Jump to content

"SD Media slow" warning with approved Media


Armin Siegwarth

Recommended Posts

I really do not like to get this message when recording a board with 3 high profile CEO's...

 

Never I had problems with approved Sandisk CF Cards with my 664. But SD cards seem to be more problematic. First I bought transcends which were removed from the list. Then I had SanDisk Extreme plus 32GB. After 1-2 years it failed during recording a concert. I found out it was 90MB - but the approved is only the 80MB Version of it. 

So I orderd in the UK the Delkin Devices 633x 32GB SD card which worked fine for about 1 Year. Till yesterday.

 

I did not find recent discussions about SD cards (besides Sound Devices own Sam32sd) but remembered some very in detail posts from Tom Duffy like.   

   

My question: Is there a way to format SD cards to improve their write speeds? Like in Windows full format (not the quick format) that takes about 5 minutes? Do all SD cards tend to fail after 1-2 years? Or can I trust cards after the full sector erase? 

 

I heard that from CFast cards that C300MK2 uses. They need to be formated from time to time in the computer to maintain their speed for 4k. 

 

The Delkin I did full sector format that way now records 14 Tracks for 3h without issues. 

 

Or the other way round: is there a software that does check if the write speed is consistent on a card and not only doing average write speed. And is there a way to check for bad sectors on SD cards? 

 

If every card slows down over time it makes no sense to buy the Sound Devices Sam32GB but to invest in time to properly format SD cards. Until now I always formated in the recorder.   

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no idea if the tricks you propose would improve the performance of the cards mentioned.  I have not heard of any manner of formatting cards for SD recorders recommended other than in the recorder itself, preferably the machine that will be using that card to record on.  I have only ever seen "disk slow" errors on non SD branded cards (Delkin, SanDisc, approved), which, yes, is why I don't use them any more in favor of SD-branded cards.  I should also say that I've only seen those errors in 6xx SD machines at the higher end of a machine's available track-count.  Is it the old thought that non SD brand cards get changes to their firmware more often than we know?  That the firmware of those cards, primarily designed for still photography and the firmware of those cameras, is really more suited to gulping big files all at once vs. a lot of streams of data in real time?  I never got conclusive answers to these questions, but will say that things have been more stable since I retired all my non-SD branded cards  re use on 6xx recorders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Three weeks ago, I had a "SD Media Slow" alert on a 664 rolling six 24/48 tracks to approved SanDisk media. I had reformatted at the beginning of the day with the 664's Erase/Format function... didn't fail until a couple hours into the day, had been fine the day before... Not my card, but yes: approved. Disconcerting, but the CF card kept rolling.

 

So I became curious about formatting alternatives, card tech & structure. To be clear, I was just curious... I'm going to stick to formatting cards through the recorders I use. And I'm going to switch to SD-branded cards.... even if they do slow down over time, the cost over other brands is basically trivial. And maybe I'll end up retiriing cards after a set lifespan... I don't yet know what that lifespan should be, but I also don't want to see another "SD Media Slow" notice. 

 

Memory cards are expendables, pretty much. And once I encounter a problem, the card is retired... Perhaps I'm wasting money, but not much money...

 

If you want to dig in and are willing to risk things not really working, this post I found a couple weeks ago looks kinda fun (though I'm not going to do anything like this for media I use at work):

 

FORMATTING SD CARDS FOR SPEED AND LIFETIME

JULY 21, 2014 

Have you ever re-formatted an SD card and noticed the performance degrade? You formatted it FAT32 just like it came from the factory, but it runs slower. Except you didn’t actually format it like the factory. The following is a document I wrote mid-2013 about formatting microSD cards with a single FAT32 partition with a layout that is optimized for speed and lifetime. It also includes details about using this card as a bootloader source for TI OMAP3/4 processors.

http://3gfp.com/wp/2014/07/formatting-sd-cards-for-speed-and-lifetime/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love to hear from others about it - especially long term experience.

 

My problems occured only on poly multitrack recordings 6 - 10 tracks.

 

If I get Tom correct a full sector erase is helpful.

 

My testing now was as follow:

1) full sector format on the computer

2) quick format in SD 664 recorder 

3) 4h - 14 Track recording till full

4) quick format in Recorder

5) 1h - 14 tracks

6) quick format in recorder

7) 1h - 14 Tracks

8) full sector format on the computer

9) full write card test with checksum on computer with h2testw

 

Previously I retired the cards that got media slow. But this time I have the feeling that the full format could do the job. 

  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I wish I knew what was causing the problem for you, this always seems so "mysterious"...

my workflow has been:

The full format on my computer twice a year, takes forever but oh well.  Then the normal format on my 633/688 and I have never had issues..

I have always been on Sandisk cards..

I have never had to do it multiple times..

Yes, it has been stress tested with over ten tracks, can't comment on concert recordings or anything like that...  shorter takes over and over...     and over.

Maybe the shorter repetitive recordings never allow the machines to get backed up..

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess this sort of thing is exactly why SoundDevices decided to sell their own branded cards.

Never had a problem with the approved Sanddisk cards while I used it but I switched to the SoundDevices labeled ones as soon as they became available.

I could understand if somebody would need more then 32GB for a single session, but otherwise, why would you want to use another card, for me the cost difference is simply too small to worry about.

 

13 hours ago, Armin Siegwarth said:

Previously I retired the cards that got media slow. But this time I have the feeling that the full format could do the job. 

 

you're a braver man that I am ; )

I don't have experience with very long and heavy use, but maybe contact SoundDevices if there's a risk of slowdown with their cards, they probably tested this, and if so you'd save hours and hours of testing and trouble shooting (not to mention the risk of loosing important recordings).

chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have also switched to Sound Devices branded cards and have not had card-related issues since. Recording media is not where you should try to save as much as possible. 

