Audio people! Where should Apple's strategy be?

[iapple]

Hi,
I decided to set up this thread, 'cause there are many rumors going around about what Apple might produce for the Audio market. With the recent buy up of Emagic, what do you guys think is the potential apple holds?

What should Apple's strategy be? Should it produce its own device, like a FireWire Audio/MIDI interface, or should it focus on software, making a "Final Audio Pro" type of app, or CD Studio pro? Should it use the technology from Emagic, making a consumer iApp, something on the lines of iCompose, or iMusic, with the ability of importing music, etc. from tapes to digitize, or to record composed music, etc?

I for one think that music requires more knowledge than DV movies/Editing. Composing isn't something so easy, you just get some clips, and add transitions! It takes ages to come up with anything good, and it requires music theory to compose a decent song! So, if there is an iApp, I think it should primarily be used for digitizing existing audio on tapes, etc.

Perhaps this iApp could have a "Pro" edition, not going so far as Logic, or something like ProTools, but maybe like a light version of ProTools Free?? Maybe 8 tracks at the most? maybe charge for the "Pro", maybe not.. (I've tried using SparkME from TC Works, which is a free audio editors, 2 tracks only, and to do substancial stuff, you need more tracks!)

ALSO, I think it is vital for Apple to continue the development of the "LOGIC" app, not completely change it! It has a large user base, and has succeeded, and Apple shouldn'T waste time trying to create a whole new app! Maybe some interface fine tunings, but other than that, let the Emagic people continue development.

Tell me what you think!
So, Apple should now start their innovations in the "Audio" field as well!!! HORRAY! of course, we are all a waiting for JAGUAR!!!!

 

[Eliot]

At the top, several all-in-one solutions more elegant than the Fairlight kit, more powerful than Digi and whizzier than Logic.
Dilutions of this (but with an upgrade path) further down the ladder. Collaborations with hardware manufacturers.
Tracking, editing, mixing, mastering etc.
Scoring, Tracking, foley, dubbing, mixing to picture etc.
Online and offline editing for broadcast.
Add your own to this........
Wizards and True Stars look no further.

 

[mymemory]

THe thing with audio vs visuals is that h9omans are 80% visuals, so it is easier to reconize visual elements rather than audible elements. Audio still " subjective" to the human mind. That is why is easir to compose something visual.

Yes, you need more instruction to develop a conceptualized sound. I mean, how many people can isolate a look prom a sound track? no one, you need some time of instruction, but any body can tell you I want this video from here from here.

Based of that, the only way Apple could go is to develop a good audio interface, something that every body can enjoy and can use togather with the audio soft, iTunes or DVD player, even a better set of Quicktime sounds would be good.

That is the easiest way to go, to transform your computer in the hi-fi entertaiment system of the house.

 

[Sun Baked]

1. Write an Apple quality driver for one of the Sound cards and integrate the darn thing into the operating system.

2. Do the same thing for a midi interface.

3. Sell the darn things in the Apple Store.

4. Don't forget the drivers for the game software.

---

It would be really nice to see as options in the Sound System Prefs under Audio Output (built-in audio, sound card, midi) & have them mean something.

You can do a lot of things for the professional market, but I'm sure the Mac game players would also like to have some audio that meets the quality of the video.

 

[Eliot]

Sell the darn things in the Apple store.......
Yes.
What about Apple Pro stores too. Hi-end outlets in big media cities- NY, LA, London, Tokyo, Bollywood etc etc etc....

 

[Dunepilot]

Hardware

Having been personally torn between parting with my cash for a firewire MOTU 828 and going for a cheaper USB Tascam 248 I had decided to go with the tascam and not worry too much about recording lots of channels of audio simultaneously.

Apple's move now suggests I ought to hold on.

Okay, listen up, Apple, if you're listening.

Manufacture a firewire interface like the Tascam that has sliders which control the software faders on screen. Please also give at least 4 (6?) simultaneous jack/XLR connections, and you'll have a winner on your hands.

In fact, if they could also bundle this with a decent soft synth or integrate a basic module into the unit, so much the better...

I can't wait to see what they do!

 

[billiam0878]

I'm not really an "Audio Person," but I do love to use MIDI with my keyboard, so an iApp that allowed basic MIDI importing and editting would be greatly appreciated (I used to use a ShareWare called MIDIgraphy which none of you probably know, but I liked and would love to see brought to X in some form of a similar iApp).

Bill

 

[AlphaTech]

I'd like to see a sound card available for the Mac along the lines of the Audiogy.

As for additional devices for systems that don't have PCI slots, they should come out with systems that either integrate the same features or offer external devices that give it to them. Since all Mac's now have FireWire, they could go with a FireWire audio device.

