Logic Pro X Gets Refresh for Upcoming Mac Pro

[Peperino]

Most of that level pro can use a Mac Mini.

Not really. Mac Mini requires a eGPU, is barely upgradable, does not have PCI, just to mention a few things.
And it is way overpriced for what it is.
[doublepost=1560485429][/doublepost]

Really? Then buy a Mac Mini or an iMac.

Neither the Mac mini nor the iMac are good enough, neither they are expandable.
We need a middle power machine that is in between the new Mac Pro and the Mac mini.

That is expandable (with 3 PCI slots and maybe 512RAM). The Mac Pro is an overkill intended high level studios or
This new Mac Pro is to replace the old Mac Server line up. It does not replace the old Mac Pro due to its difference in pricing.
[doublepost=1560485851][/doublepost]

Its for the audio engineers/producers that are sucessful at their job

Something cheaper is the imac pro or imac 2019

I know many very succesful people that are actually able to pay if they want to. But are NOT willing to pay that kind of money since it is quite expensive and It is an overkill for their needs.

Neither iMac pro nor the iMac are professional level computers that can replace the old Mac Pro. They are barely expandable, SSD cannot even be upgraded, no PCI, and the iMac Pro has not many things Pro about it. Same 10 year old external design that can not even adjust the vertical position. Furthermore, many require to have 2or 3 similar monitors side by side which cannot be achieved with the iMacs.
[doublepost=1560486026][/doublepost]

Musicians will be fine with pretty much any other computer in the lineup, no? Audio, even with a ton of plugins running on multiple tracks, MIDI, etc, shouldn't put even an iMac to the test.

Your comments clearly show how little you know about music and music plugins. If you do not know, please refrain from making misleading comments. Current sound libraries can easily choke an iMac Pro with 32GB RAM.

 

[mdriftmeyer]

Not really. Mac Mini requires a eGPU, is barely upgradable, does not have PCI, just to mention a few things.
And it is way overpriced for what it is.
[doublepost=1560485429][/doublepost]

Neither the Mac mini nor the iMac are good enough, neither they are expandable.
We need a middle power machine that is in between the new Mac Pro and the Mac mini.

That is expandable (with 3 PCI slots and maybe 512RAM). The Mac Pro is an overkill intended high level studios or
This new Mac Pro is to replace the old Mac Server line up. It does not replace the old Mac Pro due to its difference in pricing.
[doublepost=1560485851][/doublepost]

I know many very succesful people that are actually able to pay if they want to. But are NOT willing to pay that kind of money since it is quite expensive and It is an overkill for their needs.

Neither iMac pro nor the iMac are professional level computers that can replace the old Mac Pro. They are barely expandable, SSD cannot even be upgraded, no PCI, and the iMac Pro has not many things Pro about it. Same 10 year old external design that can not even adjust the vertical position. Furthermore, many require to have 2or 3 similar monitors side by side which cannot be achieved with the iMacs.
[doublepost=1560486026][/doublepost]

Your comments clearly show how little you know about music and music plugins. If you do not know, please refrain from making misleading comments. Current sound libraries can easily choke an iMac Pro with 32GB RAM.

Then you don't know how to use Logic Pro X.

 

[Peperino]

Pro = You make your living from your work. Pro's can and will purchase mac pros.

For aspiring musicians and all hobbyists - Get a Mac Mini or iMac. Can't afford one? - Get a refurb or used one.

Don't want to come across as brash but that's just the facts of it. Getting a little tired of all the bashing about the new Mac Pros by people who don't need them.

Once again, Another complete ignorant comment.

I personally know many more than "Pro" musicians, (grammy winners) that actually might make way more money than you, and still they are not willing to spend that kind of money on an overkill computer they do not need.

Your brashing does not mean you are right. The actual facts, is that the base Mac Pro is not even as powerful as the iMac Pro and Why spend the money on an extra large truck when you only need a car??

This is obviously not a machine to replace the old Mac Pro, but the old Mac server.
And it is not just musicians. Photographers, video editors, designers that are Pro and very successful that were ok spending 2500-3000 for an old Mac Pro, they will NOT be willing to spend 15-25k. That is just a fact.
[doublepost=1560487011][/doublepost]

There’s a distinction between a professional — someone who generates income from their activity — and an amateur — someone who does an activity as a hobby. Being an amateur doesn’t mean you’re not talented, it just means you don’t generate income, or at least enough income to make a living. If you’re a professional and you’re making money doing your activity, then yes, you can afford a Mac Pro because it’s the tool that will make you money to not only pay it off but pay dividends for years to come.

