|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
crescent
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
Location: yes.
|
 Posted: Wed Jul 15, 2009 7:57 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| ernie wrote: |
the quality of your audio interfaces makes all the difference. your choice of mac vs pc makes NO difference, it's just a matter of preference. i disagree that a mac is better quality/cost than a pc (i assume you mean quality/cost instead of the other way around, because a high cost/quality ratio would be a bad thing!). i bought my pc for $300 and the soundcard was another $125. i can record up to 10 ins simultaneously with no slowdown or crashes.
i'd love to know what a similar mac setup would cost these days. a few years ago some friends of mine bought a similar (G4) setup for over $2000, and that didn't include the interface, which was at least another $500. ouch. |
Your computer was 300$ brand new???
If it was i have a hard time believing it. If it wasn't why are you comparing it to a new Mac? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ernie
Joined: 05 Aug 2006
Location: asdfghjk
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 15, 2009 3:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
i'm comparing 2 machines which were bought in order to perform the same function. yes, my PC was bought used and the mac was bought new. yes, there were a few years in between. yes, i'm still wondering what it would cost for a mac (new or used, frankly i don't care) that can perform the task (multi-track recording) i need it for.
i remember talking to my friends before they were about to buy their computer. they were dead set on going with the mac, but couldn't explain why. many studios use macs because people perceive them as being more reliable and 'high end', even though their performance is EXACTLY the same. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ekul
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
Location: [Mod Edit]
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 15, 2009 6:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ernie wrote: |
| i remember talking to my friends before they were about to buy their computer. they were dead set on going with the mac, but couldn't explain why. many studios use macs because people perceive them as being more reliable and 'high end', even though their performance is EXACTLY the same. |
Nail, head, hit. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
crescent
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
Location: yes.
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 15, 2009 6:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ernie wrote: |
| many studios use macs because people perceive them as being more reliable and 'high end', even though their performance is EXACTLY the same. |
This is completely false.
Many studios use macs for the very reasons I and other mac users in this thread described. As I said on p.2 or 3 of this thread, I started in the audio production business with a Windows PC and could not get through a few hours without a software issue, or driver issue. Error messages that had no specific definitions were another source of frustration.
I wasn't in the minority. Many people I dealt with in the industry were getting fed up with help forums and tweaking their systems over and over. Out of curiosity, looking at the mac side of the help forums revealed the problems we were having so frequently were practically non existent there.
Over on the mac forums it was mostly just, "how do (insert task)?".
That's great you could record 10 instruments with your second hand computer, but when you start adding effects plugins, samplers, drum machines, and software instruments things will turn out differently. I'd bet my entire studio on it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ernie
Joined: 05 Aug 2006
Location: asdfghjk
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 15, 2009 7:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
all those things depend 100% on processing speed, RAM, etc, and have absolutely nothing to do with whether it's an apple or a pc. i don't use a lot of plug ins, samplers, or virtual instruments, but if i wanted better performance, i'd have to upgrade my specs regardless of what platform i'm using. of course any underpowered machine that isn't configured properly is going to run into problems.
the 'apple is better than pc' argument is kind of like saying 'jaguars are faster than fords'. it doesn't really make sense because it all depends upon the specs of the individual machines you're testing. at the end of the day, a top of the line jaguar and a top of the line ford will probably have similar performance ratings.
please explain how software can function better (let alone achieve a better sound) on a machine running one OS over the other. if you can't explain how this is theoretically possible, then all the anecdotal evidence in the world equals nothing more than a collection of stories. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shinjin
Joined: 25 Apr 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 15, 2009 8:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ernie wrote: |
| please explain how software can function better (let alone achieve a better sound) on a machine running one OS over the other. |
Aside from the differences in OS X and Windows, which are pretty huge in itself, software is generally developed and optimized on one architecture before being ported over to others. This is why Apache, PHP, Python Rails, MySQL and so on, are generally run on *nix servers, and .NET and SQL Server are run on Windows servers. If Apple ever decided to port Final Cut Pro to windows, I guarantee that professional studios would continue to run it on macs.
