M1 MBA vs Studio Max : empirical observations from a home producer

[MajorFubar]

Anyone who's seen <<my blog in the Digital Audio subforum>> will know that aside from forums and socials my main use of my Apple Mac kit is music production, mostly undertaken using my Studio Max with 32GB RAM and 2TB storage. My second-in-command is my 8GB/512GB M1 MBA, which during all of this week I have been using as my main computer while living at my ex wife's while she holidays with our 20 y/o twin sons (I'm pet-sitting).

So this week has seen me undertake a number of tasks on the MBA I would normally have undertaken on the Studio, including mixing and producing a 32-track song in Logic Pro for a client and producing a short tutorial video for my channel. During these tasks I have observed the following:

1 - From a mixing point of view, including the use of various DSP effects such as compressors, delays and reverbs, I have observed virtually no difference in how Logic Pro responds in the less-capable MBA (but boy oh boy have I missed my Qcon mixing desks).

2 - Bouncing the mixed project to a stereo file does take probably twice as long, and I guess this is where the Studio Max's extra CPU cores (32 vs 8 in the MBA) help considerably.

3 - For my tutorial video I had cause to be running Logic Pro, QuickTime (as screen-capture software), plus simultaneously recording my narration through a USB-connected Audio Technica 2020 condenser mic into GarageBand, running in the background. This activity was as smooth and incident-free as it usually is on my Studio, with no discernible difference in how this operation usually feels.

4 - I put the video together in iMovie, which is an app I think most content creators seriously underestimate considering it's possible to run multiple audio lanes and video lanes in it, and I commonly do both. The smoothness of operation while pulling the project together was on-par with my Studio Max: no discernible differences noted.

5 - Rendering-out the video as a 1080 file (4K = overkill for this content) took much longer than my Mac Studio would have taken, again probably because of the extra CPU and GPU cores. Basically the MBA exported the video in just shy of real time, whereas the Studio would have done it in probably a third of the time, or just over, based on my previous experience.

6 - I was working on these tasks for around 8 hours yesterday, and I went to bed with the battery showing 23% from a full charge at the start of the day. Utterly INSANE* battery life.

What I've learned is it's easy to see why many people believe single core performance is one of the key yardsticks that dictates just how fast a computer feels. Until I started rendering the 32-track Logic Project and the iMovie file with multiple channels of video, audio and titles, the experience of using the MBA was barely discernible from the Studio Max.

If I didn't have the Studio Max, I actually have no doubt I could get away with running my home production suite on a 2TB M1 MBA, especially had I opted for 16GB RAM and 10-core GPU.


*(C) Max Tech.

 

[jav6454]

Yet people somehow dismiss the M1 MBA as a relic and push people into M2 territory needlessly and without concern for budget.

 

[JW5566]

Good post @MajorFubar it's always good to get real world experiences.

 

[senttoschool]

Yet people somehow dismiss the M1 MBA as a relic and push people into M2 territory needlessly and without concern for budget.

I would buy the M2 today if I need a thin and light air.

The better screen, bigger screen, faster SoC, better webcam, and magsafe are worth an extra $200.

However, if I had a choice between a $850 sale M1 Air or a $1200 M2 Air, the choice is easy. I'm going with the M1 Air.

 

[jav6454]

I would buy the M2 today if I need a thin and light air.

The better screen, bigger screen, faster SoC, better webcam, and magsafe are worth an extra $200.

However, if I had a choice between a $850 sale M1 Air or a $1200 M2 Air, the choice is easy. I'm going with the M1 Air.

You can find the M1 Air at such prices as you can see it on sale several times over. Several MR articles have also shown that.

 

[Pugly]

I don't have a Mac Studio to compare, but this has been my experience in Logic Pro with the M1 Air. The only benefit to a faster computer is exporting files, any editing is going to be slowed down by the user and the Air doesn't have a chance to get hot enough to throttle.

The downsides to the Air aren't in processor speed, but the RAM limitations, the SSD size and only 1 external screen.

I'm really impressed at what I can run at the lowest buffer size with demanding plugins.

I think unless we get even more accurate physical modelling of acoustics or electronics, and maybe more machine learning driven techniques, audio production will remain as demanding as word processing for these computers.

The 16GB/1TB Air or mini can do things that were the domain of Apple's $2500+ Pro configurations from a couple years ago.

 

[senttoschool]

You can find the M1 Air at such prices as you can see it on sale several times over. Several MR articles have also shown that.

I know. Hence, I would always recommend the M1 Air for $850 over $1200 M2 Air unless you really want the extra speed.