Read my other replies.

If you need a car you do not need to buy an oversize 18-wheeler truck.
It does not matter how much money you make. I know many Pros that make more money than you and still are not willing to spend that kind of money.

It does not matter how successful or Pro you are to spend your money wisely. You do not need to be an amateur to stupidly spend money on something you do not actually need.

As I said before, Many pros that use too buy a 2.5-3k old Mac Pro, and that actually make a living out of it, are not willing to spend the obscene cost of 10k for a new Mac Pro.

 

[JordanNZ]

I think that the new Logic Pro X maximum track number probably says less about this new software feature and more about the potential capability of the 2019 Mac Pro. If I recall correctly, many of the DAWs (Such as Cubase) that compete with Logic Pro X have had an unlimited tracks feature for some time, limited only by the the capability of the computer. I also see that grand daddy of DAWs, Digital Performer, now allows for 32,000 midi tracks.

You're confusing the number processing cores that can be used with the track count.
And there is a very big difference between a midi track and a virtual instrument/audio track with plugins.

 

[Peperino]

The standard iMac is perfectly fine for 99% of musicians. The iMac Pro is more than enough for the rest. The Mac Pro is for proper score writers - you don't need that power. It's aimed at the likes of Hans Zimmer.

Neither the iMac nor the iMac Pro can replace the old Cheese grater. They are not expandable, they cannot be placed in a separate room, they have no PCI expansion, they have a soldered SSD, and the iMac Pro is pretty badly designed inside.
Quite pathetic that a 5-8k machine you cannot even update the SSD and to upgrade the RAM you need to take it to Apple.

We were asking for a Machine to replace the old Cheese grater Mac Pro. Clearly, the new Mac Pro is NOT. IT is a great machine, that replaces the server line. But there is nothing yet that can replace the expandability of the old cheese grater at that price point.
[doublepost=1560488221][/doublepost]

The pros that can't afford this hardware most likely don't need this hardware. They can use a $3,000 iMac (8 cores, 40GB RAM self-installed) and be fine.
This new Mac Pro is for professional studios. Think Pixar, Paramount Recording Studios. A $40,000 Mac Pro will pay for itself in months or less for them.

Truth is, this new Mac Pro shouldn't start with such a low configuration... Apple just did that for those who still want it but don't need that cases' expandability... where much of the expense lies.

Apple has all levels covered from 15" MBP to iMac, to iMac Pro, to Mac Pro. No one is left out.

Your correc that the new Mac Pro is designed for high level studios that can actually afford them.

Though your assumption is incorrect. Both the iMac and iMac Pro are ok for amateurs. THey are not designed as a professional computer. They are NOT expandable, have not PCI expansion, they are limited in RAM, among many other things that I previously mentioned.

Apple has not even close to cover all the bases. All the PRo users that use to use the old Cheese grater are still left with no option since either they cannot afford the newMac Pro or are not willing to pay obscene money for something they do not need.
And if you want to talk about the MBP, that would be for another day, but actually, the MBP 2016+ are one of the worse products Apple ever designed.
[doublepost=1560488679][/doublepost]

Then you don't know how to use Logic Pro X.

I actually know very well how to use Logic Pro. Have been using it for over 15 years.
Your comment is pathetic and is NOT related to the hardware needs whatsoever.

A studio cannot work with iMac or iMac Pros, because they will generate noise when they overheat.
They are NOT expandable, and are NOT designed for studio use since they cannot be place in a separate room.

We are talking about hardware design. Not about how to use Logic.
[doublepost=1560488840][/doublepost]

You're confusing the number processing cores that can be used with the track count.
And there is a very big difference between a midi track and a virtual instrument/audio track with plugins.

Logic Pro had a limited track count to aprox. 300 tracks regardless the core you are using.
They just released a new version where the track count have been increased to 1000 and I believe that is independent if you are using a Mac Pro or not. r

 

[SeattleMoose]

Neither the iMac nor the iMac Pro can replace the old Cheese grater. They are not expandable, they cannot be placed in a separate room, they have no PCI expansion, they have a soldered SSD, and the iMac Pro is pretty badly designed inside.
Quite pathetic that a 5-8k machine you cannot even update the SSD and to upgrade the RAM you need to take it to Apple.

