Mac vs. PC for recording.

[WalterBush]

In professional studios they don't use software based plugins. Most of them use Protools with plugins that run on digidesign ASIC based hardware.

These custom boards are far less glitchy in MAC's than PC's. This is why most pro studios run MAC's.

The performance of the Mac itself really isnt all that relevant. Its basically just doing the graphic output to you and some top level administration tasks and data storage. All of the hard core number crunching that needs to be done is on the digi cards and not the main computer.

If your running a fully software plug in version of a protools setup like a digirack or mbox with RTAS plugs then you do care how fast the computer is.

And I agree bang for buck PC wins hands down. Stability wise I think the Mac still has an edge.

Expandability wise if you want to move up to a digi HD setup Mac is the only real option in my opinion.

-Rav

At the last AES show in SF, Digidesign demo'd the ICON hardware and ProTools HD Accel with an AMD64/XP-based system.

 

[PunkerTrav]

Bottom line: Macs look cooler.

 

[12bass]

Bottom line: Macs look cooler.

Although I think PCs are a better value for performance, Macs do have an aesthetic appeal. The look and feel of the OS makes for a different user experience.

So, yeah, maybe they look cooler....

With Digi moving to AMD 64, I think the Mac dominance of the ProTools market is near its end. Given the power of the latest dual core AMD CPUs, and the adoption of PCI-E, I think the days of ProTools hardware DSP are numbered.

 

[geoffkhan]

In professional studios they don't use software based plugins. Most of them use Protools with plugins that run on digidesign ASIC based hardware.

I've been to some Protools recording studios and yes, they do use software based plugins as well as the hardware plugins you speak of. Granted sometimes they'll use a VST/RTAS version of a hardware effect (ex: Antares Autotune) because of the price. Software plugins are more flexible (I.E. Automation), but then CPU power takes effect.

These custom boards are far less glitchy in MAC's than PC's. This is why most pro studios run MAC's.

The performance of the Mac itself really isnt all that relevant. Its basically just doing the graphic output to you and some top level administration tasks and data storage. All of the hard core number crunching that needs to be done is on the digi cards and not the main computer.

If your running a fully software plug in version of a protools setup like a digirack or mbox with RTAS plugs then you do care how fast the computer is.

And I agree bang for buck PC wins hands down. Stability wise I think the Mac still has an edge.

I agree with you to a certain extent about stability. There's a very talented audio engineer I know who told me he's begun to hate Macs for studio recording. The reason for this was when he lost one of his big recording projects. I don't know the specifics, but basically suddenly a project he had been working on got erased.

Expandability wise if you want to move up to a digi HD setup Mac is the only real option in my opinion.

-Rav

Again, it really just rounds down to talent and what you can do with what you have. There's no giant difference between what a Mac can do and what Windows can do.

 

[geoffkhan]

Macs do have an aesthetic appeal. The look and feel of the OS makes for a different user experience.

So, yeah, maybe they look cooler....

The first impression you get from looking at a GUI is important. But ultimately you overlook that after a few uses.

Speaking of graphics, have you heard of that project which will let your soundcard utilize the power from your video card to process audio data?

 

[12bass]

Speaking of graphics, have you heard of that project which will let your soundcard utilize the power from your video card to process audio data?

A while back I heard about using nVidia graphics cards for DSP. As an ATI 9800Pro owner, I haven't looked into it since. Given the immense processing power in a modern GPU, the idea sounds intriguing.

Here's the FAQ:

http://www.bionicfx.com/info.html

At present, given the inherenent PCI-E latency/performance problems, I wouldn't go with their recommendation for PCI-E. AGP/PCI is still the best solution for computer audio performance.

 

[WillPlay4Food]

I agree with you to a certain extent about stability. There's a very talented audio engineer I know who told me he's begun to hate Macs for studio recording. The reason for this was when he lost one of his big recording projects. I don't know the specifics, but basically suddenly a project he had been working on got erased.

If he didn't have a backup then it's his fault, not the computer's. The company I work for backs up 12 TB of data every night. I've lost important data before and that's why I have a backup hard drive which stores a duplicate of anything I consider important.