 

[MrGunny94]

The M1/M2 Air are very capable machines, their only issue for me is only supporting one display. I need 2 displays + Air display with the iPad/TV

Other than that the M2 with 24GB of RAM would do just fine for me.

 

[kasakka]

Man these reports really make me want to get an M2 Air but the 1 display limit is a killer for me.

 

[MajorFubar]

The M1/M2 Air are very capable machines, their only issue for me is only supporting one display. I need 2 displays + Air display with the iPad/TV

Other than that the M2 with 24GB of RAM would do just fine for me.

I guess in my regular home studio environment, my physical mixing desk is effectively my extra screen

 

[MajorFubar]

However, if I had a choice between a $850 sale M1 Air or a $1200 M2 Air, the choice is easy. I'm going with the M1 Air.

This is exactly the problem we have in the UK. The list price for a base M2 is £1249 here not £1199, but we can get an M1 for typically £949. That's a £300 difference which is about $360 US. Suddenly you have to ask yourself if that difference is worth it to you, and of course that's a very subjective question. But I know what my answer would be, for my circumstances. £200 of that £300 gets me an M1 Air with 16GB RAM, or 512GB SSD. £400 gets me both.

 

[MajorFubar]

Man these reports really make me want to get an M2 Air but the 1 display limit is a killer for me.

Apple know full well that if their bottom-of-the-range laptops could handle two or more external displays, a whole chunk of their 'Pro'-buying market would just buy Airs [/cynic]

 

[flashflood101]

Anyone who's seen <<my blog in the Digital Audio subforum>> will know that aside from forums and socials my main use of my Apple Mac kit is music production, mostly undertaken using my Studio Max with 32GB RAM and 2TB storage. My second-in-command is my 8GB/512GB M1 MBA, which during all of this week I have been using as my main computer while living at my ex wife's while she holidays with our 20 y/o twin sons (I'm pet-sitting).

So this week has seen me undertake a number of tasks on the MBA I would normally have undertaken on the Studio, including mixing and producing a 32-track song in Logic Pro for a client and producing a short tutorial video for my channel. During these tasks I have observed the following:

1 - From a mixing point of view, including the use of various DSP effects such as compressors, delays and reverbs, I have observed virtually no difference in how Logic Pro responds in the less-capable MBA (but boy oh boy have I missed my Qcon mixing desks).

2 - Bouncing the mixed project to a stereo file does take probably twice as long, and I guess this is where the Studio Max's extra CPU cores (32 vs 8 in the MBA) help considerably.

3 - For my tutorial video I had cause to be running Logic Pro, QuickTime (as screen-capture software), plus simultaneously recording my narration through a USB-connected Audio Technica 2020 condenser mic into GarageBand, running in the background. This activity was as smooth and incident-free as it usually is on my Studio, with no discernible difference in how this operation usually feels.

4 - I put the video together in iMovie, which is an app I think most content creators seriously underestimate considering it's possible to run multiple audio lanes and video lanes in it, and I commonly do both. The smoothness of operation while pulling the project together was on-par with my Studio Max: no discernible differences noted.

5 - Rendering-out the video as a 1080 file (4K = overkill for this content) took much longer than my Mac Studio would have taken, again probably because of the extra CPU and GPU cores. Basically the MBA exported the video in just shy of real time, whereas the Studio would have done it in probably a third of the time, or just over, based on my previous experience.

6 - I was working on these tasks for around 8 hours yesterday, and I went to bed with the battery showing 23% from a full charge at the start of the day. Utterly INSANE* battery life.

What I've learned is it's easy to see why many people believe single core performance is one of the key yardsticks that dictates just how fast a computer feels. Until I started rendering the 32-track Logic Project and the iMovie file with multiple channels of video, audio and titles, the experience of using the MBA was barely discernible from the Studio Max.

If I didn't have the Studio Max, I actually have no doubt I could get away with running my home production suite on a 2TB M1 MBA, especially had I opted for 16GB RAM and 10-core GPU.


*(C) Max Tech.

Your observations, whilst well documented and well meaning, are not empirical, at least not in the manner presented.

 

[scottrichardson]

This has me wondering whether or not I could feasibly “upgrade” from my 10 core i9 iMac to an Apple silicon Mac TODAY. My iMac has 64GB RAM and the 16GB Radeon pro 5700xt.

I work across a few areas. Namely doing high end web design in photoshop at retina resolution. My files are typically 3840 pixels wide and about 15,000 pixels tall with often dozens to hundreds of layers. I often have 5-6 of these files open at the same time.