We were asking for a Machine to replace the old Cheese grater Mac Pro. Clearly, the new Mac Pro is NOT. IT is a great machine, that replaces the server line. But there is nothing yet that can replace the expandability of the old cheese grater at that price point.
[doublepost=1560488221][/doublepost]

Your correc that the new Mac Pro is designed for high level studios that can actually afford them.

Though your assumption is incorrect. Both the iMac and iMac Pro are ok for amateurs. THey are not designed as a professional computer. They are NOT expandable, have not PCI expansion, they are limited in RAM, among many other things that I previously mentioned.

Apple has not even close to cover all the bases. All the PRo users that use to use the old Cheese grater are still left with no option since either they cannot afford the newMac Pro or are not willing to pay obscene money for something they do not need.
And if you want to talk about the MBP, that would be for another day, but actually, the MBP 2016+ are one of the worse products Apple ever designed.
[doublepost=1560488679][/doublepost]

I actually know very well how to use Logic Pro. Have been using it for over 15 years.
Your comment is pathetic and is NOT related to the hardware needs whatsoever.

A studio cannot work with iMac or iMac Pros, because they will generate noise when they overheat.
They are NOT expandable, and are NOT designed for studio use since they cannot be place in a separate room.

We are talking about hardware design. Not about how to use Logic.
[doublepost=1560488840][/doublepost]

Logic Pro had a limited track count to aprox. 300 tracks regardless the core you are using.
They just released a new version where the track count have been increased to 1000 and I believe that is independent if you are using a Mac Pro or not. r

Your posts indicate complete ignorance of the Mac lineup and the ability to run Logic successfully. I am guessing you are a PC guy running Cubase or something other than Logic. I have used Logic (typically ~30 tracks of audio, SW instruments, and multiple plugs on each of those 30 tracks) on a MacBook Pro and a Mac Mini for years....with zero problems. And noise (if it manifests) is only a problem when recording audio tracks thru a Mic. There are many ways to get around noise (order of song construction, isolation booth, baffles, etc.). Go look at some UTube videos on using Logic on various Mac Models for real tests and demos. It's ALL good!!!

 

[unfunfionn]

Wish there were instrument UI updates and other updates as well. All the old instruments like UltraBeat and Evoc etc need updates big time. The all need to be cohesive with the new instruments.

This is my biggest request too. I switched from Ableton a year ago and I’ve been incredibly happy with Logic, but there are some gaping holes like the ones you mentioned.

For me it’s not even about retina vs non-retina. I think there are certain instruments, particularly for sampling and drums, that could do with significantly more modern usability. From Ableton, I really miss Simpler and Drum Rack. ESX24, Ultrabeat (a slightly unfair comparison though) and Drum Machine Designer aren’t comparable. A sampler/slicer with a waveform GUI would be extremely welcome.

As a mixing and recording tool, Logic is near perfect for me but as a creative tool, there’s still some room upwards.

 

[genovelle]

Apple doesn’t need to ignore the pros. Haven’t you heard? They’ve all abandoned the Mac and switched to Windows long ago.

None that I know. Especially with music.

 

[Peperino]

Your posts indicate complete ignorance of the Mac lineup and the ability to run Logic successfully. I am guessing you are a PC guy running Cubase or something other than Logic. I have used Logic (typically ~30 tracks of audio, SW instruments, and multiple plugs on each of those 30 tracks) on a MacBook Pro and a Mac Mini for years....with zero problems. And noise (if it manifests) is only a problem when recording audio tracks thru a Mic. There are many ways to get around noise (order of song construction, isolation booth, baffles, etc.). Go look at some UTube videos on using Logic on various Mac Models for real tests and demos. It's ALL good!!!

Your post indicates that you are clearly an amateur or using small libraries.
I have been using Logic in Mac for over 15 years.
Obviously, you do not do music professionally or do not use large templates with large orchestral set ups 200+tracks.

Only on the recent Mac Mini you can have more than 16GB of RAm but you need to buy the eGPU or Logic will start chocking. Also the Macbooks are limited in RAM. Both are NOT expandable and cannot connect multiple monitors.