I can't comment on which music software runs better on which platform, but to say:
| ernie wrote: |
| all those things depend 100% on processing speed, RAM, etc, and have absolutely nothing to do with whether it's an apple or a pc. |
is simplistic, not to mention, wrong. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ernie
Joined: 05 Aug 2006
Location: asdfghjk
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 15, 2009 8:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ok i can see how a program designed for one system would be better than one designed for the other, but that doesn't mean that one system runs programs better than the other, since (once again) it all depends on the individual specs. if this were the case, then a pc would be the overwhelming favorite.
note that i'm not saying that pcs are better than macs, rather that with all else being equal, they are pretty much equal. 90% of people running studios with macs are doing it for the 'Wow a mac!' factor. in the early days of digital recording, macs had an edge but nowadays there is virtually no difference between the two, besides which platform you're more comfortable using. i wouldn't be surprised if studios had empty mac boxes just sitting there to impress the fanboys. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
crescent
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
Location: yes.
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 15, 2009 8:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ernie wrote: |
all those things depend 100% on processing speed, RAM, etc, and have absolutely nothing to do with whether it's an apple or a pc. i don't use a lot of plug ins, samplers, or virtual instruments, but if i wanted better performance, i'd have to upgrade my specs regardless of what platform i'm using. of course any underpowered machine that isn't configured properly is going to run into problems.
the 'apple is better than pc' argument is kind of like saying 'jaguars are faster than fords'. it doesn't really make sense because it all depends upon the specs of the individual machines you're testing. at the end of the day, a top of the line jaguar and a top of the line ford will probably have similar performance ratings.
please explain how software can function better (let alone achieve a better sound) on a machine running one OS over the other. if you can't explain how this is theoretically possible, then all the anecdotal evidence in the world equals nothing more than a collection of stories. |
What?
You might want to read the rest of this thread before responding.
I had a current PC, upgraded RAM. Everything was installed according to specs. 4Gigs RAM and 2.8 Ghz processor.
Processor speeds and RAM in a PC does not magically produce driver support that wasn't there before, nor does it create better software integration. Those were the problems I saw so often. Every time Windows did OS maintenance or upgrades, I had issues with my setup.
You want me to explain how the language and design of an OS can effect the integration of third party software you load into it? C'mon.
Right now, I have 7 instuments, dozens of effects plugins, a drum machine and a sampler all plugged into Logic Studio which is a 50gig application.
I can run all of that on 2Gigs RAM and a 2.33Ghz processor on my Mac...and i did it once while forgetting to stop the torrents i was downloading.
No error messages to stop my workflow, no driver issues, no lags. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ernie
Joined: 05 Aug 2006
Location: asdfghjk
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 15, 2009 9:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| i'm going to reiterate that the sound quality of your recording has everything to do with your audio interfaces (players, instruments, mics, preamps, A/D converters, monitors, room, sound engineer!) and nothing to do with your choice of OS. software is a matter of preference. if you love logic, then get a mac. if it makes no difference to you, then use the money you would have spent on a mac to upgrade your signal path. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
crescent
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
Location: yes.
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 15, 2009 10:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ernie wrote: |
| i'm going to reiterate that the sound quality of your recording has everything to do with your audio interfaces (players, instruments, mics, preamps, A/D converters, monitors, room, sound engineer!) and nothing to do with your choice of OS. software is a matter of preference. if you love logic, then get a mac. if it makes no difference to you, then use the money you would have spent on a mac to upgrade your signal path. |
We weren't talking about sound quality, and you weren't responding to an issue of sound quality. We were addressing workflow and productivity.
It goea a lot further than whether ot not a certain program was 'designed' for a particular OS, because the dual-platform audio programs i use such as Reason and Native Instruments Komplete, behave much better in a Mac environment. Theres no contest. The difference is astoundiong.
