Old 05-26-2015, 06:34 PM   #1
music_scribe
Human being with feelings
 
music_scribe's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Springfield OR
Posts: 14
Default Defrag or not?

At the risk of opening a can of worms, I'd like to hear some considered input on whether or not one should defrag an audio hard drive. It's been a few years since I've looked into this, and it looks like a few years since any large scale discussion on this forum. Dr. Google still seems equally divided between never, after every session/frequently, and only if you're having problems. I still can't find any real info on whether or not each DAW has any say in the matter.

In my specific case I haven't seen any problems yet. I'm also speaking of an HDD, not SSD, on a Win 7 64 bit machine. I use 3 drives, one each for system/programs, sample libraries, and actual recorded audio files. My question is mainly about the audio files drive. Thoughts?
music_scribe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2015, 07:07 PM   #2
grinder
Human being with feelings
 
grinder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 2,905
Default

I defrag regularly
Samples drive and Wave files drive both HD
I can give you no definitive reason only that years ago I researched the subject and that was the thing then.

Grinder

https://soundcloud.com/steve-maitland-1
grinder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2015, 07:35 PM   #3
Fergler
Human being with feelings
 
Fergler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 5,207
Default

Fragmentation happens from writing and rewriting of files, so for an audio harddrive where mostly the samples remain where they are you likely won't see much difference.

But on an HDD, it can't hurt and I've certainly had performance boosts in the past when I defragged an entire HDD computer after years of letting it build up. Was like night and day.
Fergler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2015, 07:39 PM   #4
Time Waster
Human being with feelings
 
Time Waster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Bowral, Australia
Posts: 1,638
Default

The only reason not to defrag is if you are worried about data corruption. Defragging physically moves (rewrites) data to a different location the disk. With any writing operation, there is always a small risk of data corruption. presumably, the older the disk, the greater this risk is. Generally the risk is insignificant. Otherwise, the benefits of defragging are faster seek times and less movement of the recording head, so less wear on the device.
__________________
Mal, aka The Wasters of Time
Mal's JSFX: ReaRack2 Modular Synth
Time Waster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2015, 08:06 PM   #5
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 29,260
Default

No can of worms, knowledge is power.

Windows 7 forward is 100% automatic, leave it that way. The only other exception is that if for some reason you had noncontiguous WAV files which would be solved with contig.exe and the need found by using DiskView both by SysInternals.

However, the fragmentation needs to be at some credible level to cause an actual performance issue. There is a performance counter in windows under physical disk called "Split I/0" that goes high when the head is jumping around too much due to fragmentation. If it is at or near zero, any fragmentation isn't a problem because that counter measures that exact problem.

Summary, if you are a heavy DAW user with lots of files which are being modified often, you can defrag it or run contig.exe to be sure but overall, if you have at least 25% disk space free, it should usually not be an issue because that leaves enough free space for the auto defrag to do it's job when the box is idle.

Remember, Reaper for example is non-destructive, if you record some WAV files, editing them in Reaper for hours on end won't cause them to be fragmented because they aren't being changed.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like.
karbomusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2015, 09:01 PM   #6
music_scribe
Human being with feelings
 
music_scribe's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Springfield OR
Posts: 14
Default

Thank for the input all. I figured it wasn't something to worry about unless I actually saw problems. My disks are about half full, plenty of room, and I back up in at least 2 places. I'm not sure Win7 defrags totally automatically, it appears mine it set to run every Wednesday at 1am. Can't say I always leave my PC on, but there it is. I also find it interesting that Windows defrag says I have 0% fragmentation while Auslogics DiskDefrag says it's 17%.
music_scribe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2015, 07:50 AM   #7
cerendir
Human being with feelings
 
cerendir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 2,003
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
Windows 7 forward is 100% automatic, leave it that way.
So THAT's why both my Win 7 and Win 8 machines start grinding as soon as they're left idle for a while?
__________________
mattiaswestlund.net | facebook | soundcloud | bandcamp
cerendir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2015, 08:05 AM   #8
heda
Human being with feelings
 
heda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Spain
Posts: 7,239
Default

defragmenting is essential
Put the folders you are working on at the beginning of the hard disk. then make some free space after it and then the rest of the files. The heads will move less to find the files while you work. Your hard drive will be healthier and faster.

defragmenting a hard drive full of libraries that won't move is also a good idea from time to time... twice a year for example

quote from the mydefrag website: "It will refresh and strengthen the magnetic data on the harddisk by simply reading the (weakened) data and writing it afresh. However, defragmenting and optimizing is work, so excessive defragmenting and optimizing can actually cause more wear and tear than it prevents. "
heda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2015, 08:12 AM   #9
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 29,260
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cerendir View Post
So THAT's why both my Win 7 and Win 8 machines start grinding as soon as they're left idle for a while?
That may be search indexing or similar. I think defrag is an auto scheduled task if memory serves (I misspoke about idle above IIRC). A little history...