Load several instances of the heavy orchestral libraries. Omnisphere, Altiverb with a 16GB Ram and Logic will start chocking pretty easily.

 

[realtuner]

None that I know. Especially with music.

I realize I should have put a /s at the end of my post. I thought the sarcasm was obvious, but apparently not considering the number of replies I got.

 

[genovelle]

To be fair, a huge number have abandoned the Mac. A large majority of pros left are the ones that use Apple’s Pro Apps like Logic and Final Cut... which is why the Mac Pro seems to be very well suited for those.

And there are a ton of those.
[doublepost=1560491507][/doublepost]

I realize I should have put a /s at the end of my post. I thought the sarcasm was obvious, but apparently not considering the number of replies I got.

Sorry...totally missed it.

 

[TVOR]

You know what, actual musicians can make music with whatever they have. I have seen artists create music using just their smartphone, or even an old Windows XP machine, and many are simply using iPads. Real pros won’t be complaining about something being too expensive, they will use the tools they can get and focus in creating. Those are the real pros. The Mac Pro is simply just another tool, but not the only tool.

This is in complete contrast with nerds who are only fixated on the tool itself, thus will complain if a new toy they are lusting cost more than they wanted, even if they are not the target audience to begin with. This is not the definition of pros.

I've gotta be honest...I wish that Apple and others in the music equipment industry would actually raise the bar when it comes to the costs of equipment to make music! While I get that cheaper equipment can be said to democratise the music making process and allow people to get into making music with a much lower budget, I personally think that this cheaper access to the tools is one of the major reasons why the music industry has suffered so much in recent years!

With more people than ever before able to afford the tools to make music, that doesn't magically increase the percentage of people who have the talent to make music. The result (when these cheaper tools are combined with the democratisation of actually selling music) has resulted in a virtual tsunami of low quality (and often mostly derivative) music which has flooded the market.

That in itself is bad enough but when you consider that these "bedroom producers" who often do it just for "exposure" will then be able to undercut others in terms of pricing then you create a race to the bottom on the value of music which has benefitted precisely nobody!

Back in the "good old days", to release a record - even in the dance music seen which was rarely big budget and has consistently been the most guerrilla form of music making - you still had to invest a fair amount of money in the tools needed (either by purchasing yourself of hiring a studio) and you still had to have a good amount of knowledge about how to actually create music and sounds. Now we live in a time of 1,000 preset plugins, sample packs, tools for building chords and harmonies, pitch correction...so many things that allow a subpar musician/producer to up their game...albeit upping it towards and artificially created "standard" which usually isn't that high!

I know I will get criticised for this viewpoint because "art is art" and what right do I have to criticise...and I get that. But as somebody who believes that, while art may be art, there is still a spectrum of quality, I think that the age of participation trophies has massively spoiled the music industry. I view the music industry in the same way as I view any other industry. To those that feel I'm wrong...would you still be for the democratisation of industries in this way if it meant that there was a good chance that the doctor scheduled to do your open-heart surgery hadn't invested double digits of years of learning and practice and often 6 figures of money into learning their trade...but rather had picked up a cheap "teach yourself surgery" course online and a $1 scalpel?

Yes...I'm being hyperbolic...but I'm just fed up with the current attitude in the world that everybody should be allowed to do whatever they want just because they want to! So to Apple...go for it...price the Mac Pro so that it actually excludes a lot of people from buying it. Because god knows how bad music will sounds if untalented people get the ability to run four times more audio tracks and plugins in Logic...I guess the audio cesspool will become four times deeper...

 

[Craigy]

Removed comment.

 

[holisticrunner]

Not really. Mac Mini requires a eGPU, is barely upgradable, does not have PCI, just to mention a few things.
And it is way overpriced for what it is.
[doublepost=1560485429][/doublepost]

Neither the Mac mini nor the iMac are good enough, neither they are expandable.
We need a middle power machine that is in between the new Mac Pro and the Mac mini.

That is expandable (with 3 PCI slots and maybe 512RAM). The Mac Pro is an overkill intended high level studios or
This new Mac Pro is to replace the old Mac Server line up. It does not replace the old Mac Pro due to its difference in pricing.
[doublepost=1560485851][/doublepost]

I know many very succesful people that are actually able to pay if they want to. But are NOT willing to pay that kind of money since it is quite expensive and It is an overkill for their needs.