 

[Eliot]

I suspect that Alpha is thinking along the right lines. Firewire Audio Networking will appear in the next rev of OSX, which allows the use of IEC 61883-6 devices from within Core Audio using no additional drivers .
There will be devices containing a second generation DM1 chip(2 AV ports, both capable of handling either a DV stream, 8ch of AES or SPDIF, ADAT or 128 ch analog , all at 24/96kHz coming on the market towards year end, so Macs will all address these directly. Yamaha and Otari have prepared their second generation mLAN chip which is I think likely to become a professional standard for IEEE 1349 and this will be turning up in loads of semi-pro and pro kit over the next 18 months.
Looks like Apple could be heading for a good patch............

 

[mmmdreg]

seeing as composing is harder than movie-making to a degree, it should be software that you have to pay for, as it is not suited to the i-category of consumer-appz..

 

[Eliot]

I don't see why it can't be something for everyone, from your home movie to Spielberg's latest opus or from bedroom guitarists to recording the LSO at AIR Studios in London.
To put it in perspective, Apple will over the next couple of years be able to put the tech in place to push broadcast quality "TV" from any desktop Mac, and if we have the appropriate CODECS , straight onto the Web...............iWebcast, anybody?

Wahay!

 

[iapple]

Originally posted by Eliot
I don't see why it can't be something for everyone, from your home movie to Spielberg's latest opus or from bedroom guitarists to recording the LSO at AIR Studios in London.
To put it in perspective, Apple will over the next couple of years be able to put the tech in place to push broadcast quality "TV" from any desktop Mac, and if we have the appropriate CODECS , straight onto the Web...............iWebcast, anybody?

Wahay!

}

Good point. I think Apple needs to continue with the iApps too. It is the way to attract consumers!

Imagine people who have always been interested in MIDI/Audio, but never could because all the software seems so difficult etc. And then, imagine them playing with iTunes, seeing how easy it is to organize music. Then imaginne iCompose or iRecord in the dock. A free multi-track recording studio comes for free! They will pick up Macs just seeing that! (I would anyway..)

I tell you, there are many people interested in music! And many have not been able to buy all the hardware (talk about pricing!) for a multi-track recoding system! If Apple supplied a low cost Firewire (or USB for low cost) audio interface, there it is, a great package for people to buy!

I am looking foward to Apple's moves later this year, and early next year into the Audio market! As someone said before, they have some great stuff in the video market, so now, time for really stabalizing Apple's No.1 position in the creative markets, INCLUDING music production.

 

[Grokgod]

It all seems really crazy to me.

I really can't understand how there isnt any midi in OSX.

Its been out over a year and still no MIDI built in.

APPLE used to be THE machine for music.

There are a lot of musicians working on the MAC that refuse to move. to a Pcheese. But they are being forced to by obvious music appz and hardware!

Apple needs to get a handle on this before its TOO freaking late.

Why does APPLE always wait till its almost too late or IS too late.

 

[Eliot]

There's OSX Midi Services and a ton of MIDI support in the pipeline.............
I've honestly never heard of anyone jumping platforms simply because they have to buy a $59 Fastlane (and I'm sure it won't be long before MIDI is std on a Mac).
Maybe I've misunderstood your point..if so sorry..but wouldn't going to a PC right now be a little like buying an Armani jacket and then throwing it away to buy something from KMart cos it's got more pockets?

 

[D*I*S_Frontman]

Your average Joe Electronics Consumer has a cam'corder, a VCR, a stereo, and probably a digital camera. iApps like iPhoto, iTunes, and iMovie make sense.

I'm not sure a stripped-down entry-level mixing program for free will have the same impact as iPhoto, iTunes, and iMovie. What would we call it--"iGarageBand?"

Having said that, the marketing model of the extremely user-friendly free iApp and the killer pro superapp for $999 is still a very smart way to go--the average consumer feels like he/she is part of the big revolution by owning the little brother of the superstar. The twelve-year-old who is success @ iMovie can beg mummy and daddy for the real thing when he leaves for film school. Perhaps the same would apply for "iGarageBand."

To really make this revolutionary, Apple needs another HUGE HOME RUN like FCP has proved to be. They need to make a great, intuitive interface for the most powerful audio production app available. If they do this right, they will crush all comers. As stated ad nauseum throughout all of these forums, system reliability, durability, stability, and hardware/software/OS integration is more important than raw speed for creative professionals. While the current processing power of the high-end Macs is insufficient for huge track count 24bit/96 or 192khz recording projects with all of the requisite plug-ins we would all like running simultaneously, newer CPUs and faster motherboards will cure this up shortly, I suspect. Having the right superapp in place when the hardware catches up will virtually guarrantee complete domination of the market.

I am a little worried about MOTU with all of this. Perhaps Apple should stay away from the interface market and just leave that for MOTU--maybe even buy off the software portion of MOTU and incorporate elements of Digital Performer into the new superapp? Who knows. I have worked w/DP and enjoyed the experience very much. I hope the Emagic issue doesn't sour the MOTU/Apple partnership.

