Is the MB truly ideal for music production and photography?

Discussion in 'MacBook' started by Ryuukumori, Apr 20, 2008.

  1. Ryuukumori macrumors 6502

    Jan 18, 2008
    I am off to college in autumn of 2009. Plenty of time to wait, plenty of time to prepare. The only obstacle- price. The MB is in a good price range. Does a MB truly equal or surpass my needs?

    I am a musician and amateur photographer. I'll be doing hours of music production and editing, as well as occasional photo editing.

    With all this in mind, will a MB suit my needs for four consecutive years in a University?

    Let's look at the specs. A 13" screen. Intel GMA X3100 graphics processor. 2 GB RAM Standard (will upgrade 3rd party 4 GB). Large hard drive (200 GB+).

    Is the MB ideal for a college student like me who would need some power for music production and photography? If it really isn't, I can fork out money for a MBP, but I really want to look at a cheaper alternative first.

  2. FederalBmx macrumors member

    Jan 26, 2008
    well if you dont need the macbook right now i would wait for future hardware updates to decide. there could be something thats is a big change by fall of 09
  3. TuffLuffJimmy macrumors G3


    Apr 6, 2007
    Portland, OR
    I would shoot for the macbook pro once you get your student discount (that's what I'm doing, hence why I said that's what I'd do :D )

    Having said that I currently run a Macbook (late 2006) that I have upgraded to 2GB of ram and a 320GB hard disk. I can't say much for audio production, but I do video editing with Final Cut Express and photo management with Aperture. The video editing in Express is great, smooth and fast. The editing in Aperture is okay... It's a little sluggish after editing for a while, but it works pretty well.
  4. iToaster macrumors 68000


    May 3, 2007
    In front of my MacBook Pro
    The MacBook should be fine for you. It has enough power for music production and will do photography well. The only issue I can think of with it would be the glossy screen, being often touted as not ideal for photo editing due to it's color inaccuracy, but if you are an amateur, it should be fine... you could get an external LCD to compensate for the glossy, seeing as whatever laptop you buy, it won't have a great screen for anything color sensitive. I say go with the MacBook, it will last a while and will accomplish what you ask of it. You are doing nothing to warrant the graphics card advantage of the MacBook Pro.
  5. Ryuukumori thread starter macrumors 6502

    Jan 18, 2008
    Why does Apple only offer Glossy MBs than between that and Matte?

    I would like the best for every dollar I'm spending, and if it means waiting for Matte, then I probably should. If I shouldn't worry too much about glossy as an amateur photographer, then how substantially discolored are pictures with glossy?

    Are there any examples I can see?
  6. asme macrumors regular

    Mar 12, 2008
    Consider the OS.

    The only thing the Macbook has going for it nowadays is stellar, legal compatibility with Mac OS X.
  7. Hello.there macrumors 6502a


    Oct 12, 2007
    I might be a lonely voice on this one but I adore the glossy screen on my MacBook, especially when I'm viewing/editing photos. I have an older (non-Mac, matte) laptop I only use occasionally but when I do the screen just looks incredibly dull and lifeless.

    I use Aperture and Final Cut Express on my MB and both work great - but I upped the ram to 2gb. I also do some guitar recording through Garageband and that works well too.

    I agonised recently about upgrading to a MacBook Pro but I genuinely don't need it (yet), the MacBook works for me.
  8. ki2594 macrumors 6502a

    Apr 12, 2008
    Carmel, IN.
    im actualy wit u there i love it
  9. Ryuukumori thread starter macrumors 6502

    Jan 18, 2008
    So both of you love the glossy?

    Can I see pics of how the glossy compares to matte? Or at least what the glossy has to offer?

    And this is what is weird... Apple says glossy makes pictures look way better, but many of you say it's distorted colors. Can someone explain why?
  10. originalcliche macrumors member

    Oct 28, 2007
    Yup the current macbook is good for both. I ue mine for music production and its pretty sweet. People have been using macbooks and computers with much SLOWER processors for music production in the past and got away just fine.
  11. TuffLuffJimmy macrumors G3


    Apr 6, 2007
    Portland, OR
    Don't wait for matte. Apple reserves that for the pro machines now apparently. Matte has already come and gone (glossy is new), Apple won't be releasing a matte macbook.
  12. iMaccore2 macrumors regular

    Mar 2, 2008
    Boston, MA
    The glossy screen makes colors look more saturated, so they look more vibrant but are not the exact color. If I had the choice I would go for glossy anyway
  13. TuffLuffJimmy macrumors G3


    Apr 6, 2007
    Portland, OR
    If you have any intent to print your pictures or send them to other people to view on their screens and you want color accuracy then get a Pro with a matte screen.
  14. fewture macrumors regular

    Jun 8, 2006
    Music Production:
    - Same as the pro - same CPU (the higher end 15"pro is a little faster, but lower pro the same)
    - Just make sure you up the ram - I would suggest 4gb preferably. Its not that much now.
    - The only difference with Pro is you get options of Firewire 800 or even esata via express card. This will make an external hdd run faster for music production. But plenty of people use Firewire 400 or even USB for running off samples and its perfectly fine
    - I have a Macbook and do a lot of music production - its so fast.
    - Recommendation - get external monitor - something widescreen. It will make all the difference to your Macbook experience

    Photography: no idea..
  15. illidian macrumors 6502

    Mar 27, 2008
    Cincinnati, OH
    The Pro will really only give you a bigger screen, all the other differences are irrelevant for your needs.

Share This Page