Neither iMac pro nor the iMac are professional level computers that can replace the old Mac Pro. They are barely expandable, SSD cannot even be upgraded, no PCI, and the iMac Pro has not many things Pro about it. Same 10 year old external design that can not even adjust the vertical position. Furthermore, many require to have 2or 3 similar monitors side by side which cannot be achieved with the iMacs.
[doublepost=1560486026][/doublepost]

Your comments clearly show how little you know about music and music plugins. If you do not know, please refrain from making misleading comments. Current sound libraries can easily choke an iMac Pro with 32GB RAM.

How about a 18core iMac Pro with 256GB Ram and 4TB of SSD with updated Logic Pro?

You know you can max out the config right?

 

[Ploki]

Not really. Mac Mini requires a eGPU, is barely upgradable, does not have PCI, just to mention a few things.
And it is way overpriced for what it is.
[doublepost=1560485429][/doublepost]

Neither the Mac mini nor the iMac are good enough, neither they are expandable.
We need a middle power machine that is in between the new Mac Pro and the Mac mini.

That is expandable (with 3 PCI slots and maybe 512RAM). The Mac Pro is an overkill intended high level studios or
This new Mac Pro is to replace the old Mac Server line up. It does not replace the old Mac Pro due to its difference in pricing.
[doublepost=1560485851][/doublepost]

I know many very succesful people that are actually able to pay if they want to. But are NOT willing to pay that kind of money since it is quite expensive and It is an overkill for their needs.

Neither iMac pro nor the iMac are professional level computers that can replace the old Mac Pro. They are barely expandable, SSD cannot even be upgraded, no PCI, and the iMac Pro has not many things Pro about it. Same 10 year old external design that can not even adjust the vertical position. Furthermore, many require to have 2or 3 similar monitors side by side which cannot be achieved with the iMacs.
[doublepost=1560486026][/doublepost]

Your comments clearly show how little you know about music and music plugins. If you do not know, please refrain from making misleading comments. Current sound libraries can easily choke an iMac Pro with 32GB RAM.

If you cannot do professional audio work on a Mac Mini i7, you are technically illiterate and even Mac Pro won't be enough.

You don't need eGPU for audio at all.
Most of high-end interfaces (apogee symphony, RME flagships, UAD) all come in Thunderbolt flavors. PCI is redundant.
Frankly, there's no RME UFX+ replacement in PCIe form, so even if i had PCIe i'd still opt for thunderbolt.



No really dude, if you bypass kontakt prebuffer to 6KB, you can easily get by with even 8GB of RAM.
If you can choke 32GB iMac Pro with some half-assed orchestral library then you dont know how to manage your resources well.
Samples nowadays could be streamed from NVMe drives if only developers enabled it, not needing ram AT ALL.
As far as CPU goes, MacBook Pro 2012 retina quadcore (my old computer) could play 600 voices from Kontakt. If you know how to orchestrate, not just layer samples, then this is plenty to make good and convincing sounding orchestra.

I love it how orchestral mockup composers and trailer music composers act like they need as much processing power is 3D-renderers and color graders, its hilarious

 

[chrono1081]

No more comments about Apple ignores the pros

Looking good!

Oh no, those are still there. Too many people are now wining about cost, forgetting that for this kind of power, you're going to pay and for the people this is aimed at, it's probably one of the cheaper parts of their workflow.

I would personally love one and would use the crap out of it but it's just not in my budget at the moment.

 

[Peter_M]

That is great.!

Now the "Pros" need some computers they can actually afford.

Very few musicians will be able to afford a Mac Pro. So basically all the "Pros" are still with no good hardware options.

Thank you Apple for your continuing neglect.

I think there are points to be made on both sides of this argument. You basically have to be a "pro's pro" to invest in a 10,000+ dollar machine (sans monitor), when nowadays you can get pretty much the identical performance from a PC (non-ECC RAM + new generation AMD CPUs) for less than half of the price, including Hackintosh builds.

Obviously this machine is made for a very narrow marked, mainly graphics designers with high profile clients. Spending this kind of cash for music/audio work seems a bit over the top. We're probably talking about 15,000 dollars including the screen, after upgrading the lackluster base model specs (RAM, storage, CPU).

