to use key "R" or "T" to zoom but to use the icon...
Protools 6LE on Panther
Pro: "Modern" OS, easy way to transfer USB 2.0 files, keyboard focus mode, BCF 2000 (Baby-HUI), VST to RTAS via Re-FX adapter and UAD-1 vst to RTAS
Audiomedia III up to version 6.2.3 and DIGI 001 up to 6.4 cs9
Cons: All the magic tools (plugs) from OS9 are lost and only a fistfull of plugs are working thru the ilok reseter.
I see myself using the best tools for every OS in my G4s. You can always "print" the audio in any OS (after the plugs work).
Send a track to a send (AUX), make a new track and choose the input of the track the previous send(aux) and record it.
It is time consuming to "render" the tracks with your prefered plugs, but is the only way to take the best from both versions.
I have to say that the Protools 5 dont take use of multiple processor and Protools 6 too, but 6 is someway better because it let you choose to take advantage of up to 99% of the processor and "force" the OS to use the other processor. But it do not use the second proc for RTAS as Protools 7 does (That was a way to force users to go TDM/HD).
My protools LE pci systems do not let me go to Protools 7, but for sure an original M-Box user have a different opinion that us, because a M-box 1 can go up to protools 8.0.1 on leo, and there on Leo there are Tons of plugs, that probably can force them to go Leo (Melodine, Nexus) instead of using primarly OS9 like us. Also TDM users have beat detective, but LE users had to wait to 7 version to have a LE beat detective.
See Steve Vai using Beat Detective, by the way
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyFzmN72lUI (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyFzmN72lUI)
Protools 7 has better RTAS management
Protools 7.4 has elastic audio (a REAL big jump in post pro) and Real Multiprocessor support.
Protools 8.0.1 has double number of inserts than 7/6/5 versions.
Protools >8.1 (Intel only) has elastic pitch (another big jump in post pro).
When I had only 6.4 on Win and 5.1 on G3 I was wanting a 7.4 version for elastic audio and I bought a M-Audio 24/96 just to use it. You can Save Copy In... and choose to come back to 5/6 any time (after you had Commit/consolidated audio).
When Protools 9.0.4 camed out I had to bought a Focusrite Liquid Saphire 56 to use it. Elastic pitch is really important on postprod. I use it daily with clients on a Hack.
But for my own music I prefer to use PT 5/6. I think I have some OS9 days and some OSX days.
I feel PT5LE in OS9 hass really the most of the tools we need, but some works can only be made on OSX versions...
-
If I were a 'modern' musician, I wouldn't be on OS9 at all. But since I mix mainly OTB and don't use many softsynths, PT5 and Logic 6 are all I need. It's great to cut down your computer and not have things getting in the way -afro-
-
Dual booting is not really the way to go for me. We are a couple of people using the same room and the same equipment, so it needs to be "easy" to use.
Im thinking of setting up netatalk on a Leopard machine to use with the OS9 machine and hopefully everything will get solved that way. I hope :)
-
Settled with Mac OS 9.2.2 and Pro Tools 5.1.3cs11. Seems like the best idea. Networking is getting sorted as we speak :)
Today the Pro Control got it's last fader wings! Looks awesome to fill up the desk we worked so hard building.
What do you guys think? -afro-
-
No "proper" way to share files with the server running Mavericks and the iMac running Mavericks (…)
So what do you guys think? The biggest issue for me is by far the networking.
You could give "DoubleTalk" a try. It is a Samba implementation for Mac OS 9, and there are reports that it works great with 10.6. As I don´t use X you will have to try it on your own. Perhaps it works well with 10.9 also? It is at MacintoshGarden ;)
-
Way Cool Mat... never tried that one :)
Found some more info. http://www.macworld.com/article/1002290/doubletalk.html
-
the best way for networking is to create an AFP file server..
i had made threads detailing how to do this with pc hardware + a package called nas4free (freenas) but those threads were deleted.
in my experience, creating an AFP fileserver has resulted in the best + fastest reliable mounted file server on both X + 9 and it
works fantastic.
unbelievably fast from os9. and very fast from intel osx aswell. i did not test mavericks as i had not installed this os yet. but i tested it from snow leopard + lion.
basically the performance over gigabit ethernet was so good it was basically just as fast as the internal drive.. i couldnt tell the difference practically.
it really blew my mind when literally none of u responded positively to my post because for me, it was quite the revelation.... AFP fileserver is the shit!!!!!
