Mac vs PC???
- Thread starter Grim
- Start date
My friend has a G4 733mhz mac with pro tools he gets up to 14 plugins with 16 tracks of audio before it crapsout. However I have a 733mhz pc with two ata 100 hardrives at 7200 rpm spinrate intel chipset 512 ram and pro tools I get 40 plugins 24 tracks of audio before it craps out. Go figure.
mixmkr
we don't need rest!!
for HOME recording...PC, without a doubt. If you want the best there is, and have a couple of EXTRA bucks to get the hardware to match up with your computer setup...Mac/protools...but that is a waste at home. Many PC based programs, and even Cooledit will give you 95% on a PC of the imfamous protools, but at 1/10th the cost. If you gotta move fadars, get a Paris setup or a Mackie D8b mixer with the monitor option....or something along those lines. My guess is your not probably want to spend more than 5 grand TOPS for your total studio to start out with...and probably a lot less...noted especially for just asking the question you did.....so stick with your PC, (which I am guessing you already have), download some free demos, and find out what you really want. NOW, ISN'T THAT READING BETWEEN THE LINES OF YOUR POST??
Mac is better.
I mean PC is better.
Hell, I have both, and I use them both, and they both kick ass! Get the one you're comfortable with, don't listen to anyone who says one is more reliable or better for audio, because that person is full of shit. Every computer crashes, and there is no difference in sound between the platforms, so get what you want.
I mean PC is better.
Hell, I have both, and I use them both, and they both kick ass! Get the one you're comfortable with, don't listen to anyone who says one is more reliable or better for audio, because that person is full of shit. Every computer crashes, and there is no difference in sound between the platforms, so get what you want.
Thank you all for your responses...
Right now I have an older PC, but I'm planning on getting a new system soon.
A little background...I work as a network admin (Windows-based) and am all too familiar with the instability of the WIntel platform...but the plus side to that is that I know the MS operating systems and hardware platforms in and out.
Hardware performance aside...are Macs more stable?
I have two concerns here:
1) I am going to be using the box for recording gigs and really do not want to have a system blue screen on me in the middle of somone's set.
2) I know nothing about Macs...but I've been told if I can get around a PC the Macs are a breeze...true?
Right now I have an older PC, but I'm planning on getting a new system soon.
A little background...I work as a network admin (Windows-based) and am all too familiar with the instability of the WIntel platform...but the plus side to that is that I know the MS operating systems and hardware platforms in and out.
Hardware performance aside...are Macs more stable?
I have two concerns here:
1) I am going to be using the box for recording gigs and really do not want to have a system blue screen on me in the middle of somone's set.
2) I know nothing about Macs...but I've been told if I can get around a PC the Macs are a breeze...true?
As a graphic designer I HAVE to use both MAC and PC...
I think the best advice I can give you is choose what interface you're more comfortable with.
The fact is, MAC and PC... they're both the same. They both suck, they both crash, they both leave you with headaches.
If you're a veteran mac pro, stick with a mac. You'll find it easier to fix when it all goes to hell in a hand basket. Same goes with a PC.
You think macs are that easy?... yeah, think again. Do you know what to do when your fonts go awol, when you're programs keep crashing and you can only wonder if you have a bad extension? do you know how to rebuild the desktop? MACs have driven even the most mac savy crazy.
PCs, as we all know, are just as bad. The only reason why we hear about it more is because there is helluvalot more of them out there. Viruses, pooched registeries, sloppy installs...blah blah.
No one platform is better then another. in the end, its what you're more comfortable with.
Me? I'm a PC guy... why? cause I've been using em since the old 8088s. before windows... before macs... when MS-DOS was the deal... when I had to boot of one floppy disk and run a program on another. I love the way one can customize a PC, I love the amount of available software, I love how easy and cost effective it is to upgrade it, and I love being able to use more then 32 characters in a filename!
At the same time, I hate installing software that when I uninstall, not all of it disappears which leaves me to go hunting for unwanted files. I hate that when I buy a P4 2000 a p4 3000 comes out the day after
and I hate the fact that windows XP has problems playing some of the classic games like Doom.