 

[Coconut Bean]

Back then? Industry specific hardware (analog consoles etc...). Then you moved into a hybrid era of things like Pro Tools with hardware peripherals and interfaces to augment Mac/PC workstations. The progression has been to more and more in silico and software based solutions requiring more general computing muscle to get the job done. To that end, yeah, I'm sure there have been users on nMPs that have been frustrated at the amount of time it takes when using a lot of plugins and such. That's not staring at a beachball but that's waiting for processes to run and time is money. Given the reaction from people working on major projects this direction is welcome.

Surely, there is a market. I am just saying that the new Mac Pro doesn't make sense as a successor of the old one. It seems to be a totally new, higher tier segment. A segment of which many previous Apple customers might have moved away from as a result of recent years' lackluster offerings.

That partly explains the mixed reactions, to both the new display and the mac pro. Some people (prosumers, hobby artists, youtubers) didnt want this. They wanted a device stronger than mini, one without a display, but a lot of power and no thermal throttling. Calling these people not pro enough is unnecessary. They are just disappointed because there is still no clearcut product for them.

 

[uller6]

I'm what you would call a prosumer. I started recording albums in Logic in 2006 on an iMac G5, and my current recording and mixing machine is a 2009 27" i7 iMac upgraded with ssd (after using a 2011 Mac mini for about 5 years). I'm using the most up-to-date version of Logic Pro X. It can still work with about 50 simultaneous tracks, which is plenty for what I do. No, I'm not recording huge orchestral libraries, but I do use 3-4 plugins per track with samplers and soft synths. If the computer gets overloaded, then freeze one of your tracks or bounce in place instead of using live plugins or instruments. I use external firewire 800 storage which is fine for my sample libraries. I'm still using this machine because it keeps working 10 years later and hasn't caused big enough problems to my workflow to make an upgrade worthwhile. Music isn't my main gig, but I do make some money on the side from recording.

Yes, I would like more power. But don't make blanket claims that logic doesn't work on "slower" machines - it works great for plenty of people that don't need 1000 track sessions.

 

[AndyDiamond]

That is great.!

Now the "Pros" need some computers they can actually afford.

Very few musicians will be able to afford a Mac Pro. So basically all the "Pros" are still with no good hardware options.

Thank you Apple for your continuing neglect.

Very few musicians need 1,000 tracks in Logic.

 

[thisisnotmyname]

Surely, there is a market. I am just saying that the new Mac Pro doesn't make sense as a successor of the old one. It seems to be a totally new, higher tier segment. A segment of which many previous Apple customers might have moved away from as a result of recent years' lackluster offerings.

That partly explains the mixed reactions, to both the new display and the mac pro. Some people (prosumers, hobby artists, youtubers) didnt want this. They wanted a device stronger than mini, one without a display, but a lot of power and no thermal throttling. Calling these people not pro enough is unnecessary. They are just disappointed because there is still no clearcut product for them.

You have a point with not being a successor to the old one, however you would have to skip a generation to make it. No one wanted a successor the previous model. People wanted a successor to the model two generations back. I suppose that's part of the point though anyway.

From that perspective, there's a segment of enthusiasts that wants to have an Apple shell that will run MacOS but stuff it full of commodity internals. Unfortunately I think those days are never coming back. We haven't had a machine like that in what, seven years? Apple provides defined hardware, even in this new modular system it's clear they are funneling customers into MPX modules. Off the shelf graphics cards can't take advantage of the new connector type Apple has built into their board. As far as anyone can tell, Nvidia cards still won't even have signed drivers for MacOS. Even on the high end this is still not a shell that people will simply shove any component they want into (although clearly they have a better chance of making that happen with quite a few). We will pick our modules as BTO components and pay our Apple tax on each of them. We'll have the ability to drop in some third party cards where there isn't a USB/TB external peripheral available. But this isn't a return to the 5,1 even for those of us who justify the cost. You can't fill it with 3.5" internal drives, the storage modules are custom PCIe based solutions, so we'll have the same 10GbE and TB3 external solutions we're using today with the nMP. It likely won't support the next generation of graphics cards either as the main board isn't PCIe4. Maybe Nvidia's next gen will still be PCIe3 but again there aren't any drivers. AMD is clearly moving to PCIe4 and who wants to hobble their hot new GPU on a slower bus (or buy a custom Apple spec'ed version that runs more slowly to accommodate that bus). We'll still have the same issue of chipset level functionality being frozen (e.g. no way to upgrade existing systems to TB4 or the aforementioned PCIe4 etc...) Aside from being able to play legos will Apple provided and select third party modules (which, other than GPU given bus bandwidth demands [yes, I know eGPUs are a thing], could have been TB3 externals) I expect the majority of systems will remain static from purchase to decommissioning making them not much different in approach than the nMP.

