Sorry for the long post, but I don't get uot of these problems on my own.
So, put together a new PC, put everything in and on it.....and it just does not work (well is does work, but audio work is impossible). Next step, some surfing and reading several forums (or should that be fora) and I come up with a mix of questions as a result of the following facts (or are they fiction, that's also a question):
1: pulsar is incompatible with dual processing on W2K? Is this a fact, or does it depend on settings?
2: wave drivers in W2K are only 16-bit and limited to 8 pairs? Again, is this a fact or is this a pulsar limitation.? The buttons for 24 and 32 bit are greyed out in the configuration panel, but this can be a wrong setting somewhere.
3: for 24 bit you have to use the wdm drivers. And again, is this fact or fiction?
Observations with my PC:
1: Pulsar does nothing else but giving the dreaded PCI error.
2: I like CEP a lot, but it does not support wdm afaik, nor asio. It does not recognise a 24-bit wave io of pulsar (but this can be os or pulsar related).
3: this pc is stable and fast for all my other uses.
So there are 3 possible causes with their solution:
1: W2K is preventing me using CEP and pulsar as I did in W98. So I need something else. XP is no solution until SP2, and NT4 is not supported by pulsar.
2: pulsar does not work with duals. So I need another soundcard.
3: CEP is not compatible with the W2K/pulsar combination. So I need another application.
Can anybody give me a clue as to what is really happening so I can solve this????
I know there will be a lot of people asking for every little detail of this PC, but the parts involved are nothing else then W2K SP2, Pulsar V3.0 and CEP 1.2a. Once I know the source, then troubleshooting can start.
Pulsar, W2K and CEP: problems, facts, questions
1 yes, incompatible
2 W2K has limit 8, v3.01 has WDM drivers
3 yes
---
1 tweak
2 I also wait for update of CEP
3 this never was the problem
---
1 AFAIK Win98 is the best solution, XP second
2 yes
3 yes
more: more processors should be handled by the kernel of the OS. good example: solaris, bad example: W2k. XP handles better. Pulsar SW is not OPTIMIZED for dual processors (that's all you can do, normally!). CEP should be updated for W2k/XP. It's time!
Ok, the PCI thing is widely handled here and at infinitevortex. Have a look, it's a weird story about badly designed mainboards and chipsets.
So since I also use CEP I stay with Win98. And they wait, I suppose, because of the kind of not yet finished kernel. But the lack of ASIO and ability to use WDM is badly missing.
Hope it helps.
Happy pulsaring
Micha
2 W2K has limit 8, v3.01 has WDM drivers
3 yes
---
1 tweak
2 I also wait for update of CEP
3 this never was the problem
---
1 AFAIK Win98 is the best solution, XP second
2 yes
3 yes
more: more processors should be handled by the kernel of the OS. good example: solaris, bad example: W2k. XP handles better. Pulsar SW is not OPTIMIZED for dual processors (that's all you can do, normally!). CEP should be updated for W2k/XP. It's time!
Ok, the PCI thing is widely handled here and at infinitevortex. Have a look, it's a weird story about badly designed mainboards and chipsets.
So since I also use CEP I stay with Win98. And they wait, I suppose, because of the kind of not yet finished kernel. But the lack of ASIO and ability to use WDM is badly missing.
Hope it helps.
Happy pulsaring
Micha
Again,
"Pulsar is not optimised for dual cpu"???
I Don't Need Pulsar to be dual CPU profiting. But have you ever tried to open Cubase, actived 24 Rewire Channels, made somme synths in Reason, and some fx too. Then Rebirth playing 2 303's and all 808/909 channels *separately* in Cubase. Than you should load some 20 VST fx and route all that to 8 stereo ASIO.
Try that on your mono CPU, if you can, pls send me screenshot.
Thanks a lot.
atomic.
"Pulsar is not optimised for dual cpu"???