-
I agree with Chris on this one... all SAMBA based solutions won't be as efficient as an AFP file server... however, if you only have 2 units to network, then even using "Go" "Sever" on the OS X Unit and typing in the IP address of the OS 9 unit will be sufficient.
Back in the day... For a few studios in New York that had at least 4 production rooms and 2 mixing/demo rooms we ran Novell with mac name space and AFP and everything ran flawless... the only PC was the actual Compaq Rack Mount Server (a PIII Proliant with RAID 5) and tracks were being bounced all over the place.... with small projects, you could even pull up the tracks and play them "Over the wire" from the server directly to the DAW... so rather than bore you...
If you have the space, the AFP solution provides...
1) Backup (setup the server with RAID)
2) Networking (Move all tracks all over the network, OS 9, OS X, etc.)
3) Centralized Archiving when the project is finished... smaller SSD in the production Macs for tracking and mixing and use server for storing when done
-
Basically I´d agree as well and say Netatalk is the best option. BUT; sadly the Netatalk team removed the AppleTalk support with "Netatalk 3.0 alpha1" in 2012, so the only option is afp via TCP/IP!
So if you like to use AppleTalk you have to use Netatalk 2.1.6 which is the last one that is working well with AppleTalk. Versions up to 2.2.4 do also not work with AppleTalk, as all 3.x do not. So I am using Netatalk 2.1.6 when connecting Linux with Mac OS 9. Read the "Classic Mac Networking Guide" if you need more informations: http://www.applefool.com/se30/
-
Mat, thanks for that link !
That network Guide link is awesome... we should make a new thread, anyone with an older Mac needs to read that guide... thanks again
-
I just use regular FTP clients and servers. Shouldn't that be good enough?
-
Syntho, of course that is good enough... the Mac classic network guide is for Pre G4 systems and brings back a ton of awesome memories. The AFP discussion with MDDs and QS G4s really only comes into play when you have big studios and many rooms all sharing the same project from tracking to post production. One guy and 3 Macs=FTP solution, 5 guys and 10 macs=a more complex networking solution...
The days of big studios with AFP servers with RAID drives and long since dead... and maybe should be... A parallel evolution exists between Computer Networks and Audio production... Networking Racks of Servers with tons of fans and wires disappeared and were replaced a few fast computers equipped with Big Hard drives... ten racks of vintage outboard gear with 2 miles of spaghetti got replaced with 2 racks of our favorite stuff and virtual gear.
I liked designing and maintaining networks, but making music or choosing "Mix engineer" over "Network engineer" was always more fun. :)
-
I just use regular FTP clients and servers. Shouldn't that be good enough?
early implementations of AFP server software were available in Mac OS starting with System 6, in AppleShare and AppleShare IP, and in early "1.x" releases of Mac OS X Server. In client operating systems, AFP was called "Personal File Sharing", and supported up to ten simultaneous connections.[1] These AFP implementations relied on version 1.x or 2.x of the protocol. AppleShare IP 5.x, 6.x, and the "1.x" releases of Mac OS X Server introduced AFP version 2.2. This was the first version to offer transport connections using TCP/IP as well as AppleTalk. It also increased the maximum share point size from four gibibytes to two tebibytes,[1] although the maximum file size that could be stored remained at two gibibytes due to limitations in the original Mac OS.[2]
^^ this quote claims afp dates back to system 6 which was in the freaking 80s...