Blaming data loss on a computer is like blaming a dentist for a cavity.

 

[Richard Lindsey]

Blaming data loss on a computer is like blaming a dentist for a cavity.

No, not really. Data get lost because the computer doesn't do its job perfectly. You don't get cavities because the dentist doesn't do his or her job perfectly.

Though I agree that it's foolish not to back up your data. However, I think we excuse an unacceptable level of dysfunction in our computer systems. Somebody once said something to the effect that if we accepted the same level of imperfection in our cars that we do in our PCs/Macs, our cars would run off the road twice on the way home from the dealer and would randomly stop working at highway speeds at the worst possible times. Or something like that.

Sometimes it's just the computer or the software's fault, just like sometimes it's just user error.

 

[WalterBush]

If he didn't have a backup then it's his fault, not the computer's. The company I work for backs up 12 TB of data every night. I've lost important data before and that's why I have a backup hard drive which stores a duplicate of anything I consider important.

Blaming data loss on a computer is like blaming a dentist for a cavity.

And there are plenty of lawyers who would tell you that if a dentist, someone you trust, gave you bad information through malice, neglect, or simple human error, they are responsible for your cavity. Ask your dentist what kind of malpractice suits they have against them lately.

I believe the larger point is about stability, something Mac users claim to have over PC users often. If the hard drive crashed, it was most likely the HD manufacturer's fault, not Apples, but I'd like to know more. Most studios replace hard drives at the start of each project, and if something in Mac OS is killing them (something I doubt, BTW) I'd like to know.

 

[geoffkhan]

If he didn't have a backup then it's his fault, not the computer's. The company I work for backs up 12 TB of data every night. I've lost important data before and that's why I have a backup hard drive which stores a duplicate of anything I consider important.

Blaming data loss on a computer is like blaming a dentist for a cavity.

Well, yes, backing things up is SO important. But his files were erased by a fluke with the Mac, not his fault.

So continuing your analogy, no, it would be the dentist's fault if he caused the cavity.

 

[Rav]

Just because one person who used a mac lost data doesn't mean that the mac is inheriently a flaky operating system.

Generally speaking the only things that cause data loss are:

1) HD failure - in this case PC's and mac's use the same drive technology so no difference in failure rate.

2) User error. - Users who use either can make mistakes.

3) Catastrophic application error causing the process to crash. - This is no more or less likely platform to platform. It depends on the software company who wrote then ported the application. Generally the application is more stable on the OS it was written on than the one it is ported to but this is not always the case. Protools is written on Mac.

4) Operating system failure resulting in seizure and reboot. - I personally haven't heard of anyone complaining that their MAC's just reboot for no reason.


Regardless save often in more than one directory.

Given that the operating system of Mac's is now NextStep/bsd Unix I would bet that his data in fact wasn't lost he just doesn't know how to find it.

-Rav

 

[Rav]

I've been to some Protools recording studios and yes, they do use software based plugins as well as the hardware plugins you speak of. Granted sometimes they'll use a VST/RTAS version of a hardware effect (ex: Antares Autotune) because of the price. Software plugins are more flexible (I.E. Automation), but then CPU power takes effect.

Semantic interpretation of what I said. Let me clarify.

Professional studios use hardware based processing. They don't use it to never have to use software plugins. They use it for performance. On a Protools HD system you can run literally hundreds of plugins in hardware at once and still have your system resources free to run the software plugins you like as well. Completely software based systems will not scale to this level.

I never said nor meant to say that professional studios never use software plugins.

-Rav

 

[geoffkhan]

I never said nor meant to say that professional studios never use software plugins.

-Rav

Okay, I'm sorry I kinda mistook what you said before. Thank you for clarifying. I agree with you. It's knowing what you need to have in hardware and what you need to have in plugins that's the key, so you can get a good mix of both.

 

[geoffkhan]

Given that the operating system of Mac's is now NextStep/bsd Unix I would bet that his data in fact wasn't lost he just doesn't know how to find it.

