SYNTH ZONE
Visit The Bar For Casual Discussion
Page 2 of 3 < 1 2 3 >
Topic Options
#2763 - 02/17/05 01:56 PM Re: Best for music IBM/MS or Apple??
Pennywizz6 Offline
Member

Registered: 11/10/04
Posts: 434
Loc: Shakopee, MN, USA
A decent processor such as a pentium 4 (1.6ghz or higher) should be just fine. But that isnt everything. You will want ram! ram is good ram is great and lots of it is a MUST!!! 512mb is minimum, 1gb is adequete any more is just fantastic. Another thing is a video card is a big advantage, over 32mb is prety much minimal on some of this fancy programs, 128 will be just fine.

Phil

Top
#2764 - 02/17/05 05:25 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...
Thanks again ,
Thanks guys for all the help...at least I have some independant views to help me make up my mind..

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

Top
#2765 - 02/18/05 08:19 AM Re: Best for music IBM/MS or Apple??
3351 Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 08/17/03
Posts: 1194
Loc: Toronto, Canada.
QUick question to all PC users here.
JUst how much latency do you guys experience while trying to run software synths?
How many of them can you run at the same time? (Needless to mention Arturia in this case, since that stuff is really power hungry(
-ED-


[This message has been edited by 3351 (edited 02-18-2005).]
_________________________
A gentleman is one who never hurts anyone's feelings unintentionally.
- - - Oscar Wilde

Top
#2766 - 02/18/05 09:24 AM Re: Best for music IBM/MS or Apple??
Sheriff Offline
Member

Registered: 02/18/05
Posts: 965
Loc: Frankfurt, Hessen, Germany
Hello Leo!

There's no better way for making music as using an Atari Falcon 030 with FA-8 & FDI controlled by cubase audio. This product is THE reference class until today and has never been topped by any modern computersystems.
Unfortunality this computer isn't produced anymore since 10 years. So, for today there's no better system for making music as an Apple. The Hardware of a PC was never designed for professional working with sound or graphics - it was only made for using in offices.
Virtual synthesises are not really equal to real sysnthesises with analogic oscillators. So the best way for making musik is to use real instruments - believe it or not!

Greetings from Frankfurt (Germany),
Sheriff
;-)


[This message has been edited by Sheriff (edited 02-18-2005).]
_________________________
Greetings from Frankfurt (Germany),
Sheriff ;-)

Top
#2767 - 02/18/05 01:05 PM Re: Best for music IBM/MS or Apple??
RW Offline
Member

Registered: 01/30/01
Posts: 344
Loc: NJ, USA
What if you're not using soft synths, but just using the PC to record audio tracks, and final mixing?

Would a pentimum 4 2gighz be ok? with say 512 ram?

Bob
<><

Top
#2768 - 02/18/05 02:10 PM Re: Best for music IBM/MS or Apple??
Pennywizz6 Offline
Member

Registered: 11/10/04
Posts: 434
Loc: Shakopee, MN, USA
Bob, Yes that will work just fine. If it goes real slow, just upgrade to 1gb of ram, a 512 stick will be 60-70 bucks, well worth it.

Sheriff, depending on your system you can run many programs at once. The thing that limits how much you can run is ram. I have 1gb and have never been to the point where I cant run enough programs.

Phil

Top
#2769 - 02/19/05 08:08 AM Re: Best for music IBM/MS or Apple??
3351 Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 08/17/03
Posts: 1194
Loc: Toronto, Canada.
Hey SHeriff, your comment on soft synths kind of pre-supposes that we are all after analog emulations. Truth is, most soft synths go far beyond emulations of analog. But to be honest, virtual analog synths do sound damn good and in some cases even better than the real thing. I agree, there are limitations and definite differences in character of sound, but even with all that virtual analog synths sound pretty damn analog in the mix. OFten times even better.