Back in "the day" windows defrag was actually a watered down version of Disk keeper. Thusly, some of the functionality such as scheduling it etc. wasn't available in order to not compete with the full version of disk keeper. Back then I had a pretty fancy script that would run every day at 3:00AM and defrag each drive since the built in version of disk keeper didn't offer it.

When it was manual only, there were lots of poorly performing systems due to excessive fragmentation. That problem is nearly nonexistent (comparatively) these days. However, if someone is concerned they can just defrag it manually and be done with it. From an academic standpoint, there are clear measurements that can be taken to know if it is a real issue and I always think real numbers are better than anecdotal evidence. AKA, I don't want to be spinning drives constantly defragging if there is no need and it's fairly easy to know if there is a need.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like.
karbomusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2015, 09:56 AM   #10
bennetng
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 264
Default

I never defrag since using XP and win7. Noticeable disk slowdown only happens when the disk itself is already busy but I still trying to do some disk intensive works or the disk is nearly full. I even disabled auto defrag in task scheduler.
bennetng is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2015, 09:58 AM   #11
Headshot
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 21
Default

The best "defrag" method, is to move all data to another drive. Format the drive you want to defrag and then move the data back to the drive. The perfect defrag.
Headshot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2015, 09:59 AM   #12
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 29,260
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Headshot View Post
The best "defrag" method, is to move all data to another drive. Format the drive you want to defrag and then move the data back to the drive. The perfect defrag.
It is... if you have the time, that is the perfect defrag.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like.
karbomusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2015, 10:24 AM   #13
cyrano
Human being with feelings
 
cyrano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Belgium
Posts: 5,246
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by heda View Post
quote from the mydefrag website: "It will refresh and strengthen the magnetic data on the harddisk by simply reading the (weakened) data and writing it afresh. However, defragmenting and optimizing is work, so excessive defragmenting and optimizing can actually cause more wear and tear than it prevents. "
That's only valid if you buy Monster cable and are able to hear the difference in sound from different harddisks...

Modern disk formats do not need to be defragged. In fact, you can't even defrag HFS+ or NTFS.

As long as you don't fill up the disk completely, you should never see fragmentation. If you have filled a (system) disk completely, you're in trouble anyway, but not because of fragmentation.

In very rare cases, backing up to an external disk and deleting on the source disk until you have enough space is a good method. After moving the files, shut the machine down to make sure journals have been written. Start up again and let the machine on overnight. It will defragment/prioritize files itself.

If you're running XP on a smallish FAT formatted disk, you will see fragmentation if you produce and delete a lot of stuff. But you shouldn't be running a system from a FAT disk anyway. It's 0.2% faster because it lacks ALL of the protection.
cyrano is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2015, 10:38 AM   #14
The Buddha Rats
Human being with feelings
 
The Buddha Rats's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: NYC
Posts: 312
Default

It's recommended that all non-solid state drives get defragged. Probably once a month is a good place to start. It really all depends on usage.
__________________
Les Paul, More Lennon
http://soundcloud.com/thebuddharats
The Buddha Rats is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2015, 10:45 AM   #15
Jeffsounds
Human being with feelings
 
Jeffsounds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Northeast Michigan
Posts: 3,460
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Buddha Rats View Post
It's recommended that all non-solid state drives get defragged. Probably once a month is a good place to start. It really all depends on usage.
Even if defrag says it is not needed?
__________________
"TV has become nothing more than a Petri dish where this country grows its idiots." -Dr. John Becker
My First CD On Spotify - Side O' The Highway
Jeffsounds is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2015, 11:09 AM   #16
whiteaxxxe
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: United States of Europe, Germany, Mönchengladbach
Posts: 2,047
Default

you only need to defrag a drive if you write and change the files on it often.

if - like said - you have a drive full of samples that are only read, you dont need to defrag.

simple solution is: start a defragging and see what the defrag-program says. the program tells you how the stat of fragmentation is on your drive.