While doing this I also have Illustrator open.

Additionally I also do web development so have sublime open, with codekit for code compiling, GitHub desktop.

Next I often utilise Lightroom classic for managing 46 megapixel RAW files for photography.

(I run a studio and specialise in web design, development, and photography)

However, I also am a DJ and produce music in Ableton using several plugin synths like Spire etc and mastering tools like Isotope Ozone etc.

Finally I also gave Safari open with dozens of tabs, notes, calendar, text edit, Apple Music, messages and Mail all permanently open and used.

So, with all that said I need a Mac that can handle a lot of different stuff. The only thing I don’t really do is video or big scientific computations.

My 10 core iMac handles this really well honestly. Photoshop can get a little sluggish with huge layered files and navigating 46 megapixel RAW files can get a little less than snappy.

I think what I am really missing is that overall single core performance. My core i9 has a single core performance around 1,100 - 1,200 if I’m not mistaken.

But I’m concerned that:

1. If I went for an M2 air it just would t have the RAM I need to handle all the simultaneous workloads I demand of my iMac. Additionally concerned the GPU would not sufficiently replace the Radeon pro 5700xt and any GPU accelerated functions in photoshop, illustrator and Lightroom would feel less snappy.

2. If I went with a MacBook Pro with an M1 pro or Max I could match the 64GB RAM but with M2 around the corner I would likely feel that terrible “missing out” feeling pretty quickly.

3. M1 Max / Ultra Studio, would probably meet my needs but again, M2 coming at some point soon and honestly the price is just so high still. To replace my 27” screen in my iMac I need the external studio display. I would end up spending 1.75 x as much as I did for my top end iMac.

Finally, my daughter starts high school next year. She needs a laptop. I am thinking she can have my i7 13” Touch Bar MacBook Pro from 2018. Which would leave me sans laptop. Hence my wondering about a new laptop to replace BOTH my Macs.

Would love to hear any other professionals who have “upgraded” from a top end iMac to Apple silicon.

 

[sgtaylor5]

Your observations, whilst well documented and well meaning, are not empirical, at least not in the manner presented.

Just out of curiosity (really), what would be an empirical observation?

 

[Analog Kid]

Your observations, whilst well documented and well meaning, are not empirical, at least not in the manner presented.

They’re pretty much the definition of empirical.

 

[Analog Kid]

Just out of curiosity (really), what would be an empirical observation?

I think the question is “what wouldn’t be an empirical observation?”.

 

[Analog Kid]

I guess in my regular home studio environment, my physical mixing desk is effectively my extra screen View attachment 2039471

Well, you just moved up in the rankings of people I wish I was…

 

[FocusAndEarnIt]

I guess in my regular home studio environment, my physical mixing desk is effectively my extra screen View attachment 2039471

Love the old school white wireless keyboard. I’ve got one in use to this day, too.

 

[generationfourth]

This has me wondering whether or not I could feasibly “upgrade” from my 10 core i9 iMac to an Apple silicon Mac TODAY. My iMac has 64GB RAM and the 16GB Radeon pro 5700xt.

I work across a few areas. Namely doing high end web design in photoshop at retina resolution. My files are typically 3840 pixels wide and about 15,000 pixels tall with often dozens to hundreds of layers. I often have 5-6 of these files open at the same time.

While doing this I also have Illustrator open.

Additionally I also do web development so have sublime open, with codekit for code compiling, GitHub desktop.

Next I often utilise Lightroom classic for managing 46 megapixel RAW files for photography.

(I run a studio and specialise in web design, development, and photography)

However, I also am a DJ and produce music in Ableton using several plugin synths like Spire etc and mastering tools like Isotope Ozone etc.

Finally I also gave Safari open with dozens of tabs, notes, calendar, text edit, Apple Music, messages and Mail all permanently open and used.

So, with all that said I need a Mac that can handle a lot of different stuff. The only thing I don’t really do is video or big scientific computations.

My 10 core iMac handles this really well honestly. Photoshop can get a little sluggish with huge layered files and navigating 46 megapixel RAW files can get a little less than snappy.

I think what I am really missing is that overall single core performance. My core i9 has a single core performance around 1,100 - 1,200 if I’m not mistaken.

But I’m concerned that:

1. If I went for an M2 air it just would t have the RAM I need to handle all the simultaneous workloads I demand of my iMac. Additionally concerned the GPU would not sufficiently replace the Radeon pro 5700xt and any GPU accelerated functions in photoshop, illustrator and Lightroom would feel less snappy.

