|
Hijacked a thread and want a larger opinion on the virtual machine topic for DAWs (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Eric J |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ Robby Rox
I wanted the VM to test software on, but would never have it booted when I was making music (which is what I posted in my thread and what nighshift commented about).
|
VM's are excellent for testing software, just dont expect to get great performance unless you have a monster host machine. When I say monster, I mean a server-class machine, especially if you want to run multiple VM's simultaneously. We use them at work to test software installation packages. Hyper-V is really top notch, but it costs. The nice thing is you can save snapshots of the machines in specific states and revert the machine back to that state with the click of a button.
You also have the option of using differencing disks where you can have a base install on one VHD (virtual hard disk) and then add another VHD on top of that to store any changes. You make the base VHD read-only and then add your differencing VHD. That way you always have a base install ready to go and if you ever screw up the snapshots you can revert to the base install by just deleting the differencing disk. The base VHD is also good for cloning a single VHD for use among multiple VM's. Windows 7 takes this one step further by adding Undo Disks, which basically do this behind the scenes for you.
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ Robby Rox
But I think the most important thing is I find out what hes using and then you can give me better direction. I will not have the VM booted at anytime when I'm making music, so it would be under those terms. Which is what I originally asked.. and I'm still honestly not sure why people answered in reference to having the VM booted.
I'm sorry but I thought I clearly stated that. Just nevermind. I'm going to find out one way or another I guess.. |
Its cool. My guess is that he is using an application-based virtual host, because those are generally inexpensive and consumer level. If that is the case you take no performance hit when the VM host software is not running but they perform slower than enterprise-level VM hosts that run as a service.
| quote: | Originally posted by atxbigballer1
U don't need that VM ! |
I agree with this guy that you may be better off using a multi-boot scenario. The only problem is that you'd miss the snapshot feature, which is extremely useful. It all depends on your goals, but in your case, I think you'd be just fine with a multi-boot machine. |
|
|
| DJ Robby Rox |
Thanks Eric this clarified things really well.
I do want to mention however he works for management at AT&T (couldn't tell you name of the branch) and gets free lifetime subscriptions to lots (or actually I think almost all the stuff he uses) He commonly gets extra copies and passes them off to family.
I'm honestly not sure if this is an extra copy or if hes using his own but price has never been an issue for most the software he uses. Its one benefit I suppose of having a massive computer geek in your family. Would rather not get into the ethical part though.. |
|
|
| Eric J |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ Robby Rox
Thanks Eric this clarified things really well.
I do want to mention however he works for management at AT&T (couldn't tell you name of the branch) and gets free lifetime subscriptions to lots (or actually I think almost all the stuff he uses) He commonly gets extra copies and passes them off to family.
I'm honestly not sure if this is an extra copy or if hes using his own but price has never been an issue for most the software he uses. Its one benefit I suppose of having a massive computer geek in your family. Would rather not get into the ethical part though.. |
He probably has an MSDN Volume License from AT&T, which is what I have. Legally you are only allowed to use these licenses for development purposes, but many people use them in "production" scenarios, illegally. Strictly speaking, what you are doing is not considered "development", so it'd technically be a violation of the MSDN EULA. Microsoft has started to crack down on this a bit, by limiting the number of product keys you are allowed to request for a particular application, server or OS.
In your case if you really want to try this and get the best performance out of it, that means Windows 7 Enterprise for you. Windows 7 Ent runs a "version" of Hyper V that allows direct access to the hardware if your processor supports it. It even includes a "Windows XP Mode" that runs pretty well.
Most server class machine in the past 2 years support it and there are several recent workstation class machines (such as the Dell Optiplex) that are including support for it. You'll need to go into your BIOS and look for a setting that says "Virtualization" or "Hyper-V" to see if your processor supports it. You can also check your manufacturer support website. If you dont have the hardware processor support you can't install it, so in that case you'll need to look at application-based VM hosts such as VMware fusion. or Microsoft Virtual PC.
The only other option is Windows Server 2008 w/ Hyper V and I would not recommend that for you. Server operating systems are setup by default to give priority to background services and applications, and you need resource priority to be given to foreground processes. You can change this behavior, but its not always easy and often require dangerous registry tweaks and obscure changes to things like DCOM Configuration. If you were to do this, you are basically turning a server OS into a workstation OS, so what's the point? Might as well install the workstation OS in the first place. |
|
|
| Chronosis |
| I use VM's for everything else besides music. Keeps my main OS fast and clean for running DAW. I also shut down the VM server from taking resources when producing. |
|
|
| Nightshift |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ Robby Rox
When nighshift made that comment I thought he was talking about the scenario of using them seperately, not together. (with VM being booted just for chat/surfing then shutting it down for music production) which is what I honestly think he still was talking about lol.
|
this is precisely what i was talking about. and it seems the results are quite good:
| quote: | Originally posted by Chronosis
I use VM's for everything else besides music. Keeps my main OS fast and clean for running DAW. I also shut down the VM server from taking resources when producing. |
|
|
|
| palm |
| i use VM-Ware at work. it sucks performance wise. its great for alot of other things but for audio id never try it. for one USB-ports and are troublesome in VM-Ware as u have to route them to what OS u want to use them on. Just stay the hell away from this. |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by palm
i use VM-Ware at work. it sucks performance wise. |
:wtf: :wtf: :wtf:
VMWare is practically transparent, performance-wise, assuming you've actually got virtualization-capable hardware. Are you running it on some ty desktop machine? Or worse, a laptop?
Not that I would use it for production, or on a home machine at all. I thought this ancient idea of keeping a machine "clean" for production "performance" died with Windows 98 along with all the "tweaking" guides. With UAC and quad-core processors and 4 GB of RAM, if you are really seeing performance problems then you've probably managed to get 27 worms from all your cr4xx0r3d software and need to just reformat. |
|
|
| Specimen303 |
| I have vmware workstation in my laptop (with vista 32-bit home) and it works just fine. It's currently running windows server 2008 r2 and sql server 2008 without any performance problems - studying for the sql certification exam. |
|
|
| DJ Robby Rox |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
[FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=#99CCEE] :wtf: :wtf: :wtf:
VMWare is practically transparent, performance-wise, assuming you've actually got virtualization-capable hardware. Are you running it on some ty desktop machine? Or worse, a laptop?
|
Just want to get an idea if you think my desktop is capable. I built it myself, 500gb HD, Core2DuoE7400 2.8ghz, 4GB RAM, Asus Mobo, Windows XP, can give you more specs if you need.
I mean that should be capable right? Or does the hardware need to be completely different? Like manufactured specifically for VMware? |
|
|
| DJ Robby Rox |
| quote: | Originally posted by Specimen303
I have vmware workstation in my laptop (with vista 32-bit home) and it works just fine. It's currently running windows server 2008 r2 and sql server 2008 without any performance problems - studying for the sql certification exam. |
Haha a laptop eh?
If you're not having issues on a laptop I think I should be fine then with my setup, thanks! |
|
|
| Specimen303 |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ Robby Rox
Haha a laptop eh?
If you're not having issues on a laptop I think I should be fine then with my setup, thanks! |
Well yes. I have about one and a half year old laptop with turion x2 and 4gb of ram. It's not the fastest in the planet but it gets things done. |
|
|
| Aesthetic |
I just completed a vmware course last week and the instructor basically said you can virtualize any machines but the ones that don't work well are machines that require very little latency responses.
So. lol. I love you Robbyrox, merry xmas mate.
PS. Looking at it the other way, you could use your Host OS to run your DAW and music , and your Guest OS to run all the other internet crap.. that could work I suppose |
|
|
|
|
