Apple or PC?

  • Thread starter Thread starter djhead
  • Start date Start date
djhead

djhead

Military Intelligence
As part of beefing up my mobile recording setup, I would be interested in hearing oppinions on what was better for pure recording. No internet needed, no office needed, just easy to use powerful recording. Would be coupling it with my firepod and Cubase LE for now, until i could upgrade to SX3. I really would love to know the DIFFERENCE as well, between these rigs.
 
djhead said:
As part of beefing up my mobile recording setup, I would be interested in hearing oppinions on what was better for pure recording. No internet needed, no office needed, just easy to use powerful recording. Would be coupling it with my firepod and Cubase LE for now, until i could upgrade to SX3. I really would love to know the DIFFERENCE as well, between these rigs.

They are both tools, like hammers.

They don't affect your sound at all so it really comes down to your own likes on what hammer you want to use. If you already have a PC and want to change to Mac why woud you want to lay out more money? I would use the money for things like room treatment, mics, pre's etc etc..

So basically for recording music there is no difference in Mac or PC. One cost more than the other that's all I see.
 
If you like tuning and adjusting your system to make it work to your specific needs...go PC
If you like a stable something that works out of the box but can't be tuned that much...go Mac.

You like Logic? Go Mac.
You Like Digital Performer? Go Mac
You Like E-Mu audio interface? Go PC
You Like....etc.


it depends on what you want.


oh. have to say I've read that Cubase doesn't run very well on Mac (unstable)
 
Pizza Hut, mos def.


They're both expensive, but the difference is, at least at Pizza Hut you get decent pizza for your money.
 
It depends man....for Logic, get a Mac. i run cubase on windows, and its really fast.
and im happy with it. but Macs are much more flexible than PCs.
 
Bottom Line: Use whatever system you are most comfortable with.

There is no other right answer.
 
Mo-Kay said:
have to say I've read that Cubase doesn't run very well on Mac (unstable)
Second that. If you're gonna run Cubase, I suggest you go with a PC as it's optimised better for it.
 
Macs, when compared to a similard spec PC, are much more expensive. it is a pain the ass to get spares for them, and you're warranty is out of date is also vey expensive.

with PCs you have the choice of looooads of spare parts, anything to suit your needs (not the case with Mac), you have the choice of building your own etc etc.

unless you have a particularly good reason for doing the change to mac, i can't see any point..
 
MessianicDreams said:
Macs, when compared to a similard spec PC, are much more expensive. it is a pain the ass to get spares for them, and you're warranty is out of date is also vey expensive.

with PCs you have the choice of looooads of spare parts, anything to suit your needs (not the case with Mac), you have the choice of building your own etc etc.

unless you have a particularly good reason for doing the change to mac, i can't see any point..

Maybe that's all true where you live, but at least in the U.S., it's only about 20% more than the equivalent PC according to various surveys.

This ignores built-it-yourself setups, of course, which will always be way cheaper than anything built by a manufacturer, but which also puts the burden of compatibility research on you, and thus often results in a system that barely works unless you know what you're doing. :)

I do wish it were easier to get Mac replacement parts, though places like PBFixit provide a lot of those sorts of things.
 
dgatwood said:
Maybe that's all true where you live, but at least in the U.S., it's only about 20% more than the equivalent PC according to various surveys.

This ignores built-it-yourself setups, of course, which will always be way cheaper than anything built by a manufacturer, but which also puts the burden of compatibility research on you, and thus often results in a system that barely works unless you know what you're doing. :)

IMACs' "start" at $1300. G5's start at $2000

You can get a nice PC for quite a bit less than $1300. You can get a Dell with 1 gb memory and 17" LCD for less than $600.
 
dgatwood said:
Maybe that's all true where you live, but at least in the U.S., it's only about 20% more than the equivalent PC according to various surveys.

And runs a fraction of the software, too! :p
 
therage! said:
IMACs' "start" at $1300. G5's start at $2000

You can get a nice PC for quite a bit less than $1300. You can get a Dell with 1 gb memory and 17" LCD for less than $600.

But not a comparable Dell in performance or power consumption. I can't find a single Core Duo desktop machine on Dell's website. They use Pentium D chips instead, which don't perform as well, produce more heat, and use more power than Core Duo.

Dell does offer a Core Duo laptop (Inspiron 9400). When you configure it with features as close as possible to the MacBook Pro, depending on options chosen, the Dell ranges from about $3 to $230 more than the Mac.


ez_willis said:
And runs a fraction of the software, too!

You didn't hear? Macs can run Windows now. So I guess that now the Dell runs a fraction of the software. :D
 
Papa John's definitely...

...Oh, hold on, are we talking pizza or computers?
 
Back
Top