I replace those cards on a fairly regular basis, but I haven’t established a routine for this, yet. 

I‘m on a 788, but I only ever use its internal formatting option 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm kind of spend-thrift on this issue.  If a card of any sort shows any sort of issue, out it goes.  The higher the track count, the more signal processing you are using (esp automix), the higher your SR, AND if you are recording MONO tracks (not poly) and staying in record for very long takes, the more it seems like a good idea to be as conservative about card choice and use as possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Sound Devices Card is on the market for 1.5 Years now. It gets to the time when I had my issues with other brands. Anybody heard of a media slow with them? 

 

Anybody needed to use their 5 Year Warranty? 

 

As I record always Poly.wav from my understanding its not different from recording a video stream. As a quick solution I bought 64GB Sandisk Extreme Pro 95MB. And most probably I will order a Sam32Gb SD too. But I am still so curious....  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Philip Perkins said:

SD cards have been fine for me, started using them (both CF and SD) as soon as they became available.  But I will say that I'm not using a high track count machine with them anymore, just a 633.   I did have occasional issues with Delkin on my 664 rolling 16 tracks of mono files.

16 tracks of mono files and I may fail before the card..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Armin Siegwarth said:

The Sound Devices Card is on the market for 1.5 Years now. It gets to the time when I had my issues with other brands. Anybody heard of a media slow with them? 

 

Anybody needed to use their 5 Year Warranty? 

 

As I record always Poly.wav from my understanding its not different from recording a video stream. As a quick solution I bought 64GB Sandisk Extreme Pro 95MB. And most probably I will order a Sam32Gb SD too. But I am still so curious....  

I've been running SAM 32 SD/CF for a year. Previously ran approved media until an unrecoverable recorder crash - previously approved media no longer approved - use SAM cards if you want 1 less tier of dialogue (with Sound Devices) when you recorder has a problem. A bit expensive (especially in UK), yes - but I like to think of the extra as helping SD improve the customer services outcomes - it should.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 9 months later...

I'm working with a studio that recently purchased a 688 and a 633. They also bought 3 Sound Devices SD cards and 2 Sound Devices CF cards. In the first week we've had two of the three SD cards report that the media was too slow and one of the CF cards is completely corrupted. I've personally owned a 664 and 688 and I've always used SanDisk cards. Never had a single issue before now. 

 

We've been recording 9 mics for takes up to an hour long so I understand that we're putting the cards through their paces but one day I was running only three lavs and the SD reported that the media was too slow. 

 

I had the company order SanDisk cards from the approved media list. I'll keep you posted as to how they respond compared to the Sound Devices cards. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, cn obrien said:

I'm working with a studio that recently purchased a 688 and a 633. They also bought 3 Sound Devices SD cards and 2 Sound Devices CF cards. In the first week we've had two of the three SD cards report that the media was too slow and one of the CF cards is completely corrupted. I've personally owned a 664 and 688 and I've always used SanDisk cards. Never had a single issue before now. 

 

That's disconcerting. Did you contact Sound Devices and ask what might be up? And to be clear, I'm asking not in an "always contact support" kind of way. Rather, I'd really like to know what might be going on, what the solution is, etc. Dang. Good luck!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
9 hours ago, DonSpaulding said:

what card do you guys recommend other than the (rather pricey) one that Sound Devices offer?


SanDisk gets mentioned a lot, is what I use too, is what many camera guys use too when they need high performance cards (such as in the BMPCC etc) as SanDisk is one of the best respected media brands. (not just my SD cards, but my CF and SSDs are SanDisk as well!)

 

Go for one of their Extreme or Extreme Pro cards. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, DonSpaulding said:

If I stick to 24 bits, what card do you guys recommend other than the (rather pricey) one that Sound Devices offer?

 

for paid jobs, I'd strongly advice to stick with the SD branded cards. only reason to use something else is if you need more then 32GB.

for hobby projects, use whatever you have and report back ; )

chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, chrismedr said:

for paid jobs, I'd strongly advice to stick with the SD branded cards.


Unfortunately as this thread shows, sticking to Sound Devices branded cards (cards? "Card" singular...  they've only got one SD card type available) isn't a fail safe approach to a trouble free existence. 

This is one of the reasons I'm glad the 833 has an internal SSD (as well as 2x SDs), so at least you've always got that to rely upon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, IronFilm said:


Unfortunately as this thread shows, sticking to Sound Devices branded cards (cards? "Card" singular...  they've only got one SD card type available) isn't a fail safe approach to a trouble free existence. 

This is one of the reasons I'm glad the 833 has an internal SSD (as well as 2x SDs), so at least you've always got that to rely upon.

No, but it it is something like 'plausible deniability', (as in you didn't do the 'wrong thing' by using another card). Just buying 'SAM' cards now from US, as the UK price is a total rip-off (>£5/stereo hour {more expensive than DAT!}). The card thing will be missed least by 6 series users when they move on to their next recorders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am the outlier here.  thinking it was safest option, I had production buy SD CF cards for a film.  Several failed with speed issues.  Switched to my personal Sandisk cards-no issue- long takes 13 tracks.....   .  Cards failed with not so high track counts-- 5 tracks.  Failed in both 688 and 633.   And also failed during card to card transfer. Talking to SD about it today. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the input guys! I forgot about that one issue since I usually take an interface and Macbook pro into the field. It may be worth the extra money to have an internal SSD. But as a couple people have pointed out, there are no bullet proof solutions to what we do, or else backups would be obsolete!

 

Which Scandisk cards are you using? It looks like the biggest issue is the read/write speed and the SD branded do 90mb/sec.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...