SYNTH ZONE
Visit The Bar For Casual Discussion
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 >
Topic Options
#2753 - 01/28/05 08:17 AM Best for music IBM/MS or Apple??
LeoD Offline
Member

Registered: 10/25/04
Posts: 33
Loc: Lusk, Co. Dublin . Rep.of Irel...
Have always used MS(WorksXP)..as op system on my PC...However am due to change hardware and have heard that Apple is a better choice for Music Production & graphics
Main use of PC is for following
CD Production..(small batches)
Internet...Forums D'load/up loads etc
Music files storage & organization
USB Connection to Tyros..
Various Music S'Ware (cakeW-BIB-S'forge)
Music promotion Fliers & Future net Site
Programme lists/sorts

Any advice appreciated..

Many thanks
LeoD
_________________________
LeoD...Committed to Live
Performance & use of M.Pads

Top
#2754 - 01/28/05 09:38 AM Re: Best for music IBM/MS or Apple??
lowfrequencyoscillator Offline
Member

Registered: 01/20/05
Posts: 49
Loc: atlanta , Georgia , USA
Apple is far better than PCs for music or really just about anything . BUT ! Apple is high dollar stuff . They do have the new MACMINI out , it's a G-4 for less than $600 . The OS X in Mac is promised never to crash . On a PC the promise is that it WILL crash , and often . I use Apple and I love it .
They do cost alot though , really , you must let your budget keep you in line , Check out Apple . http://www.apple.com
_________________________
http://
www.joshuacurry.com/
modify

Top
#2755 - 01/28/05 01:48 PM Re: Best for music IBM/MS or Apple??
WDMcM Offline
Member

Registered: 02/06/04
Posts: 817
Loc: Ohio, USA
Hi Leo,

I use Vegas Video/DVD Architect, Sound Forge and Photoshop quite heavily on a PC and never had problems. I also use Cakewalk, Band in a Box and other music related software. Again, no problems.

As lowfreq stated in a roundabout way, PC's are less expensive to purchase, primarily because there are so many options in manufacturers. Several studio owner friends of mine use MAC's and love them. It used to be that if your main use was music and/or graphics, then the MAC was the best choice. Things have changed though. There is just as much in the way of high-end music production and graphics for PC as for MAC. The guys that I know using MAC's seem to have just as many problems from time to time as those using PC's.

Good advice for using a PC or MAC for music/graphics is to dedicate the computer to those uses and don't use that computer for web surfing, games, etc. This will allow all system resources to only be concerned with the applications you need rather than having innumerable drivers, internet access, etc. that other programs will use.

Good luck,

Go PC!
_________________________
Wm. David McMahan
The Modulators

Top
#2756 - 02/07/05 01:12 PM Re: Best for music IBM/MS or Apple??
LeoD Offline
Member

Registered: 10/25/04
Posts: 33
Loc: Lusk, Co. Dublin . Rep.of Irel...
Many thanks guys,
good input from you both ...much appreciated....only problem is mon. as usual

Regards

LeoD
_________________________
LeoD...Committed to Live
Performance & use of M.Pads

Top
#2757 - 02/08/05 05:34 PM Re: Best for music IBM/MS or Apple??
jrlaudio Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 02/07/05
Posts: 5
Loc: New York
Apple ... no contest.

I've had problems with PC's, none with Mac. I use my PC for this, the internet. And household stuff. I don't care if it crashes, locks, or fumbles because because some memory is locked up by a program I have recently closed. But when it comes to my music this is unacceptable.

MACs run faster, are more reliable, and are much more intuitive. Ever tried to find all the crap a program installs on a PC. IF you can find the install log (if there is one) or maybe you can if know what something like "{gr3hY56vBKgbl1877nfr0fjJ}.scr" means. Or what error code "7gkf83n" is. What the hells is that? Very few people really know. I do and it's still daunting.

Remember, Windows is the bastard child of MAC OS. Even XP still has some old MAC OS lines of code in it. In the Windows world it is a free for all, due to Windows open-ended architecture, various manufacturers, and software developers taken advantage in their own way of this open-ended architecture. In the MAC world, the architecture is more streamlined and the rules are tighter when designing software for the OS. Also the people who write the OS are also the manufacturers of the hardware, so integration is more streamlined and elegant and less problematic and transparent for the end-user.

In PC land the hardware manufacturers and software developers are given the options and are the ones supported. It is easier and less costlier to develop and implement software for the PC. Which makes Microsoft more dominant in the industry. The end-user really is secondary. Remember Mr. Gates was the first person to really insist that software should not be free. So his leadership will favor software development over all other concerns. He cares very little about compatibility, reliability, security, hardware intergration, or any of the other things vital to an end-user. He wants the industry to be with him, developers to be happy, and the hardware manufacturers to be content, not the end-user. They are after the fact for Microsoft. That's why Windows has an open-ended architecture, but it is also why it has so many constant security issues manifest themselves. Do you really think the manufacturers care that you have a security issue or other problems related to the the free-for-all, open-ended nature of Windows. No. They already have your money if you have their products. Window's end-user performance history has been abysmal and therefore proves this.

This is not the case for Mac users. Apple tried this open-ended approach for a while and it didn't work and they backed away from third parties. It wasn't good for the end-user (and as secondary result its own health corporately within its market), which was a violation of its core principles in its design criteria. However this is also why MAC are not as industry dominant, until end-user performance is the issue. That's why in the marketplace, not the industry, where end-user performance takes precedence over industry strength and costs, like in the music and video production markets, the true reality of COMPUTER USE comes forward, and MAC dominates.