I Don't Need Pulsar to be dual CPU profiting. But have you ever tried to open Cubase, actived 24 Rewire Channels, made somme synths in Reason, and some fx too. Then Rebirth playing 2 303's and all 808/909 channels *separately* in Cubase. Than you should load some 20 VST fx and route all that to 8 stereo ASIO.
Try that on your mono CPU, if you can, pls send me screenshot.
Thanks a lot.
atomic.
If you have a VIA chipset you should expect PCI overflows. The CW DSP system was designed before VIA chipsets were really mainstream, and they didn't expect people who purchased highend audio cards to purchase a lowend motherboard, to be sure. Sure, onboard RAM would have blah blah blah, and blah blah blah, but it works perfectly with an Intel chipset so get one and watch your problem go away... sorry if I seem a bit jaded here, but this is the best advice I can offer for the problem, even if there are a few otherwork arounds which only partially help. Please note that other audio cards also have problems with the PCI issues of a VIA chipset, including basic I/O cards like Delta 1010.
You guys seem to mis my point. I only want to know where I stand now. Does pulsar work on a dual (any one, be it via, intel or amd)? If yes, onder wich OS? And can you only have 24-bit with WDM when using W2K or XP?
Once I know that, I'm capable of taking the conclusions, but I don't want to spend months trying every combination out. One or the other has to go, the OS, the pulsar or the application. It is as easy as that.
Once I know that, I'm capable of taking the conclusions, but I don't want to spend months trying every combination out. One or the other has to go, the OS, the pulsar or the application. It is as easy as that.
If going dual, my advice is to not even bother with Win2k. What hardware do you have then? This would also help.
I guess it was Supersaw who had the dual processor via motherboard then. I don't use CEP, and 24bit WDM drivers are generally a function of the HOST software ie: WAVEFORMATEXTENSIBLE must be implemented. Not sure if CEP has this (probably not), also pretty sure there will need to be further CW optimizations with Windows XP, but it's coming and they are already further or as far as anyone else in this area (let me know if I'm wrong here).
Dual processors do work with i860 and Windows XP but this is out of the price range of most. We're (planetZ users) still experimenting with the Dual P3 Acorp board, and we've (infinitevortex) had the Tyan dual AMD board for over a month, waiting for a replacement board (our rev1 simply stopped POSTing after the 2nd week), so this is still territoriy unexplored by nearly everyone. Don't expect too much advice except from maybe myself, maybe atomic, RyanC, and (soon) earlyFirst... and the occasional comment from supersaw. The guys with i860 and dual Xeons are too busy using thier rigs to bother posting here.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: subhuman on 2001-11-26 10:52 ]</font>
I guess it was Supersaw who had the dual processor via motherboard then. I don't use CEP, and 24bit WDM drivers are generally a function of the HOST software ie: WAVEFORMATEXTENSIBLE must be implemented. Not sure if CEP has this (probably not), also pretty sure there will need to be further CW optimizations with Windows XP, but it's coming and they are already further or as far as anyone else in this area (let me know if I'm wrong here).
Dual processors do work with i860 and Windows XP but this is out of the price range of most. We're (planetZ users) still experimenting with the Dual P3 Acorp board, and we've (infinitevortex) had the Tyan dual AMD board for over a month, waiting for a replacement board (our rev1 simply stopped POSTing after the 2nd week), so this is still territoriy unexplored by nearly everyone. Don't expect too much advice except from maybe myself, maybe atomic, RyanC, and (soon) earlyFirst... and the occasional comment from supersaw. The guys with i860 and dual Xeons are too busy using thier rigs to bother posting here.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: subhuman on 2001-11-26 10:52 ]</font>
Didnt Subhuman say the only dual cpu system working was the P4 Xeon 1.7 Dual or something like that, I doubt it very much though!! To my knowledge no dual cpu machine is even 60-70% working with Pulsar 1 or 2.
At the end of the day Creamware are just pissing on their users. They know about this problem and still continue to do nothing. I'm sure there is more than 1% of Pulsar/Scope users with dual cpu capable machines. Its about time creamware give the people what they want not what they ( Creamware )want!