-Rav

You're most likely correct about this.

And I know another guy who runs his studio with a PC and his entire harddrive went down when he was mixing down something. It's a good thing he kept good regular backups!

Anyway, I'm biased towards the PC side of things because I do a lot of VST/VSTi work which is mostly for the PC.

 

[Bassist30]

The debate between Mac and Pc's seems like its never ending.
I think the 2 are much closer than say 2 years ago. The pentium is coming out, or could have already, a dual processor which is similar to the mac. What it comes down to is....... Is the music you are recording any good. It will basically sound the same with all the same hardware and software. I mean today when you buy software you can download it if you had a mac or pc, from the same disk. many of the mac software companies now make it for the pc. I mean it really does not make too much of a difference and with pentium making dual processors there will probably be no differences. Mac's are great and being it was really the first to do hard disk recording it is hard to change people to think that PC's are able to produce a good product. I just think if the music is good it will sound good on either with no one knowing which type of computer it was recorded on.

 

[Richard Lindsey]

I think good software is available for either one, you can make good music with either one, and you can have problems with either one (my buddy with a G4 has a lot more problems with his rig than I do with my Windoze box, but mileage varies enormously). This is not to say that the two platforms are basically just the same, because they're not. It's just to say that you can most likely do a sufficiently high-quality job with either, and it's probably not gonna happen that someone's gonna hear your results and say, ooh, that sounds like it was done on a PC.

It does seem to be true that more professional places do still prefer Macs, but I wouldn't assume that proves any *across-the-board inherent* superiority. I think you have to consider that there's probably at least some mental intertia involved. To a degree, people keep using Macs (or PCs) because, well, they've *been* using them. It can be almost a Ford-Chevy kinda thing: if your last five cars were Chevys, maybe your next one will be too. As an example, in the business world, for about every office task except graphics (word processing, spreadsheets, etc.), PCs are overwhelmingly more common than Macs. Does that mean Macs can't do those tasks at a professional level?

 

[Cantstandsya]

I have to admit to a strong Mac bias, but for what it's worth, I think Garageband2 stomps on any portastudio or budget recording software I've ever seen, and it comes with the new Mac. Then you can go Pro Tools later.

I get way better recordings with my Boss BR-864 than any of my friends get with Garage Band but I think it's a great program to get for free.Wish it came with PC's.........

 

[geoffkhan]

I think good software is available for either one, you can make good music with either one, and you can have problems with either one (my buddy with a G4 has a lot more problems with his rig than I do with my Windoze box, but mileage varies enormously). This is not to say that the two platforms are basically just the same, because they're not. It's just to say that you can most likely do a sufficiently high-quality job with either, and it's probably not gonna happen that someone's gonna hear your results and say, ooh, that sounds like it was done on a PC.

It does seem to be true that more professional places do still prefer Macs, but I wouldn't assume that proves any *across-the-board inherent* superiority. I think you have to consider that there's probably at least some mental intertia involved. To a degree, people keep using Macs (or PCs) because, well, they've *been* using them. It can be almost a Ford-Chevy kinda thing: if your last five cars were Chevys, maybe your next one will be too. As an example, in the business world, for about every office task except graphics (word processing, spreadsheets, etc.), PCs are overwhelmingly more common than Macs. Does that mean Macs can't do those tasks at a professional level?

Amen!

 

[JimmyM]

I find that the best sounding music recorded on computers is recorded by people who have talent and an ear for what sounds good. It doesn't make a lick of difference whether you use a Mac or a PC. While Mac is the industry standard, I have heard plenty of good music recorded onto PC-based systems. I find this debate irrelevant, quite honestly. What matters is the talent and heart you bring to the table.

 

[joninjapan]

Start with your need, then choose your tools.

I needed portable live recording on a minimal budget. I already own an iBook.

Solution:
Quicktime Pro 7 - ~$30
Edirol USB adio interface - $80
Audacity - free (for editing and converting to mp3 when needed)

I also use this for video recording, since the QTPro 7 allows seperate audio and video sources during recording.

So what is your "need"??