For music and video (performance), or anything ... MAC. For business (cost) or family use (availability & cost), PC is fine.

JRL

[This message has been edited by jrlaudio (edited 02-08-2005).]

[This message has been edited by jrlaudio (edited 02-08-2005).]

Top
#2758 - 02/09/05 02:04 PM Re: Best for music IBM/MS or Apple??
LeoD Offline
Member

Registered: 10/25/04
Posts: 33
Loc: Lusk, Co. Dublin . Rep.of Irel...
JRL,
I really appreciate the lengths you have gone to , to explain the real issues between MS & Apple....you obviously know yor business in this area.

As I already have a (reasonably spectd) PC...which was purchased 2 years ago...for the household...I guess in your mind then it's a 'no brainer'....Mac its gotta be.

I have been looking at the latest Apple range...G5...which ...finance permitting is probably what I will go for...but they aint cheap...especially in Ireland..(where they have a major Mfg Facility by the way).

If you don't mind I may touch base with you again ...for advice on precise model and accessories for my needs/pocket.

Meanwhile many thanks again,

Regards
LeoD
_________________________
LeoD...Committed to Live
Performance & use of M.Pads

Top
#2759 - 02/09/05 03:35 PM Re: Best for music IBM/MS or Apple??
WDMcM Offline
Member

Registered: 02/06/04
Posts: 817
Loc: Ohio, USA
Hi Leo,

Here is an old but still wise question in the decision making process when buying a new computer. Ask you self what you want to do with this computer purchase, check into the available software that will perform those tasks and that will dictate what type/brand/power level of computer to buy.

I agree with jrl that those people heavily into graphics, pro-level music studios, etc. tend to go for MAC. The MAC is far less susceptible to software problems since software developers must adhere to more stringent rules than those writing for Dos/Windows based machines. That normally also relates to considerably higher software prices. The MAC O/S is constantly being upgraded just like Windows. When a new O/S comes out, it means having to try and make the peripheral devices work with the new O/S which can be a real pain on either platform.

I am not trying to talk you into or out of any particular system, just more to consider.


------------------
Wm. David McMahan
Nat'l Product and Support Manager
Generalmusic USA
_________________________
Wm. David McMahan
The Modulators

Top
#2760 - 02/13/05 11:16 AM Re: Best for music IBM/MS or Apple??
MORPH! Offline
Member

Registered: 07/25/00
Posts: 296
Loc: Laguna Beach, California, Unit...
Music Production- Mac
Wav Proccessing
MIDI Proccessing
Sample Proccessing
Synth Emulation
Mac software runs far more foundational to the proccessor than PC format.
JUST AS AN EXAMPLE, it would be SIMILAR to a PC running in straight machine code instead of standardized C++ based software.
Mac software has very little margin for error in it's programming, and so the clock runs with great efficiency whereas with PC software, often times, errors are written in without choice just to perform one portion of a subroutine whereas the rest of the subroutine's functioning is not used. (some programmers call it proccessing fat)
Music Post Production- PC
Wav editing is much faster than a Mac.
Especially when it comes to inserts, simple copy and paste and SOME simple transformations (amplitude, Normalizations, and other post production dynamics.
I like mastering with the PC because it is pretty effortless. However, if a noise reduction is warranted at the material's end of proccessing, I will take it back to a Mac because it is capable of removing noise with "a finer rake" or higher FFT resolution without having to wait a week for it to finish up.
Desktop Publishing- either.dependant on program used. Ms Publisher XP does fine. I I Dont think people examine flyers beyond a hundreth of an inch, but if you have Adobe on a Mac you have 10X the accuracy of publisher (one thousandth of an inch). I say wtf, do you need that accuracy for a flyer? Overkill. Might as well build your flyer with AutoCAD LOL
Internet depends on the proficiency of the user. advanced, a mac. long learning curve to the in's and out's that the mac has capability of. If you are not into port scanning or web harvesting, that's good because it is not nice to do that. Average mousing browser's: Go with a PC for the net.

It depends on the task really.
You can't put a Mac inside a PC, but A G3,4,or 5 can run a software based PC from mac language. Hardware based, up to 8 PC's at one time effortlessly.

It depends on the task. You wouldn't drive a golf course in a Ferrari Marinello, and you wouldn't take a golf cart on the freeway (Anyone with some intelligence anyway)

Things change all the time, so next week, things might be different.
_________________________
MORPH! Sound

Top
#2761 - 02/16/05 01:41 PM Re: Best for music IBM/MS or Apple??
Pennywizz6 Offline
Member

Registered: 11/10/04
Posts: 434
Loc: Shakopee, MN, USA
Mac has always had the upper hand on graphic design and multimedia compared to PCs. If doing this is all you plan on doing with it, id get a mac.

Phil

Top
#2762 - 02/17/05 11:43 AM Re: Best for music IBM/MS or Apple??
RW Offline
Member

Registered: 01/30/01
Posts: 344
Loc: NJ, USA
I read somewhere that PC will be fine so long as it's a pentium 4 chip. I really personally don't know myself and appreciate the question.

Bob
<><

Top
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 >

Moderator:  Admin 



Help keep Synth Zone Online