More Complaints regarding Vegas 4.0c

lamename wrote on 6/11/2003, 7:46 PM
PC- P4 2.4ghz
WIN XP Pro with 2GB RAM
INTEL D865PERL Motherboard w/ onboard sound SoundMAX
Aardvark Q10 audio interface w/ latest drivers.

I used to have no problems at all with Vegas 3 but...

I bought and installed Vegas 4 and applied latest update 4.0c I think it is.
I have tried every setting in Vegas as far as Audio Device settings are concerned.
NONE WORK. I'm not talking about the out of sync problem everyone in the forum seems to be talking about. I'm talking if I play back a Vegas3 file and even move the scrollbars, It beeps and slows the whole darn palyback down. Never occured in Vegas 3.

I tried every setting I know of in Windows' sound properties. Defaulted the SoundMAX, then I disabled the SoundMAX, then I tried defaulting to the Aardvark Q10 which by the way supports ASIO. Somebody please save me. I'm so bummed that I bought all the latest greatest and it works worse than before...

Thanks to all who care.

Craigb - Lamename

Comments

Arnar wrote on 6/12/2003, 4:25 AM
Im sorry mate....stick with 3 ! it works and 4 doesnt.
Im seriously thinking of asking for a refund ...

I gave 4 another try last night ...5 minutes ...Bluescreen.!!

Seriiously crapped out software!
Former user wrote on 6/12/2003, 7:25 AM
Was your onboard card disabled in the BIOS before the XP install or did you simply try and turn it off thru Windows...huge difference here. And a classic symptom of problems. The Q10 should rock straight away...providing your box is correctly configured to begin with. I suspecy some serious hardware trouble here...

Update when you can.

Cuzin B
lamename wrote on 6/12/2003, 3:28 PM
I have at least tackled one big problem so far.
I had a great system with one exception. I temporarily had been using a cruddy 8MB Trident PCI video card. It must have been hogging PCI resources and so when I would scroll in vegas4 with it playing it would majorly stutter. NO MORE now that I swapped it with a slightly better AGP Radeon card. That took care of that.

Now I'm waiting to see what happens with my first heavier session tonight. I never had issues with Vegas3 and hopefully that will continue. I'm still a lot confused about proper settings between my Aardvark Q10 and Vegas with regards to Sample Rates and Bit Depth. I gonna try 96/24 ASIO for the first time tonight and see what happens.
I'll come back here then and report and you can all act like you care:)

Thanks.
Lamename
tmrpro wrote on 6/12/2003, 8:57 PM
******I'll come back here then and report and you can all act like you care:)******

Hey Craig,

I care a lot about the issues I'm seeing in this forum.

I really want to know what happens.

I personally have no need or desire to record at 96k, but I am always using 24 bit.

I had V3 and didn't really use it. My first experience with V4 was 4.0 (build 115). I'm using it to mix with in 3 slightly different systems and have not had the kind of problems I've seen here. I'm not tracking with it, so the track alignment bug as described in other posts is not something that I would have experienced. Also, I'm using ASIO.

The only thing I've ever had happen is a slight "hiccup" when I'm moving in and out of my effects chains on individual channels when the application is in play and I'm using 50 or more tracks.

If I ever start tracking with the program, I will probably want to use Direct Sound for a greater number of externally monitored tracks.

I have P4 systems that are built from the ground up for audio:

ASUS M/Bs
P4 2.0G processor (or bigger) w/onboard ethernet
2 gigs RAMBUS PC800 memory
{One machine is a XEON machine with 2G of DDR}
XP home w/SP1 (audio optimized)
Boot & Write to SCSI 19160 w/15k cheetah or IBM
IDE backup on carrier
CDRW
Delta or Echo sound card

I use SOHO server cases for all of my machines with 400+ Watt power supplies and lots of ventilation.

I wonder if my overall system stability is increased by having the real good power supplies with no voltage increase on the v-core...
lamename wrote on 6/14/2003, 2:14 AM
tmrpro,
Sounds like you have some nice PCs. I build mine too but not quite as nice as yours.

As for last night session. Didn't keep as many tracks as I was hoping for last night but this had nothing to do with Vegas and more to do with poor performances.

That said, I experienced no problems, no hiccups, no out of syncing, etc with 15 tracks. Again, not that many I know. I would have been very dissatisfied had I experienced those issues with that many audio only tracks.

Just because, I exclusively utilized 96/24 throughout the session and it was cool. Though I agree with you, I don't know that I really need to go with 96 too often. Going 24bit though is way cool.

So, for now, no new complaining. I rest easy. I will add more input into this forum as I do more. I will also continue devouring everyone else's input in this forum in the meantime.

~Lamename
Geoff_Wood wrote on 6/14/2003, 6:53 AM
"Poor performance" because of the extra throughput with the 96K, maybe ? How did that comnpare with 48K/44K1 projects with similar track/plug-count ?

geoff
PeterVred wrote on 6/14/2003, 7:13 AM
Seems like we have to bit the bullet with 4.0, 2.0 was a smooth program for me, 4.0 is buggy as hell. But still worth the update due to Efx automation.
I just updated motherboard and am now using onboard sound...no problems so far!
You are right about Video cards too, they have a big impack on XP, especially during install...and new is not always better, i had to regress to an old card to get XP loaded up.

I don't have any tips for ya...just to commiserate on 4.0.
lamename wrote on 6/14/2003, 4:31 PM
Geoff:
When I said "poor performances" I was referring to the poor performances of the human musicians. Not the application or the sound card.

So far with my 96/24 attempts, it's smooth except for one annoying thing. There are noticable crackles during playback; not after rendering mind you, but during playback.
Never had it before but as I say, this is with 96/24.

I may just utilize the 24bit but not 96 in future projects.