and that is simply all to the story ...
whiteaxxxe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2015, 11:13 AM   #17
whiteaxxxe
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: United States of Europe, Germany, Mönchengladbach
Posts: 2,047
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by heda View Post
...

defragmenting a hard drive full of libraries that won't move is also a good idea from time to time... twice a year for example

quote from the mydefrag website: "It will refresh and strengthen the magnetic data on the harddisk by simply reading the (weakened) data and writing it afresh. However, defragmenting and optimizing is work, so excessive defragmenting and optimizing can actually cause more wear and tear than it prevents. "
honestly? I think that is big bs. but the companies need to make stuff up to sell their programs.

but very creative ... I have to admit that.
whiteaxxxe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2015, 11:19 AM   #18
cerendir
Human being with feelings
 
cerendir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 2,003
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
That may be search indexing or similar. I think defrag is an auto scheduled task if memory serves (I misspoke about idle above IIRC). A little history...
I've always had indexing off on both machines so that can't be it. I've always wondered what the heck they are doing but never been able to find a clear answer. Normally it's the csrss.exe process that starts to chug away with tons and tons on disk I/O after a short time of idling, maybe 15-20 minutes.

Come to think of it, it can't be defragmenting either, because if I load up the Windows defragmenter (or a third party app like Defraggler) I can clearly see that fragmentation is happening despite the constant churning of my hdd's.

Sorry for the OT, your statement about automatic defragging just got me thinking.
__________________
mattiaswestlund.net | facebook | soundcloud | bandcamp
cerendir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2015, 12:41 PM   #19
bluzkat
Human being with feelings
 
bluzkat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Northern Michigan
Posts: 6,919
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cyrano View Post
In fact, you can't even defrag HFS+ or NTFS.
I don't think this is quite right... got any references to back up this statement?


__________________
Peace...
bluzkat
bluzkat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2015, 01:00 PM   #20
cerendir
Human being with feelings
 
cerendir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 2,003
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluzkat View Post
I don't think this is quite right... got any references to back up this statement?


nope, that can't be right.
__________________
mattiaswestlund.net | facebook | soundcloud | bandcamp
cerendir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2015, 01:34 PM   #21
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 29,260
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cerendir View Post
I've always had indexing off on both machines so that can't be it. I've always wondered what the heck they are doing but never been able to find a clear answer. Normally it's the csrss.exe process that starts to chug away with tons and tons on disk I/O after a short time of idling, maybe 15-20 minutes.

Come to think of it, it can't be defragmenting either, because if I load up the Windows defragmenter (or a third party app like Defraggler) I can clearly see that fragmentation is happening despite the constant churning of my hdd's.

Sorry for the OT, your statement about automatic defragging just got me thinking.
It can be about anything but you can easily find out by running procmon.exe from SysInternals. My guess is that it is multiple things. And turn that indexing back on unless you like waiting forever for searches to complete.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like.
karbomusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2015, 01:42 PM   #22
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 29,260
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by whiteaxxxe View Post
you only need to defrag a drive if you write and change the files on it often.


if - like said - you have a drive full of samples that are only read, you dont need to defrag.
...

Right, only delete, modifications and writes can cause fragmentation and it's really too easy to know if you need to defrag.

Quote:
Originally Posted by whiteaxxxe View Post
honestly? I think that is big bs. but the companies need to make stuff up to sell their programs.

but very creative ... I have to admit that.
It is kinda BS and kinda not, it's real but not the thing that makes "all the difference". Besides any defrag starts refragging itself again at the very first modification of any file. By packing everything together you just guaranteed the next modification that results in a larger or smaller file creates fragments.

The point is that this is the thing for hair splitters to have fun with, the efficient thing to do is actually look at the IO and access times and know if you are taking a performance hit that even matters. Or better yet, let the OS take care of it unless you can prove it is a real issue that you can measure. If your drive is jumping all over the platter constantly and files are severely fragmented, it's a problem, if there are a few percentage points of fragmentation the time is spent better worrying about other things.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluzkat View Post
I don't think this is quite right... got any references to back up this statement?


Quote:
Originally Posted by cerendir View Post
nope, that can't be right.
It isn't. He may be mistaking NTFS the file system with various parts of that system such as the journal etc. I'd have to go back and find the specifics but you can defrag data on NTFS all day long since all it is doing is moving blocks of data around. The journal and other NTFS meta data may be more troublesome or need to be done at boot time, don't remember.

