Sequencers That Work With Macs?

  • Thread starter Thread starter gvdv
  • Start date Start date
G

gvdv

Member
Hi,
I've reluctantly made the decision to go for a Mac Pro when putting together my DAW and am wondering what sequencers out there have a gentler learning curve than Pro Tools, Logic etc., and are cheaper than these sequencers.

This is important to me because I want to ease myself into computer based digital recording.

I should add that I'm looking for a sequencer that includes MIDI, so that I can learn the basics.

I'm not particularly focused on working with loops or anything initially, just looking to learn the basics of routing, monitoring,applying effects and mastering (I know that the latter function is often accomplished by using a separate piece of software, but I'd like to focus on learning the mechanics of navigating and using a sequencer for now).

Thanks,

GVDV
 
Digital Performer is good. I really would take a look at Logic though. To really "ease" yourself in, play with GarageBand for awhile.
 
Hi Macmoondoggie
Thanks for the reply.

It seems that you would recommend Logic over Digital Performer. Is this right?

I have a few years doing analogue mutitracking, and have played around with GarageBand a bit, and while I think it's a very neat program, find it a bit basic for what I'm talking about.

Thanks once again,
GVDV
 
www.hitsquad.com/smm

(Good place to go when you're looking for music software - and they have Mac stuff, too! Loads of links to commercial, shareware and free software....)
 
Cubase and PT both work with the Mac as well.
 
gvdv said:
Hi Macmoondoggie
Thanks for the reply.

It seems that you would recommend Logic over Digital Performer. Is this right?

I have a few years doing analogue mutitracking, and have played around with GarageBand a bit, and while I think it's a very neat program, find it a bit basic for what I'm talking about.

Thanks once again,
GVDV
Click to expand...

Yes, but that is because of my personal preference for Logic. Dp is well thought of. I only mentioned GB as I did not know how much experience you already had. Best wishes.
 
Hi Guys,
Thansk for all the replies.

Still fighting the urge, but will go Mac.

GVDV.
 
Hi Bulls Hit,
O.K., when I buy the Mac Pro, you're on; I will download Reaper and give it a try.

Thanks,

GVDV.
 
dont you usually pick the daw first then the platform? (assuming you arent already ON the platform)
 
If you need midi just go with Cubase. This is coming from a pro tools user by the way.
 
pipelineaudio said:
dont you usually pick the daw first then the platform? (assuming you arent already ON the platform)
Click to expand...
Hi Pipelineaudio,
I know that this is the received wisdom, but I think that advizing people to pick the DAW first leaves an awful lot out of the equation, and could be deemed to be a poor way of approaching a computer audio purchase.

Let me say here, that I am a confirmed PC user, and cannot stand Mac for various reasons, but I will probably buy a Mac eventually.

Among the issues involved in this decision (to me) are the following:

If going PC (versus Mac), you have to do an awful lot of research to figure out what components will work with the DAW and with each other.

If you pick a platform such as Mac where there are very few choices (of say, motherboard, CPU, RAM etc.) and those choices have been troubleshot by the manufacturer and are shipped to you in an already assembled computer, then a lot of the work has been done for you and you know that the various components that have been matched with each other will work together.

All that's left at that point is to choose the various 'peripherals' that you want/need: DAW (i.e., sequencer/multitrack software), sound card or audio interface, microphones etc..

This concept of assembling components that already work with one another has been emulated in the general PC market by various companies, probably the most successful of which (in terms of $, not necessarily in terms of technical efficiency) is Dell.

In a specialized context, companies like Sweetwater (is that the one?) that produce assembled, dedicated DAWs (with software included, often) are examples of PC based manufacturers who are emulating this (Mac) approach within the PC audio recording market.

While it is true that there is far more choice of hardware and software, often at better prices, within the PC DAW world, it is also true that making these choices requires a lot of research to avoid the pitfalls that come with not knowing whether a particular manufacturer's component will work with another manufacturer's component.

Also inherent in the PC choice is that one has to watch out for other aspects of maintaining a PC that Macs don't really have - for example, keeping PC's away from viruses on the net.

I really don't want to get flamed for this, but it seems obvious to me that Macs are more likely to run properly out of the box, because all of the components and hardware have been designed to work together, i.e. there are far fewer variations in software, hardware, drivers and the like, and therefore there is far less that can go wrong.

This leaves the challenge for the musician/user to learn how to manipulate the hardware and software to achieve the results that they want, rather than to have the added challenge of assembling and maintaining the computer.

GVDV.
 
your stupid not to go mac :), specially with the intel processors making it possible to dual boot.

BTW im using a macbook right now, that has both OSX and XP Home successfully installed and running.

i use a powermac for the studio. look, pro tools isnt that difficult. jsut not point blank, but if you RTFM it's ok. keep in mind that to go pro tools means going with digidesign hardware as well.

running a digi002r with pt 7.0 on a powermac dual g5 for a year now, you get the hang of it pretty quick.
 
macmoondoggie said:
Yes, but that is because of my personal preference for Logic. Dp is well thought of. I only mentioned GB as I did not know how much experience you already had. Best wishes.
Click to expand...

IMHO, Logic and DP are the strongest choices on the platform. I've never used either on Intel hardware, so I can't cay much on that front. I really like DP for audio work, but I've never used it for anything remotely MIDI-related other than a little triggering, so I can't say much about it on that front.

The only time I've done sequencing in Mac OS X was with Metro, and that was in a fairly old version thereof.
 
if you are really really reluctant about going with mac,

get a PC, with a good intel duo and alot of ram, stay away from vista, and dont connect it to the internet constantly

and get sonar.

i have cubase and i hate it. i bought it, used it like 3 times and decided i hated it. its just not for me. if i had to go PC based though, i wouldnt use Pro Tools. i would definitley use sonar. its a bit more user friendly than the others and packs all of the features plus some.
 
TragikRemix said:
if you are really really reluctant about going with mac,

get a PC, with a good intel duo and alot of ram, stay away from vista, and dont connect it to the internet constantly

and get sonar.

i have cubase and i hate it. i bought it, used it like 3 times and decided i hated it. its just not for me. if i had to go PC based though, i wouldnt use Pro Tools. i would definitley use sonar. its a bit more user friendly than the others and packs all of the features plus some.
Click to expand...
Hi Tragicremix, and others here,
Thansk for the replies.

I read a series of posts on the Sonar Producer forum in which one person was successfully running Sonar 6 PE from a Mac (mind you, another person wasn't), and I have decided to go Mac. So, am going to give it a go.

Thanks once again for your replies,
GVDV.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top