I've also used macs for several years now... they're not bad at all. OSX has lots of promise. And it looks really cool too
im sure MACheads will say, they love their interface, they love the way they can change the color of their icons, they love the photoshop power, they love the way the cases look, they love the commercials and they love the RISC based processing.
As well, they can hate the fact that every system has to have a different compiled software for that particular mac. Some things on the beige MACS wont work on the Green Macs, which wont work on the Blue Macs, Which wont work on the Cube MAC, which wont work on a I Mac..... umm, right. The way that OS7, 8, and 9 crashes like theres no tommorow. The fact if one program crashes, theres a good chance your entire computer will go down with it loosing that 4 hours work you forgot to save. The fact that you can't run old OS9 programs on OSX unless you use the os9 emulator that takes forever run. And most of all, Hate when you're mp3s can't contain the band, album and track name cause you cant fit that in under 32 characters for your filename.
2000/XP is great, OSX will be great... both just don't crash... I'll say it again, its what you like best.
heh... yeah, I ranted again... sue me.
I think the best advice I can give you is choose what interface you're more comfortable with.
The fact is, MAC and PC... they're both the same. They both suck, they both crash, they both leave you with headaches.
If you're a veteran mac pro, stick with a mac. You'll find it easier to fix when it all goes to hell in a hand basket. Same goes with a PC.
You think macs are that easy?... yeah, think again. Do you know what to do when your fonts go awol, when you're programs keep crashing and you can only wonder if you have a bad extension? do you know how to rebuild the desktop? MACs have driven even the most mac savy crazy.
PCs, as we all know, are just as bad. The only reason why we hear about it more is because there is helluvalot more of them out there. Viruses, pooched registeries, sloppy installs...blah blah.
No one platform is better then another. in the end, its what you're more comfortable with.
Me? I'm a PC guy... why? cause I've been using em since the old 8088s. before windows... before macs... when MS-DOS was the deal... when I had to boot of one floppy disk and run a program on another. I love the way one can customize a PC, I love the amount of available software, I love how easy and cost effective it is to upgrade it, and I love being able to use more then 32 characters in a filename!
At the same time, I hate installing software that when I uninstall, not all of it disappears which leaves me to go hunting for unwanted files. I hate that when I buy a P4 2000 a p4 3000 comes out the day after
and I hate the fact that windows XP has problems playing some of the classic games like Doom.I've also used macs for several years now... they're not bad at all. OSX has lots of promise. And it looks really cool too
im sure MACheads will say, they love their interface, they love the way they can change the color of their icons, they love the photoshop power, they love the way the cases look, they love the commercials and they love the RISC based processing.
As well, they can hate the fact that every system has to have a different compiled software for that particular mac. Some things on the beige MACS wont work on the Green Macs, which wont work on the Blue Macs, Which wont work on the Cube MAC, which wont work on a I Mac..... umm, right. The way that OS7, 8, and 9 crashes like theres no tommorow. The fact if one program crashes, theres a good chance your entire computer will go down with it loosing that 4 hours work you forgot to save. The fact that you can't run old OS9 programs on OSX unless you use the os9 emulator that takes forever run. And most of all, Hate when you're mp3s can't contain the band, album and track name cause you cant fit that in under 32 characters for your filename.
2000/XP is great, OSX will be great... both just don't crash... I'll say it again, its what you like best.
heh... yeah, I ranted again... sue me.
tvaillan
New member
I can't find the DOS prompt on my MAC?
joke.
The mac architecture traditionally on motorolla 68k family of processors has certain advantages over the pc.
the RISC (reduced instruction set computing) set of instructions is smaller. there are more CPU data and adress registers.
8 data
7 address
1 stack.
the pc, traditionally built on intel cpu's, up until the p4, only had 4
not so general data registers , 2 address registers, 4 segment registers and a 2 stack registers...(i think. woah it's ben a while.)
programming the mac was a dream come true. it was straightforward, whereas on the PC, it seemed as though there was always a better way to utilize the registers.
with the advent of the G series MAC's the data/address bus was a whopping full 64bits whreas the intel architecture only had 32bits.