(apple file protocol) was built for mac os. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Filing_Protocol
its honestly stupid fast for os9 like faster then FTP dont ask me why
like i said when u mount the afp file server like a remote drive it basically feels like an internal drive the speed is so nice + fast
and its built for exactly that.. even tho on the remote drive the fiel system isnt macosxtended the afp protocol encapsulates all
metadata + resource forks + all the other mac wierdness.
pretty sure it auto remounts the afp share after reboot too.. its just.. solid as hell
for me the AFP fileserver acting as an interim share really works well .. transfering.. backup.. but most importantly the software allows many different access methods..
to the same data.. and remote administration via web interface the same way that u would have on a modern purchased solution
its just easier to just work natively within mac os 9.. making folders .. dragging files.. etc without having to worry about ftp apps crashing or passwords and ports and all that crap
Computers using classic Mac OS can connect to AFP 3.x servers, with some limitations. For example, the maximum file size in Mac OS 8 is 2 gigabytes. Typically, Mac OS 9.1 or later is recommended for connecting to AFP 3.x servers; for versions of original Mac OS prior to 9.1, installation of the AppleShare client 3.8.8 is required.
AFP URLs take the form: afp://<server>/<share>, where <server> is the server's IP address, Domain Name System (DNS) name, or Bonjour name, and <share> is the name of the share point.
-
Dual booting is not really the way to go for me. We are a couple of people using the same room and the same equipment, so it needs to be "easy" to use.
Im thinking of setting up netatalk on a Leopard machine to use with the OS9 machine and hopefully everything will get solved that way. I hope :)
honestly knez
if "Easy to use" is your goal..
do yourself a favour..
http://www.wdc.com/en/products/products.aspx?id=620
just buy one of these..
supports AFP connection..
self contained unit with raid.. probably low power consumption.. fault tolerance... fast speed.. support for metadata/resource forks.. cant go wrong!
plug into your gigabit router and integrates seamless with any os via SMB/cifs + with the old mac + new mac, AFP
u can access this natively inside mac os 9 like the local drive on the mac via the AFP protocol
i have posted about this over and over and over and still u guys have said NOTHING in response;)
only mactron has spoken about it!
-
Yeah, that might be something! I was thinking to take home an old Dell server from work, put in two SAS drives and make a RAID 1 array of them. Install some Linux distro and use Netatalk, but I don't feel like administrating it :P
BTW, to update on the studio build:
The studio is finished! We are now open for business and have been flooded with work (one if the reasons I haven't been very active here for the past months).
Have a look at our website: http://www.bankvalvet.com
It's in Swedish, but an english version is coming soon as well :)
-
congrats
-
Thanks man!
-
Yeah, that might be something! I was thinking to take home an old Dell server from work, put in two SAS drives and make a RAID 1 array of them. Install some Linux distro and use Netatalk, but I don't feel like administrating it :P
if u already have the drives id say do it.. but use NAS4FREE (http://www.nas4free.org/) as the OS off a 8gb thumb usb
and u can administrate it remotely over http
if u dont have the drives already i suggest the WD nas drive.. its a better solution. takes less power.. ;)
-
We got free electricity in the studio, so the power consumption is not a problem ;). I'll look into nas4free again. Thanks.
-
We got free electricity in the studio, so the power consumption is not a problem ;). I'll look into nas4free again. Thanks.
trying to help.. because i have found through much trouble of my own, the solution to this.. and its a great solution.
just dont try to use "Freenas" by mistake. i had huge problems with freenas + smb
good luck
-
Lifting this 10 year old thread. I still have the stuff and started missing it so much that when we moved to our new house I put up the old Pro Tools MIX|24 rig again. Damn, this rig sounds INSANE. The workflow is wonderful. I'm back for good now ;)
Picture of the same rig in it's new home. There's still a lot to be plugged in, but it's working :)
-
That setup is beautiful. Aah, that MDD on the side... What a fine touch, like a topping over a monumental dessert.
I know nothing about music production, though, so I am unqualified to appreciate the setup for its technical merits, but it looks badass and very fun. -afro-
-
Don't know why you even doubted it :)
-
nice ns10 torture chamber :D
jokes aside, this looks lovely!!
-
Go Knez!
-
nice ns10 torture chamber :D
Ha ha ha.
But, there's always a fix.
http://www.bobhodas.com/examining-the-yamaha-ns-10m.php
-
Looking good Knez!! I still enjoy working on the ProControl rig too!!👍😁