Cockos Incorporated Forums - View Single Post - Optimizing Windows XP for Audio *a sticky in the making??*

user1 · 06-19-2007, 06:51 PM

Well, he said

"DONT defragment your audio files ... all of that interleaving in stereo wave files will be kissed bye-bye when you do"

so he was talking about stereo wave files.

Second, I can't imagine a scenario where you run your computer so close to the edge (and having to make a large number of assumptions that lead to the computer reading faster from two files that are "interleaved on the disk" (and I'm making that term up for that use), that such would be necessary.

You'd need a perfectly clear hard disk, assume the computer doesn't buffer to memory, assume it reads faster from interleaved data (meaning it reads fastest the way it writes, which is not often the case, often writes skip across the disk so they match the spin RPM, or across write heads, etc.), and then assume you are recording enough tracks such that if there is a small increase in speed for such reads, you need it.

That's a lot of assumptions. I just don't think, even if that is what he meant, that it a practical worry.

06-19-2007, 06:51 PM	#22
user1 Human being with feelings Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 130	Well, he said "DONT defragment your audio files ... all of that interleaving in stereo wave files will be kissed bye-bye when you do" so he was talking about stereo wave files. Second, I can't imagine a scenario where you run your computer so close to the edge (and having to make a large number of assumptions that lead to the computer reading faster from two files that are "interleaved on the disk" (and I'm making that term up for that use), that such would be necessary. You'd need a perfectly clear hard disk, assume the computer doesn't buffer to memory, assume it reads faster from interleaved data (meaning it reads fastest the way it writes, which is not often the case, often writes skip across the disk so they match the spin RPM, or across write heads, etc.), and then assume you are recording enough tracks such that if there is a small increase in speed for such reads, you need it. That's a lot of assumptions. I just don't think, even if that is what he meant, that it a practical worry.