Note subhuman:
I do not rant without a reason too. Why does pratically all Pro Soundcards work with dual systems be it on intel/via/amd chipsets and the Creamware Products do not!!
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Supersaw on 2001-11-26 10:56 ]</font>
At the end of the day Creamware are just pissing on their users. They know about this problem and still continue to do nothing. I'm sure there is more than 1% of Pulsar/Scope users with dual cpu capable machines. Its about time creamware give the people what they want not what they ( Creamware )want!
Note subhuman:
I do not rant without a reason too. Why does pratically all Pro Soundcards work with dual systems be it on intel/via/amd chipsets and the Creamware Products do not!!
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Supersaw on 2001-11-26 10:56 ]</font>
I believe Creamware will give us what we want, but they only have that many programmers.
They have their priorities -we will influence those priorities when they see enough people demand dual support.
They have their priorities -we will influence those priorities when they see enough people demand dual support.
more has been done with less
https://soundcloud.com/at0m-studio
https://soundcloud.com/at0m-studio
They obviously code on the projects that will benefit the greatest number of users. This is why, for example, Pulsar users got their V3 update before Scope/SP users who paid more.
Supersaw - just because you don't have it working doesn't mean it doesn't work... likewise, just because it works on a few dual processor configurations doesn't mean it works on all of them. It is mentioned on RME's website, for example, that certain optimizations had to be made to their drivers to get it working under certain dual configurations.
My advice again, is Windows XP for dual processors. If you ignore this advice then expect issues. If you're more concerned about what computer you're running and must always have the latest, then a simple I/O card for that latest machine may be your best bet.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: subhuman on 2001-11-26 11:30 ]</font>
Supersaw - just because you don't have it working doesn't mean it doesn't work... likewise, just because it works on a few dual processor configurations doesn't mean it works on all of them. It is mentioned on RME's website, for example, that certain optimizations had to be made to their drivers to get it working under certain dual configurations.
My advice again, is Windows XP for dual processors. If you ignore this advice then expect issues. If you're more concerned about what computer you're running and must always have the latest, then a simple I/O card for that latest machine may be your best bet.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: subhuman on 2001-11-26 11:30 ]</font>
As you asked for the hardware:
- Tyan S2460 (cannot find the revision on the board)
- 512MB DDR
- ATI radeon VE (is a tested and approved card with the MB)
- adaptec 39160 dual channel U160 with a 18GB and a 36GB disk on one channel, CDrom and CDRW on the other
- pulsarI
- network card Allied Telesyn....
- soft: only W2K SP2,V3.0 and CEP1.2a
- no acpi (w2k never istalled it) pulsar on its own IRQ.
I know already that this board has its problems with pulsar, but just a working adat connection is impossible.
I know it takes time before any board runs optimal, but at the moment pulsar not even crawls.
- Tyan S2460 (cannot find the revision on the board)
- 512MB DDR
- ATI radeon VE (is a tested and approved card with the MB)
- adaptec 39160 dual channel U160 with a 18GB and a 36GB disk on one channel, CDrom and CDRW on the other
- pulsarI
- network card Allied Telesyn....
- soft: only W2K SP2,V3.0 and CEP1.2a
- no acpi (w2k never istalled it) pulsar on its own IRQ.
I know already that this board has its problems with pulsar, but just a working adat connection is impossible.
I know it takes time before any board runs optimal, but at the moment pulsar not even crawls.
Sounds to me like you got one of the early (buggy) Tiger boards. Major problems with that board, when ours simply stopped POSTing correctly after week 2, we called the AMD Authorized Launch Partner where we purchased the board, and he literally laughed at us, saying that every one of the original batch he sold went back and then we worked out the RMA to get the rev 3 board.
Good news though! It looks like the rev3 may solve a lot of the problems
http://www.planetz.com/forums/viewtopic ... &forum=5&3
I will have more to tell you in about 10 days when our replacement finally arrives.