Mac Mini isn't that freely user configurable system though either and in its higher BTO specs is a highly capable machine. iMac Pro is a great system, in hind site I should have picked one up on launch while waiting for the Mac Pro to be released (I mistaken thought it was much nearer than it was). Higher spec'ed iMac 5Ks are very capable machines as well. Basically the pro-sumer market isn't neglected by Apple, there's a subset of that population that wants a case stuffing system and that hasn't been Apple for the better part of a decade and really won't be again as far as anyone outside the C-suite of 1 Infinite Loop can tell.

So, yes, thank you (I know this is the internet but I'm not being sarcastic, you helped me see another perspective), I can understand your point about wanting a less expensive system that succeeds the 5,1. Most people expressing displeasure aren't stating it that way though, they are stating that Apple doesn't have a system for semi-strenuous to strenuous workloads at a lower price point. I can empathize with the former but I disagree with the latter.

edit to add: tl;dr version: for those whose issue is that Apple doesn't have a long term upgradeable solution they can afford, the point is kind of moot as even when removing the "they can afford" bit the situation remains the same. Apple doesn't have a long term upgradeable solution. Buy the system that best fits your needs for the (reasonable) period you will use it and plan to upgrade later. At that point point Mac Mini vs iMac vs Mac Pro 2019 form factor becomes much less critical and there's a fit for 99% of users across their line up.

 

[rowspaxe]

Very few musicians will be able to afford a Mac Pro. So basically all the "Pros" are still with no good hardware options.

iMac pro more than enough for 99% of music projects

 

[Sedulous]

Ugh, yeah we know if you can’t afford the new Mac Pro then “you are not a pro”. Every other post does not need to say the same thing. I think what people are saying is that non “pro” users would still like a configurable form factor that is not always thermal throttled.

 

[jeabraham]

Very few musicians will be able to afford a Mac Pro. So basically all the "Pros" are still with no good hardware options.

The professional mixers, masterers and producers I know and work with are thrilled with the new Mac Pro. Their computer is their main tool for work. Some of them work in million dollar music studios, so a few thousand for a computer is small potatoes. They’ll spend thousands of dollars on a microphone! A plumber or carpenter buys a pickup truck or cube van, but these guys don’t need a pickup truck, they can spend their business income on the right tool for them.

The musicians (players) and amateur producers/mixers/etc I know mostly use Mac Book Pros and are happy with the performance. If they need more power, they work with a professional producer instead of doing it themselves.

Logic is great for the handoff between the musician’s studio and the producer’s studio. My latest album I did all the recording on my laptop with Logic, then passed it off to a professional for final mixing and mastering.
[doublepost=1560523073][/doublepost]

my current recording and mixing machine is a 2009 27" i7 iMac upgraded with ssd (after using a 2011 Mac mini for about 5 years).

I'm still using this machine because it keeps working 10 years later and hasn't caused big enough problems to my workflow to make an upgrade worthwhile.

Yes, I would like more power.

Dude, you should upgrade. The new iMacs are so sweet. You’re worth it.

 

[BvizioN]

Apple making the stand optional and pricing it at $999 was a brilliant move from a (free) publicity perspective.

Look at all of the moan-n-whiners and tech sites that have given the display a ton of coverage and controversy since it was announced. That's caused many to go deep on the specs and performance of the display relative to the real competition. Anyone looking for an outstanding display (reference or not) will see it represents excellent value.

I think it was the opposite. Quite stupid! As many tech reviewers have said, Apple should have just announced one fixed price with an option to purchase without a stand for $999 less. Apple are the ones who should be the genius on marketing and not so much with this one. It shifts the focus from rather an impressive machine to something as stupid as a monitor stand. Luckily for Apple, real professionals who this machine is aimed to look at this thing from a different angle and are not bothered with form factor or price of the stand.