 

[Eliot]

Yes, I was a little concerned about DP too when this was announced. I like both Logic and DP for slightly different projects and would be saddened to see such a solid Mac-centric company harmed by Apple's own moves.
Anyway we'll be able to call this one a lot better in 10 days.

 

[dongmin]

iMixer

Apple is trying to push the Mac as the ultimate content-producing machine, for pros and amateurs. For the Mac to be the total solution, it needs to cover sound production at some level.

Even at the consumer level, I don't think it's hard to think up uses for this kind of technology.

For one, they could simply beef up the audio portion of iMovie, allowing people to add more than one audio track and maybe offer a rudimentary set of audio effects.

Or, they could write a seperate audio iApp but one that works in tandem with iMovie. This iMixer could let novices play with basic mixing, sampling, stereo or surround effects, etc. I know a lot of people who aren't musicians but want to get into all this b/c they love dance music or hip hop and want to experiment with cutting their own tracks. It's becoming more and more mainstream; you can tell by the popularity of Reason on Hotline.

Or, they could build something into iTunes. A live mixing station for the amateur DJs out there.

If done well (and we know Apple will do a decent job) it could spawn a whole new consumer market.

 

[tjwett]

NO iAPP!!!! that would be stupid. if Apple ruins Logic by dumbing it down or making any drastic changes i'll lose it and throw my machine out the window.

 

[Eliot]

Originally posted by tjwett
NO iAPP!!!! that would be stupid. if Apple ruins Logic by dumbing it down or making any drastic changes i'll lose it and throw my machine out the window.


If that was all they had in mind, you might JUST ABOUT have a point. However, Apple would have to be a collective of Neanderthals, run by a Cro-Magnon, to buy Emagic- just to build something to let my (and everyone else's) 5year old daughter do "iSing it like Britney."

A little faith please gentlemen.....

 

[D*I*S_Frontman]

Another rather disconcerting development:

MOTU's site used to have verbage on it to the effect that they would be taking DP and related software to OS X (the current version only works in OS 9/Classic Mode). I was just there and all mention of OS X I remember having seen a few months ago is gone.

Boy do I hope I am dead wrong on this one, but if you were MOTU what would you have your developers spending more time on--converting existing Mac software (Mac OS 9 compatable across virtually their entire product line) or making everything Winows XP compatable (very little of their big stuff is M$ OS compatable currently). The answer a week or two ago would obviously have been Mac OS X development--stay with the undisputed flagship audio production platform. Now that Apple has bought one of MOTU's biggest competitors lock, stock and barrel, with even more savvy AltiVec-enabled competitive products to come, what would YOU do? Fight to stay in the market competing against the manufacturer of the system 90% of your software HAS to run on, or ramp up Windows development and cash in on the 94% of computer owners who don't use Macs?

I hope Apple has been working closely with MOTU on this so as not to cut their legs out from under them. This is a pretty dicey time for Mac DP fans.

 

[3rdpath]

Originally posted by D*I*S_Frontman
Another rather disconcerting development:

MOTU's site used to have verbage on it to the effect that they would be taking DP and related software to OS X (the current version only works in OS 9/Classic Mode). I was just there and all mention of OS X I remember having seen a few months ago is gone.

Boy do I hope I am dead wrong on this one, but if you were MOTU what would you have your developers spending more time on--converting existing Mac software (Mac OS 9 compatable across virtually their entire product line) or making everything Winows XP compatable (very little of their big stuff is M$ OS compatable currently). The answer a week or two ago would obviously have been Mac OS X development--stay with the undisputed flagship audio production platform. Now that Apple has bought one of MOTU's biggest competitors lock, stock and barrel, with even more savvy AltiVec-enabled competitive products to come, what would YOU do? Fight to stay in the market competing against the manufacturer of the system 90% of your software HAS to run on, or ramp up Windows development and cash in on the 94% of computer owners who don't use Macs?

I hope Apple has been working closely with MOTU on this so as not to cut their legs out from under them. This is a pretty dicey time for Mac DP fans.

i think porting dp3.1 to X has been the hold-up for it's release...can't think of any other reason for 3.1 to not be shipping by now....

i don't have any worries about motu in the larger scenario. they have a nice market share, loyal users and a growing presence in the post field( and a serious hold on the audio I/O hardware)...emagic is still going to be just another( high quality) music app . if apple dumbs-down a version of logic for the masses so what?

i'm also sure this wasn't a surprise to motu since i would be shocked if apple didn't make a move towards motu first...don't get me wrong-logic is very nice- but IMO motu seems more like a company in the same philosophical mindset as apple.

macs are easy to use
performer is easy to use
ask around, the consensus is logic is not.

my gut is apple will take a very small user friendly portion of logic and make it a standard part of their base software. and in time, make a midi port standard( mlan is a long ways off...). i don't expect to see anything music related from the emagic purchase for quite some time.