Good news though! It looks like the rev3 may solve a lot of the problems
http://www.planetz.com/forums/viewtopic ... &forum=5&3
I will have more to tell you in about 10 days when our replacement finally arrives.
Subhuman - So a Supermicro P4DC6 (i860 chipset) and 2 Pentium Xeons 1.7Ghz should do the trick!? I will get no hassle from the Creamware Pulsar V3/3.01 software under XP Pro eh??
No more annoying Copy protection violation messages, no more freezing and hard crashing whilst using Cubase with the Pulsar hardware. Basically no dual cpu compatability issues, should run sweet as pie?
Honestly subhuman i'm not pulling your chain here this is my proposed next system and basically i need to know if this is going to work?? What happens if it doesnt work, who/what is to blame then? If Creamware would make a statement regarding dual cpu compatability with their products and what hardware is recommended it would save a lot of unnecessary bitching!!
No more annoying Copy protection violation messages, no more freezing and hard crashing whilst using Cubase with the Pulsar hardware. Basically no dual cpu compatability issues, should run sweet as pie?
Honestly subhuman i'm not pulling your chain here this is my proposed next system and basically i need to know if this is going to work?? What happens if it doesnt work, who/what is to blame then? If Creamware would make a statement regarding dual cpu compatability with their products and what hardware is recommended it would save a lot of unnecessary bitching!!
The only machines I can guarantee are the machines I sell... the official word from Creamware's FAQ on the P4 is:
<ul><i>
Solution
We have not finished all our tests yet and for this reason cannot recommend individual P4 systems.
However, the P4 chip sets i850 (RD-RAM) and i845 (SD-RAM) use the same ICH2 chip in the PCI bridge as the i815 chip set we currently recommend. This chip is important for the available PCI bandwidth. So theoretically PCI bandwidth should be ideal with P4 boards.
We will inform you about the results of our test as soon as these will be finished.
The RAM type used does not directly influence the PCI performance.
</i></ul>
So we're still a little ahead of them on the P4 front (and the ICH2 info is something I've said on the Creamware forum a few times in the past
). P4 systems DO work, and they work <i>really</i> well. (I run one myself with 21 DSPs)
As far as dual processing, this is the official words Creamware has on their website:
<ul><i>
*We do not recommend dual CPU systems, since these lead to a higher PCI load and thus reduce the performance of our products
</i></ul>
As we, the warriors (you're one of em!) of testing new computer platforms with Creamware have found, PCI isn't actually the issues you will run into... it's more along the lines of CopyProtection messages.
Guess what? I got these messages on my single processor machine last night under XP, PulsarV3.01. And I don't have any Creamware crack either. I'm running in ACPI mode right now on my WinXP install, so I think it may have something to do with the fact that the IRQs/hardware addresses slightly change with each reboot. This does seem to be the reason they suggest "Standard Mode" as it keeps everything solid/stable. It does work, if you simply close and reopen Pulsar, but I agree with you: it's annoying and it would be nice if there was a fix, instead of this workaround.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: subhuman on 2001-11-27 09:58 ]</font>
<ul><i>
Solution
We have not finished all our tests yet and for this reason cannot recommend individual P4 systems.
However, the P4 chip sets i850 (RD-RAM) and i845 (SD-RAM) use the same ICH2 chip in the PCI bridge as the i815 chip set we currently recommend. This chip is important for the available PCI bandwidth. So theoretically PCI bandwidth should be ideal with P4 boards.
We will inform you about the results of our test as soon as these will be finished.
The RAM type used does not directly influence the PCI performance.
</i></ul>
So we're still a little ahead of them on the P4 front (and the ICH2 info is something I've said on the Creamware forum a few times in the past
). P4 systems DO work, and they work <i>really</i> well. (I run one myself with 21 DSPs)As far as dual processing, this is the official words Creamware has on their website:
<ul><i>
*We do not recommend dual CPU systems, since these lead to a higher PCI load and thus reduce the performance of our products
</i></ul>
As we, the warriors (you're one of em!) of testing new computer platforms with Creamware have found, PCI isn't actually the issues you will run into... it's more along the lines of CopyProtection messages.