I brought up Logic because it goes to show you how much I can do with the little hardwar I have. I use other programs just as much. Switching to Mac has not only improved my workflow exponentially, but yes I also get Logic. I could get it for free if I wanted to and get free automatic updates for life from Apple.
When you use a computer to make money, the last thing you want are interruptions that can take days to fix. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shinjin
Joined: 25 Apr 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 15, 2009 10:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ernie wrote: |
| 90% of people running studios with macs are doing it for the 'Wow a mac!' factor. in the early days of digital recording, macs had an edge but nowadays there is virtually no difference between the two, besides which platform you're more comfortable using. |
What are you basing this on? Have you even used a mac before?
If I can rebut one unsupported generalization with another, I'm guessing 90% of the mac-detractors in this forum have never used a mac for more than 10 minutes, and argue for sake of arguing and satisfying a deep-rooted prejudice they have against mac-users. That's why inevitably the detractors speak in generalities and turn the discussion to mac-users and their personal characteristics, busting out words like "kool-aid", rather than arguing the merits of the respective OSes. While I think both sides have their share of idiots, at least most mac-users have used pc/windows and have a basis for comparison.
Do you honestly think that when companies are facing a 5, 6 or 7 figure investment decision like this, they take the "Wow a mac!" factor into consideration? If you honestly believe this then there really isn't any point in discussing this further other than to say I disagree. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ernie
Joined: 05 Aug 2006
Location: asdfghjk
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 15, 2009 10:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
i've read most of this thread and come to the conclusion that the 'workflow and productivity' argument is nothing but anecdotal BS. for every story a mac user has about how much better their mac performs, someone else can counter with how great their pc works. except that pc users don't generally do this because they don't feel the need to justify their purchase to people on the internet.
my pc works fine for multi-track recording and i have yet to hear how a mac would improve my recording process or sound. in fact, my recordings would likely sound worse because i would have had to buy cheaper preamps and mics.
i've used macs quite a bit for recording and general surfing/word processing and i don't see what the hype is all about. they look kinda pretty and work just fine until something goes wrong, and then it's lights out. i have nothing against mac users except that they tend to really want other people to hear about how great their computer/mp3 player/phone is, which is annoying. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
crescent
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
Location: yes.
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 15, 2009 11:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ernie wrote: |
i've read most of this thread and come to the conclusion that the 'workflow and productivity' argument is nothing but anecdotal BS. for every story a mac user has about how much better their mac performs, someone else can counter with how great their pc works. except that pc users don't generally do this because they don't feel the need to justify their purchase to people on the internet.
my pc works fine for multi-track recording and i have yet to hear how a mac would improve my recording process or sound. in fact, my recordings would likely sound worse because i would have had to buy cheaper preamps and mics. |
Again, you base your assessment on no personal comparative expereince so of course you come to innacurate conclusions. 'All this is anecodtal BS' says the guy whos whole argument is based on a ONE SIDED anecdote.
Take a look at the Native Instruments Help forums to see the differences in complaints, as well as the nature and seveity of the problems ecountered.
As for this perception that Mac users are justifying anything, well don't forget that thes emac users were once PC users. What you see as 'justification' is merely a reaction to people who think they know what they are talking about but really don't.
Only PC users on this thread have attacked the mac user as a person, and it's quite common. Talk about 'justification', hmm?
You are arguing about things you have absolutley no experiencve with, except for recording instruments in a DAW. That's as complicated and demanding as redirecting my email accounts. Try using plugins and samplers and you'll get it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Underwaterbob
Joined: 08 Jan 2005
Location: In Cognito
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 16, 2009 3:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ernie wrote: |
| i disagree that a mac is better quality/cost than a pc (i assume you mean quality/cost instead of the other way around, because a high cost/quality ratio would be a bad thing!) |
I meant what I said, so you agree.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Underwaterbob
Joined: 08 Jan 2005
Location: In Cognito
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
