My Studio Set up

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bisson820
  • Start date Start date
iownrocknroll, whilst I disagree with Bisson on quite a few of his points and have resisted so far to post, most of his statements are more-or-less factually correct (there are a few things he's said that I'm tempted to pick up on). On the other hand, there are some errors in your post...

DDR will not run correctly unless divisable by 3. so 6, 12, 18 GB. etc. not 8.
Click to expand...

Really!? I thought it depended in on the memory controller.

DDR has long been associated with dual-channel memory controllers (performed best when using matched pairs). Its only with the first lot of chipsets for the i7 that triple-channel RAM became hype, and even that seems to have died off now - most of the newer more affordable i7 mobos are set up for running in dual-channel.


OS X also does have strong roots in UNIX. There was a good UNIX timeline / family-tree that I saw floating round once which showed how all the projects had forked and related to each other. OS X was forked from Nextstep and is most closely related to BSD if my memory serves me correctly.
 
mattr said:
iownrocknroll, whilst I disagree with Bisson on quite a few of his points and have resisted so far to post, most of his statements are more-or-less factually correct (there are a few things he's said that I'm tempted to pick up on). On the other hand, there are some errors in your post...



Really!? I thought it depended in on the memory controller.

DDR has long been associated with dual-channel memory controllers (performed best when using matched pairs). Its only with the first lot of chipsets for the i7 that triple-channel RAM became hype, and even that seems to have died off now - most of the newer more affordable i7 mobos are set up for running in dual-channel.


OS X also does have strong roots in UNIX. There was a good UNIX timeline / family-tree that I saw floating round once which showed how all the projects had forked and related to each other. OS X was forked from Nextstep and is most closely related to BSD if my memory serves me correctly.
Click to expand...

i would like to know what things i am mistaken on please.... im not being immature about it and this isnt a stupid immature arguement...

simply if im wrong i would like to hear what is right.
 
Errm, not a lot really, hence why I said "more or less".

Some of your wording was a bit weak in places and made be have to reread a few bits. You still seem to be using airy-fairy statements such as "serious edge", "reliability", "performance" - these words are hollow and meaningless without justification and/or proof.

For a start, Vista (not that I liked it) actually had a very similar RAM footprint to OS X in several independent tests. You can't say that RAM footprint directly correlates with performance, but you seem to be using the work 'lightweight' and 'bloated' quite liberally.

You also used the phrasing...
ALSO the UNIX foundation in mac puts a serious edge over PC.
Click to expand...
...which triggered alarm bells as I remembered it being the words used in the marketing spiel by Apple on the OS X product page. It just made me wonder how much you of understood OS X's relationship to Unix.

And its not as if these benefits cannot be seen on a PC... who says you have to use Windows? You could run UNIX, BSD or Linux if you wanted. You could run a studio based around a Linux distro (Ubuntu Studio maybe?) running Ardour and low-latency audio via Jack. It is also possible to reliably run OS X on a cheap PC built from off the shelf components (see http://www.osx86project.org/ ).

After all, since the switch away from the PowerPC architecture, what defines the difference between a PC and a Mac other than branding on the latter? OS X is no longer restricted to a different architecture. x86 Macs are built from mainly off-the-shelf components; well, last time I checked iMacs were based at lot on stock laptop components (part of how they fit it all behind the screen).

And building a computer is a hassle. Really? It took me no more than 50 minutes to build my most recent PC which doesn't seem like a hassle to me, and I certainly don't claim to be an expert.


Anyway, I suggest you start a new thread in a relevant subforum if you want to carry on with this discussion. It keeps this thread clean for discussing the original topic of gear for your studio, and would help with keeping search results relevant if anyone ever (god help them) did a search for benefits of running a Mac or a PC based studio.
 
mattr said:
Errm, not a lot really, hence why I said "more or less".

Some of your wording was a bit weak in places and made be have to reread a few bits. You still seem to be using airy-fairy statements such as "serious edge", "reliability", "performance" - these words are hollow and meaningless without justification and/or proof.

For a start, Vista (not that I liked it) actually had a very similar RAM footprint to OS X in several independent tests. You can't say that RAM footprint directly correlates with performance, but you seem to be using the work 'lightweight' and 'bloated' quite liberally.

You also used the phrasing...

...which triggered alarm bells as I remembered it being the words used in the marketing spiel by Apple on the OS X product page. It just made me wonder how much you of understood OS X's relationship to Unix.

And its not as if these benefits cannot be seen on a PC... who says you have to use Windows? You could run UNIX, BSD or Linux if you wanted. You could run a studio based around a Linux distro (Ubuntu Studio maybe?) running Ardour and low-latency audio via Jack. It is also possible to reliably run OS X on a cheap PC built from off the shelf components (see http://www.osx86project.org/ ).