Now with the modern super scalar architecture, jump prediction, mmx SIMD floating point and integer multimedia co processor, the intel as well as AMD cpu's are certainly good contendors to the RISC based competition offered from MAC.
The XP generation of amd's and the new P4's from intel's certainly address the bus width shortcoming and gobble the mac hertz for hertz.
I am a diehard fan of RISC and MAC since things are just so easy from the point of the assembly language and machine instruction organization ... and now that MAC OS-X has gone UNIX .. I think i'm gonna soon trash my PC and go for a MAC.
UNIX is far more stable and secure than Windows period.
There's more software out for PC though and it's more readily available. I guess we just have to give it time.
and that was my two cents.
joke.
The mac architecture traditionally on motorolla 68k family of processors has certain advantages over the pc.
the RISC (reduced instruction set computing) set of instructions is smaller. there are more CPU data and adress registers.
8 data
7 address
1 stack.
the pc, traditionally built on intel cpu's, up until the p4, only had 4
not so general data registers , 2 address registers, 4 segment registers and a 2 stack registers...(i think. woah it's ben a while.)
programming the mac was a dream come true. it was straightforward, whereas on the PC, it seemed as though there was always a better way to utilize the registers.
with the advent of the G series MAC's the data/address bus was a whopping full 64bits whreas the intel architecture only had 32bits.
Now with the modern super scalar architecture, jump prediction, mmx SIMD floating point and integer multimedia co processor, the intel as well as AMD cpu's are certainly good contendors to the RISC based competition offered from MAC.
The XP generation of amd's and the new P4's from intel's certainly address the bus width shortcoming and gobble the mac hertz for hertz.
I am a diehard fan of RISC and MAC since things are just so easy from the point of the assembly language and machine instruction organization ... and now that MAC OS-X has gone UNIX .. I think i'm gonna soon trash my PC and go for a MAC.
UNIX is far more stable and secure than Windows period.
There's more software out for PC though and it's more readily available. I guess we just have to give it time.
and that was my two cents.
TexRoadkill
Audio Bum
I used macs 10yrs ago for sequencing and even then they were a lot more stable and easy to set up then a windows system today.
If you are recording live forget about a computer. All you need is for a disk overflow error in the middle of a song and your screwed. I used to do a lot of field recording for film and video and the most reliable decks are going to be DAT's and ADATs. Save the DAW for editing and mixing in the studio.
I havent used any dedicated HDD systems but usually for reliablity and ease go with tape. You can even use 2 adats and record on both at the same time for extra redundancy.
If you do take a DAW on location you better have some type of standby tape system if you want to get paid for the gig.
If you are recording live forget about a computer. All you need is for a disk overflow error in the middle of a song and your screwed. I used to do a lot of field recording for film and video and the most reliable decks are going to be DAT's and ADATs. Save the DAW for editing and mixing in the studio.
I havent used any dedicated HDD systems but usually for reliablity and ease go with tape. You can even use 2 adats and record on both at the same time for extra redundancy.
If you do take a DAW on location you better have some type of standby tape system if you want to get paid for the gig.
I think Tex hit right on the nose...save the PC/MAC for the studio...get a DAT for location. As far as studio work...you got to love a MAC/ProTool setup...but you've got to have the bucks for it. If money is an issue...then a PC/CEP is the way to go. The first computer I ever owned was an 8088...oh yeah, you had to know DOS to work it too! That baby ran me a whopping $3,200.00 back in '87. Heck, today with that amount of money, I can build 3 kick-butt boxes! The first video edit controller I ever bought set me back only $16,800.00...then there was the VTR's...man I could go on and on.
PS...and that was when Compuserv was Compuserv and the internet...well that was for something else!
PS...and that was when Compuserv was Compuserv and the internet...well that was for something else!