Guess what? I got these messages on my single processor machine last night under XP, PulsarV3.01. And I don't have any Creamware crack either. I'm running in ACPI mode right now on my WinXP install, so I think it may have something to do with the fact that the IRQs/hardware addresses slightly change with each reboot. This does seem to be the reason they suggest "Standard Mode" as it keeps everything solid/stable. It does work, if you simply close and reopen Pulsar, but I agree with you: it's annoying and it would be nice if there was a fix, instead of this workaround.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: subhuman on 2001-11-27 09:58 ]</font>
A few more words: Windows 2000 really doesn't work so well as compared to Windows XP dual processing, it's MUCH smoother in XP (XP simply much smoother than Win2k all around). It was also only recently released, and Creamware is the only company with a DSP board that runs under XP that I know of. There will undoubtably be improvements to their XP implementation as time goes on.
Which leads me to my next point: what's the huge rush to have the latest, newest OS and hardware? Are you a musician or a computer technician? There are solid, proven systems that work reliably with Creamware and it should be really clear what those systems are by now. If you want a reliable proven system without the headaches of going down a dark road alone, then choose that system, and use it to make music and leave the bleeding edge to the computer geeks... Because until it's on Infinite Vortex or listed in Creamware's FAQ, there is no promises it'll work on your new 10Ghz quad processor etc. I'm done now.
Which leads me to my next point: what's the huge rush to have the latest, newest OS and hardware? Are you a musician or a computer technician? There are solid, proven systems that work reliably with Creamware and it should be really clear what those systems are by now. If you want a reliable proven system without the headaches of going down a dark road alone, then choose that system, and use it to make music and leave the bleeding edge to the computer geeks... Because until it's on Infinite Vortex or listed in Creamware's FAQ, there is no promises it'll work on your new 10Ghz quad processor etc. I'm done now.
Sub your a funny guy ( in a good way )
>>Are you a musician or a computer technician?
I'm a musician but since having my Pulsar Card it has turned me from musician to technician.
>>As far as dual processing, this is the official words Creamware has on their website:
*We do not recommend dual CPU systems, since these lead to a higher PCI load and thus reduce the performance of our products
All it says is they do not recommend. Where does it say "Our Products wont work/non compatible with PIII Dual CPU, but if your lucky it might work" Maybe they ought to change there text to mine
As for the situation for dual athlon MP i cannot comment whether they are compatible or not.
>>Guess what? I got these messages on my single processor machine last night under XP, PulsarV3.01...........
Luckily for you opening and closing pulsar fixes your problem. It dont work for me :-0
>>Because until it's on Infinite Vortex or listed in Creamware's FAQ, there is no promises it'll work on your new 10Ghz quad processor etc.
Lets not worry about the 10ghz quad processor compatability just yet I'll be happy just to have dual processor compatability for now.
Its All Fun.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Supersaw on 2001-11-27 11:49 ]</font>
>>Are you a musician or a computer technician?
I'm a musician but since having my Pulsar Card it has turned me from musician to technician.
>>As far as dual processing, this is the official words Creamware has on their website:
*We do not recommend dual CPU systems, since these lead to a higher PCI load and thus reduce the performance of our products
All it says is they do not recommend. Where does it say "Our Products wont work/non compatible with PIII Dual CPU, but if your lucky it might work" Maybe they ought to change there text to mine
As for the situation for dual athlon MP i cannot comment whether they are compatible or not.
>>Guess what? I got these messages on my single processor machine last night under XP, PulsarV3.01...........
Luckily for you opening and closing pulsar fixes your problem. It dont work for me :-0
>>Because until it's on Infinite Vortex or listed in Creamware's FAQ, there is no promises it'll work on your new 10Ghz quad processor etc.
Lets not worry about the 10ghz quad processor compatability just yet I'll be happy just to have dual processor compatability for now.
Its All Fun.
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Supersaw on 2001-11-27 11:49 ]</font>