After all, since the switch away from the PowerPC architecture, what defines the difference between a PC and a Mac other than branding on the latter? OS X is no longer restricted to a different architecture. x86 Macs are built from mainly off-the-shelf components; well, last time I checked iMacs were based at lot on stock laptop components (part of how they fit it all behind the screen).

And building a computer is a hassle. Really? It took me no more than 50 minutes to build my most recent PC which doesn't seem like a hassle to me, and I certainly don't claim to be an expert.


Anyway, I suggest you start a new thread in a relevant subforum if you want to carry on with this discussion. It keeps this thread clean for discussing the original topic of gear for your studio, and would help with keeping search results relevant if anyone ever (god help them) did a search for benefits of running a Mac or a PC based studio.
Click to expand...

so hollow words? and sounding like what mac advertises?

well i learned about macs from the mac division of the UNH IT department, of which i work... so i can assure you im not copy pasting :P

but reliability and performance arent hollow at all.... a mac is more reliable in a sense that it has way fewer hackers and viruses .. MOSTLY due to the fact that people havent figured out how to do it aswell..

PC's as a general rule... they usually only last 1 operating system upgrade... meaning by the time a new one comes out... they PC is ready to kick the bucket...

performance... how is that hollow? its how well your unit performs... and due to the design of macs OS... it has proven (to me) to perform more quickly and a lot smoother.... (applications dont take forever to load or hiccup)
 
So you honestly no longer care about getting helpful advice about mics, preamps, interfaces, etc, and would rather sacrifice any more opportunity for that relevant discussion for the sake of a petty argument about Macs (which you won't learn anything from, because you already know everything so there's no point us telling you anything)?

That's cool :)

Forums are a great place to observe some strange social interactions.
 
mattr said:
So you honestly no longer care about getting helpful advice about mics, preamps, interfaces, etc, and would rather sacrifice any more opportunity for that relevant discussion for the sake of a petty argument about Macs (which you won't learn anything from, because you already know everything so there's no point us telling you anything)?

That's cool :)

Forums are a great place to observe some strange social interactions.
Click to expand...

no im just satisfied with what i've obtained and figured out what i want to do... so this is just fun now.

but its a nice attempt to take a shot at me...

they are also great places to observe people trying to be assholes..
 
I don't want to jump onto the off topic bandwagon but I manage a network with both PC's and Macs and they have very similar failure rates. As for PC's being harder to maintain then a mac for a DAW I disagree. I have a decent computer which I installed myself cleaned all the extra services off installed my drivers and Sonar 8.5. This computer will never go on the internet, now that it is setup it is basically not going to change unless I do a major hardware upgrade. Backups would be the exception to this, but you better do backups on your Mac as well becaue mac hard disks fail just as much as PC's. One thing I like about my DaW PC over a mac is heat dissapation, macs are crammed pretty tight as where a custom built pc can use a large case with large slower moving fans(much quiter then small fast fans).


Anyway your gear looks awsome! Good luck in the world of mac.
 
correct the DDR buss speed does depend on the memory controller. on the new i7/e550x which everyone in the DAW is raving about and if you building/buying a new DAW you are buying something outdated unless the chip is an i7/e550x


in the new intel world which mac needs to get on the ball about the memory controller is on the chip itself. read up on north bridge/south bridge merging and do-ing away with FSB

so for DDR version 3 it needs to be in multiples of 3.

osx does have strong unix roots is somewhat true. that's like saying your telephone has strong unix roots which is also somewhat true.

the fact of the matter is mac OSx runs over a unix kernel hence why the restart time is so quick. unix doesn't really restart.

the hard boot takes time. just like your iphone/ipod

OSx as well as other mac apps are mostly written in objective c and java/jquery and the like.

another reason that osx cannot be truely unix/linux is graphics driver support.

ever try and run fedora on an ATI card???? aint' gonna happen unless you re-compile the kernel for each card
 
this debate for me is strictly educational and is perfectly acceptable to this thread because we are discussing the gear that im getting.... comparing an imac to a PC of a similar price...

so mattr.... there is no need for your hostility...

i would however like someone to stop saying.. "no your wrong.. my pc is just fine"... and for them to start saying why...

im the only one that is discussing the internals.. (obviously not at a intense level)... aside from rocknroll in which he was talking about DDR and irrelevant lack of expandability (i say irrelevant to me... not in general)..

a lot of you guys are also forgetting.. i've said PC's are perfectly capable, however i think macs are superior and have given reason and evidence as to why...

im getting a little sick of the "nah just build a PC"... well explain...

so kindly... explain what you mean, or quit parroting what has already been said.

Edit - i was in the middle of typing this while rocknroll posted his reply... thanks for presenting a case based of what you believe to be true in regards to the actual technicality of the machine rather than just saying "your wrong... now tell me how im wrong about calliing you wrong"

Edit Edit - again thanks because this is giving me something to look into.
 
Fishmed said:
I think that technology will change before your computer's hardware fails completely; granted, individual parts may crap out... usually the hard drive.
Click to expand...