It sounds like it's a horse apiece either way I go. Honestly, I was hoping someone was going to say they use their PC for on-location recording...but that was more of a pipedream anyway.
Realistically, I think I'm going to go with a Mackie MDR24/96 and board for remote recording and build a somewhat scaled down PC for manipulating the audio in my home setup.
Thanks again for your input...
Realistically, I think I'm going to go with a Mackie MDR24/96 and board for remote recording and build a somewhat scaled down PC for manipulating the audio in my home setup.
Thanks again for your input...
Geeze!
I am a PeeCee user at work, used to be one at home till a buddy talked me into a Mac. (he subsequently bought a PC for work reasons)
I am a lover of Macs due to the interface and perceived quality of construction.
I love reading these duelling Mac/PeeCee wars!!!)
Personally, I find M$ windows very clunky and I don't have any big problems getting software. So I like Macs. Prior to OSX (which I don't have) they crash as often as PeeCees.
www.maccentral.com is a good source for Mac user discussion forums.
I have to agree with the replies about not using a computer for recording.
Thanks for the amusement!
PS Once you try Mac...
You won't go back!
I am a PeeCee user at work, used to be one at home till a buddy talked me into a Mac. (he subsequently bought a PC for work reasons)
I am a lover of Macs due to the interface and perceived quality of construction.
I love reading these duelling Mac/PeeCee wars!!!
)Personally, I find M$ windows very clunky and I don't have any big problems getting software. So I like Macs. Prior to OSX (which I don't have) they crash as often as PeeCees.
www.maccentral.com is a good source for Mac user discussion forums.
I have to agree with the replies about not using a computer for recording.
Thanks for the amusement!
PS Once you try Mac...
You won't go back!
there's plenty of people who use pc notebooks for recording,
that becomes more of a sound card issue-
will it fit/ usb device
the program you choose for pc has a lot to do with stability
after trying many i got sonar, which is good.
but now i am using samplitude for audio, this program was written for pc it is VERY stable on windows 98
windows 2000 is even more stable
i still use sonar for limited midi
but samplitude sounds awsome
i would stay away from cubase, it is very unstable, as i found n-tracks to be and even sonar
some people say it does not matter which program you choose to record on,
then they say protools sounds the best
well the software does matter
protools for pc has a lot of issues
samplitude is a rock and sounds great,
to my ears it has much more depth and smoothness
i advise you search forums of the various programs and download demos
if you have a pc and feel comfortable with it stay with it
there are way more programmers working for the pc platform than the mac
and everything mac is more $
nuendo is supposedly another very good program
written by steinberg w/ cubase money but far above it
i really advise you check out the samplitude demo though
it is fully functional for 90 days
so you pretty much are getting a free program at least for 90 days
this program is not the best known but it is so deep and has so many features and sounds so good....
protools is great especially if you have or want a working studio
because of name recoginition
but it is way more $$$$ than one needs to spend
IMHO, catfish11
that becomes more of a sound card issue-
will it fit/ usb device
the program you choose for pc has a lot to do with stability
after trying many i got sonar, which is good.
but now i am using samplitude for audio, this program was written for pc it is VERY stable on windows 98
windows 2000 is even more stable
i still use sonar for limited midi
but samplitude sounds awsome
i would stay away from cubase, it is very unstable, as i found n-tracks to be and even sonar
some people say it does not matter which program you choose to record on,
then they say protools sounds the best
well the software does matter
protools for pc has a lot of issues
samplitude is a rock and sounds great,
to my ears it has much more depth and smoothness
i advise you search forums of the various programs and download demos
if you have a pc and feel comfortable with it stay with it
there are way more programmers working for the pc platform than the mac
and everything mac is more $
nuendo is supposedly another very good program
written by steinberg w/ cubase money but far above it
i really advise you check out the samplitude demo though
it is fully functional for 90 days
so you pretty much are getting a free program at least for 90 days
this program is not the best known but it is so deep and has so many features and sounds so good....
protools is great especially if you have or want a working studio
because of name recoginition
but it is way more $$$$ than one needs to spend
IMHO, catfish11