Here is a scenario that could lead to fragmentation that would be noticeable. Recording take after take after take and deleting bad ones and retaking and tracking say for a day or few. This could potentially and easily create lots of fragments. However, as mentioned newer OS's are going to clean that up overnight anyway so it isn't typically going to be an issue.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like.

Last edited by karbomusic; 05-27-2015 at 01:51 PM.
karbomusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2015, 01:45 PM   #23
cerendir
Human being with feelings
 
cerendir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 2,003
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
It can be about anything but you can easily find out by running procmon.exe from SysInternals. My guess is that it is multiple things. And turn that indexing back on unless you like waiting forever for searches to complete.
I've been a Total (previously Windows) Commander user for 15 years or so. I've never noticed that my file searches take more than 30 seconds tops.
__________________
mattiaswestlund.net | facebook | soundcloud | bandcamp
cerendir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2015, 02:03 PM   #24
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 29,260
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cerendir View Post
I've been a Total (previously Windows) Commander user for 15 years or so. I've never noticed that my file searches take more than 30 seconds tops.
Disk is disk so it takes more time to search each file on a disk than to search an index However.... If you can find a file in the presence of several million across several multi-terabyte drive in 30 seconds, you win, no argument from me.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like.
karbomusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2015, 02:34 PM   #25
Wolffman
Human being with feelings
 
Wolffman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Down Under
Posts: 2,148
Default

I just had a hard drive die which i had to have data retrieval experts retrieve for me, cost me a packet.

Anyhow, i spoke to him about my new hard drive and wether or not to drfrag and he said it wasn't necessary anymore because the new hard drives have some sort of built in file management system.

He basically said the new drives organise themselves and defraging could actually make things worse until the drive sorted itself out again.

This was for a brand new drive, i'm not sure when this sort of tech was implemented on hard drives, to be honest i'm not really too interested as long as it works

Older drives will benifit from defraging though.


Cheers
__________________
" Serve the song "

https://soundcloud.com/wolffman7
Wolffman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2015, 03:55 PM   #26
Banned
Human being with feelings
 
Banned's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Unwired (probably in the proximity of Amsterdam)
Posts: 4,868
Default

For non-SSD drives, for recording workflows maintaining a sufficiently large amount of non-fragmented free space is perhaps much more important than keeping the entire filesystem defragmented.

And if you need to play back (large) audio files during live workflows (performances, installations, theatre), it may make sense defragment those files individually.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolffman View Post
Anyhow, i spoke to him about my new hard drive and wether or not to drfrag and he said it wasn't necessary anymore because the new hard drives have some sort of built in file management system.

He basically said the new drives organise themselves and defraging could actually make things worse until the drive sorted itself out again.

This was for a brand new drive, i'm not sure when this sort of tech was implemented on hard drives, to be honest i'm not really too interested as long as it works

Older drives will benifit from defraging though.
I guess if you interpret "new" as SSD and "old" as non-SSD, it's just a somewhat poor explanation of a basic truth.
__________________
˙lɐd 'ʎɐʍ ƃuoɹʍ ǝɥʇ ǝɔıʌǝp ʇɐɥʇ ƃuıploɥ ǝɹ,noʎ
Banned is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2015, 12:57 AM   #27
Wolffman
Human being with feelings
 
Wolffman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Down Under
Posts: 2,148
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Banned View Post
I guess if you interpret "new" as SSD and "old" as non-SSD, it's just a somewhat poor explanation of a basic truth.
He was specific about my new HD which is not an SSD drive, its a typical 7200 speed 64 mb cache 1TB HD, Hitachi ( i Think )anyhow i'm going to take his word for it as he is the HD expert and all, and i know jack about how HD's actually work or what sort of tech they use to organise the files.

I'm just passing on what i was told only a couple of weeks back by a hard drive data retrieval expert, i can only assume he knows what he's talking about.

Cheers
__________________
" Serve the song "

https://soundcloud.com/wolffman7

Last edited by Wolffman; 05-28-2015 at 01:02 AM.
Wolffman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2015, 10:22 AM   #28
The Buddha Rats
Human being with feelings
 
The Buddha Rats's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: NYC
Posts: 312
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeffsounds View Post
Even if defrag says it is not needed?
I don't defrag unless it's over 20% and my performance is sluggish, if that helps.
__________________
Les Paul, More Lennon
http://soundcloud.com/thebuddharats
The Buddha Rats is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:23 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.