That's where I was heading. My experience is usually hard drive or power supply failure.

I would think that either platform is perfectly capable of running without major incident well past the time when it makes sense to get a new computer due to advances in technology.

The biggest problem that I've witnessed with people and PC's is that its easy to let them fill up with junkware, spyware, virus, etc to the point where the thing will barely move- especially for an inexperienced user (or a user with kids that cant stay out of the file sharing stuff :p). I'll assume that there is alot less of that going on with Mac. I'll speculate that most people that are savvy enough to operate a computer on the level that home recording requires, have probably figured out what to do and what not to do to prevent this from becoming a problem (although it can still be a minor nuisance).

My only gripe with Mac is the cost. I'm sure they are perfectly capable in their function and operation. But for what it costs for a Mac, I can build a comparable pc for less. I also like free and freely available software, freeware, shareware etc. which seems to be more availible for PC.

Anyway, I think I've said everything I can on how I feel on the Mac/Pc debate. For now (and the foreseeable future) I'll be on a PC. I'm sure you'll be equally as happy on your Mac...

I'm confident that I wont talk you out of a Mac (and thats fine, and not my intention). But, since this is a public forum and lots of people could be reading this for a good time to come, I think its important to express both sides.
 
I'm also talking about
RAM Speed
the use of DDR 3
true Multi-threaded applications
scalability
cost
repair time.

no matter how you slice the cake, pro-tools 8 does not support 64 bit.

however if i was gonna run a 64 bit mac, i'd run vmware fusion and use unity mode to run pt in windows.


just my two sense.
 
price difference... ok... i just matched what my iMac will have with what a PC equivalent will be... Mac to me won the contest and was only 50 bucks more.
 
iownrocknroll said:
I'm also talking about
RAM Speed
the use of DDR 3
true Multi-threaded applications
scalability
cost
repair time.

no matter how you slice the cake, pro-tools 8 does not support 64 bit.

however if i was gonna run a 64 bit mac, i'd run vmware fusion and use unity mode to run pt in windows.


just my two sense.
Click to expand...

Using logic which is offered to come WITH the machine.. i dont think i'll have any problems with it then haha.

im guessing you missed that, but thanks for lookin out.
 
Bisson820 said:
just out of boredom... went to the mac store and the dell store.

Mac: 21.5 inch iMac
RAM: 8 GB
OS: snow leopard
processor: 3.06 GHz Duo
Hard Drive: 500GB

Price: 1,399.99

Dell: Studio XPS with 21.5 inch monitor
RAM: 8GB
OS: Windows 7
Processor: 2.66 GHz
Hard Drive: 750GB

Price: 1,349.99



I'll take a mac! :)
Click to expand...

iMac is apple's low end machine. XPS is Dell's high end machine not really a fair comparison. You could easily get another dell model such as a vostro or inspiron that would match or beat those specs under 1k.

I do tech support for a living and I often repair PCs on the side for extra money. I hear from my mac friends just as often as I hear from my PC friends the only difference is that the PC problems are usually easier to fix.

At the end of the day the only thing I really have against Macs is their price and the somewhat smug snotty attitude of their fanatics.
 
Sorry iownrocknroll, you are still incorrect with some of your ideas.

DDR3 doesn't mean it has to be in multiples of three. It just refers to the version of DDR.

As you said, with Core i7 (Nehalem architecture) the memory controller is integrated into the CPU. The original desktop Core i7 chips (Bloomfield) had the triple-channel DDR3 controllers, but the newer versions (Lynnfield, Clarksfield, and very soon Arrandale) are all back to dual-channel.


As for all the Unix stuff, here's a nice simplified family tree :)
Unix.png



another reason that osx cannot be truely unix/linux is graphics driver support.

ever try and run fedora on an ATI card???? aint' gonna happen unless you re-compile the kernel for each card
Click to expand...

Eh? I've had to fight with both ATI (and nvidia, though they tend to be easier) drivers on a variety on Linux distributions over the past few years, yet I don't understnad how this has any meaning that OS X cannot be a derivative of Unix (note: Linux is not Unix). Anyway, you don't have to continually recompile the kernel - ever heard of kernel modules?
 
thanks for your input and expertise...

however... i dont see the logic for DELL to have 2 different computers with the same specs and same performance... however... one be 1350 and one be 700...

there is SOME reason that makes it worse to have it cost less...

do you know the answer to this?
 
Bisson820 said:
price difference... ok... i just matched what my iMac will have with what a PC equivalent will be... Mac to me won the contest and was only 50 bucks more.
Click to expand...

You matched it with a pre-built Dell. I get my parts from newegg and roll my own.
Of course then, there is also software availability, and the more or less "open market" and interchangeability of parts for PC. To me, I like the idea that I can crack the case open and swap parts as I choose.

I think a few pages back you said your Mac would blow away a PC. Then you just said you priced a comparable Dell and the Dell was $50 less. So was that Dell comparable, or would the Mac blow it away?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top