2. If I went with a MacBook Pro with an M1 pro or Max I could match the 64GB RAM but with M2 around the corner I would likely feel that terrible “missing out” feeling pretty quickly.

3. M1 Max / Ultra Studio, would probably meet my needs but again, M2 coming at some point soon and honestly the price is just so high still. To replace my 27” screen in my iMac I need the external studio display. I would end up spending 1.75 x as much as I did for my top end iMac.

Finally, my daughter starts high school next year. She needs a laptop. I am thinking she can have my i7 13” Touch Bar MacBook Pro from 2018. Which would leave me sans laptop. Hence my wondering about a new laptop to replace BOTH my Macs.

Would love to hear any other professionals who have “upgraded” from a top end iMac to Apple silicon.

My personal experience is that I used to require a $3,000-3,500 MacBook Pro for my work and now I feel like I only need a $2,000 or less machine with M1. I would not wait for M2 as M1 will be plenty of speed especially it seems like you depend more on single core performance than you do on multicores/rendering.

- Typically have mail, ~5 notion windows, music, messages, slack, and about ~3-8 safari windows with about 1-10 tabs each
- Design programs typically running 5-8 Figma files, 1-3 photoshop files, 2-5 heavy illustrator files (you know the textured look that is everywhere), animating those types of illustrator files in adobe animate.
- Lightroom cloud or classic processing 50-500 files, though this is more for hobby and not part of my typical workflow
- 27" 4k monitor scaled

My i9 8-core MBP with 5500m 8gb with 32gb of ram could handle this type of workload (except the heavy illustrator files and animating them) but man that thing got hot, fan screamed, and battery ran down. Granted the i9 MBP is nowhere near the desktop counterpart. M1 feels way snappier and comfortable and as soon as I started using it I just sold my i9.

I was sent a base model 14" M1 pro MBP with 16gb of ram from my employer. I was disappointed in the ram spec because typically I need 32gb, but really how disappointed could I be in a free machine? I thought to myself: I know adobe optimized for CPU/GPU but there was no way they aren't ram hogs anymore. I had my eye on the base model Mac studio. For the first few weeks I kept activity monitor open and regularly found myself in the yellow with memory pressure. My ego was right. BUT I didn't notice any slowdowns or hiccups whatsoever. So the past week or so I've been throwing everything at the machine and if I weren't looking at activity monitor I'd have no idea that I was using all my ram and swapping more. Also, the only way I know the fans come on is through iStat. Otherwise I'd swear the fans were never on. If you watch the Maxtech 8gb or 16gb stress test videos you can see what I'm talking about. I've only seen the beach ball briefly while open and closing Adobe animate which is running through Rosetta and not optimized for silicon yet. Once it's running though it runs buttery smooth, even better than it did on intel.

I honestly think the average professional could simply just pick whatever form factor they want, their level of I/O needed, and screen needs. The ones shopping max/ultra chips are concerned about render times. Those packing in extra ram are probably buying a level too much- though I'd obviously avoid 8gb ram. I'd suggest watching artisright on YT he tends to skew towards the higher spec machines and really big photo files (56gb files, mega panoramas, etc)

edit: for reference my i9 was rated at 1,100-1,200 single core, the m1 pro 8-cpu 14-gpu is rated ~1,750 and the difference is night and day

 

[jav6454]

I know. Hence, I would always recommend the M1 Air for $850 over $1200 M2 Air unless you really want the extra speed.

That extra speed isn't worth $350 (+ tax) difference to the average person on a budget.

 

[a.phoenicis]

Speed isn’t the end-all-be-all for everyone. The larger, better screen, and new form-factor (have always actively disliked the wedge) were worth the extra price for me. The extra speed is a nice bonus.

 

[Tevosn]

The M1/M2 Air are very capable machines, their only issue for me is only supporting one display. I need 2 displays + Air display with the iPad/TV

Other than that the M2 with 24GB of RAM would do just fine for me.

I had no idea that was a limitation, but that is pretty weak sauce. For work I’m using 2 or more monitors, anything less I find cumbersome. Granted the resolution is only 1080p on the 3 monitors I have connected to my windows laptop, but is that really not possible on an Air, even through a dock or something?

 

[flashflood101]

Just out of curiosity (really), what would be an empirical observation?

What he has provided is anecdotal.

What is missing are benchmarks or other objective measurements.

 

[temende]

What he has provided is anecdotal.

What is missing are benchmarks or other objective measurements.

You can benchmark specific algorithms and workloads, but you can't really "benchmark" how generally responsive an app is (unless you use a high-speed camera and measure display frames)