Now, back to what I was originally saying...
Synths like Absynth, FM7, PPG 2.V, Reaktor, Reason are pretty much what drives the virtual synth market. Sure, manufacturers like Arturia and Gmedia tend to focus on the retro shit; but really, how many times does a modern days electronic musician need a Moog emulation? THere are fanatics writing tributes to Tonto's head Expanding band and Tangerine Dream but there aren't too many of those.

Most of us are after grooves, motion pads, heavy morphing textures and your average meat and potato stuff like pianos, strings etc.

So if anyone wishes to limit themselves and stick to just recording TB303s and Moog modular systems using PCs or ancient atari systems - be my guest.

As it was once brilliantly put: "There are too many freaks and not enough circuses".

Now, back to our PC or a MAC delema. A used G4 Mac will do a much better job than any PC. THey won't cost you a fortune BTW.

-ED-
_________________________
A gentleman is one who never hurts anyone's feelings unintentionally.
- - - Oscar Wilde

Top
#2770 - 02/19/05 03:06 PM Re: Best for music IBM/MS or Apple??
Sheriff Offline
Member

Registered: 02/18/05
Posts: 965
Loc: Frankfurt, Hessen, Germany
Hi, Bob!

Without using soft synths you don't need too much memory. I had a AMD K6-II/500 and 256MB SDRAM...and it worked good for recording standard audio tracks - even Oxygen (a Cubase clone) worked fine. ;-)
My old Atari uses a SCSI-II interface with 2 MB/s and it is sufficient for recording 8 (up to 16) tracks. So an ATA-33 controller should be more than enough for the most biggest dreams... ;-)

------------------
Greetings from Frankfurt (Germany),
Sheriff ;-)

[This message has been edited by Sheriff (edited 02-19-2005).]
_________________________
Greetings from Frankfurt (Germany),
Sheriff ;-)

Top
#2771 - 02/19/05 03:45 PM Re: Best for music IBM/MS or Apple??
Sheriff Offline
Member

Registered: 02/18/05
Posts: 965
Loc: Frankfurt, Hessen, Germany
Hi, Phil!

Nearly all PC systems running win32 are not qualified for synchronisation between HD recording, V.S.T. and midi controller. PC's are great dealers for networking, office programms, etc. which won't need any exactly timings.
The most important advantages of a single task program is: 100% attention of hardware for cooperating with software! - I don't need a 'recorder' which is permanently engaged in background checking this or that nonrelevant thing. I need a wave recorder with full attention to MY interests. ;-)

Nevertheless, a win32 system is already enough for audio recording. But if you need to use V.S.T. imho you better use a PPC.
Otherwise you can also use a DAT or a normal tape for recording...*lol*


------------------
Greetings from Frankfurt (Germany),
Sheriff ;-)
_________________________
Greetings from Frankfurt (Germany),
Sheriff ;-)

Top
#2772 - 02/19/05 04:19 PM Re: Best for music IBM/MS or Apple??
Sheriff Offline
Member

Registered: 02/18/05
Posts: 965
Loc: Frankfurt, Hessen, Germany
Hello Ed!

I can't really disagree!
The point is that we all love our good old synths and won't believe that there is any comparable emulation on market. Another point is that the experience shows us that most mucicians are 'crying' for their 'old and humble sounds' (I'm likewise doing it).

Otherwise the new technics brought us new possibilities and also new 'colours' (in my special case there is no need for any V.S.T. because of my V.A.S.T. in K2000). :-)

I'm using a lot of modern digital sounds but I would never dispense with my analog colours from Yamaha V-50 (I think it has a DX-7 machine inside?).

"Yes, give me the whole new techs but never scrap my old techs away!" ;-)

It lasts years before I can handle a complex technical thing nearly perfect. So it's logical to say: "The old thing sounds better than the new once!"
Isn't it? ;-)


------------------
Greetings from Frankfurt (Germany),
Sheriff ;-)
_________________________
Greetings from Frankfurt (Germany),
Sheriff ;-)

Top
Page 2 of 3 < 1 2 3 >

Moderator:  Admin 



Help keep Synth Zone Online