mini or pro for music composing?

L int.

macrumors member
Original poster
Aug 13, 2006
37
0
Amersfoort, NL
I would like to have a mac for working with logic and to be capable of composing and editing music foremost - I also will use photoshop, illustrator, flash, but not as intensive as logic. Right now i have a 5 year old pc with 768mb RAM, and a 2 Ghz Processor which is quite ok - but i haven't used serious music software on it so far.

My question: would you guys rather recommend a mac pro, or would that be overkill? - i guess RAM is the most important thing for my purpose, or are there other components i should take care about.

I like the Mini, and was wondering if that would do it for me (upgraded to the max of course)?
What i like more about the mini (compared to the 20" Imac), is that i am free to choose any display size i like.

Any recommendations welcome, thanks,

Joey
 

gallinger

macrumors regular
Jul 19, 2006
175
19
Canada
I also do music recording and editing. I just bought the mac pro cause I need all the processing power i can get for all the plug-ins and crap. Only im using pro tools.
 

aaron.lee2006

macrumors 65816
Feb 23, 2006
1,215
0
Ontario, Canada
For what you are using it for, I would buy a dual core mini. Doesn't sound like you re doing anything to graphically intensive. No ned to buy somehting you don't ned. Hoped I helped you.
 

Felldownthewell

macrumors 65816
Feb 10, 2006
1,053
0
Portland
The Mac Pro sounds like overkill and the mini will not be powerful enough to run pro apps well (at least not logic intensively or photoshop through rosetta quickly). If you get the iMac you can always buy an external display to add on to it, and then you have two...

It all depends on your money situation. If you are strapped for cash then you should probably go with a low end iMac or high-end mini. If you have some cash to spend then go for a lower-end Mac Pro.

A 1.66 mini with 2gb or RAM and 100gb HDD and a 23in display (and keyboard+mouse) is $2,226.00. Keep in mind the core duo 2 is a mobile chip, meaning that it is meant for a laptop, and therefore is not as powerful as the mac pro's chip, which is a SERVER chip.

A 2.0ghz mac pro with 2gb of RAM a 250gb HDD, dedicated video, and a 23in display is $3,498.00. Do you think you will need the extra HDD space and much better processor? Will you ever want to upgrade (easy with the mac pro, difficult with the mini)? Do you need the dedicated graphics? And most importantly, do you have the money to spend on the more powerful system?


My inclination is to say go with the mac pro- the mini is not nearly as powerful and will be outdated much quicker. The pro will last for 4 years or longer- the mini won't.
 

L int.

macrumors member
Original poster
Aug 13, 2006
37
0
Amersfoort, NL
well, money is an issue, but i rather sell one of my expensive bikes to afford the right tools, than having a poor machine - I was just hoping that i wouldn't need a MP, since i won't do 3D renderings. But i like the argument of beeing able to update, and to be satisfied with it for many years.

guys you are lucky to buy your macs in the US - Next US visit I should smuggle one to europe...:D

another question: Is there a big difference performance wise between a fully upgraded Mini and a MacBookPro (except the graphics card - which counts for 3D & heavy photo/video editing)?

Thanks...
 

ender78

macrumors 6502
Jan 9, 2005
329
17
One big reason to get the MP is that it will allow you to buy PCI-E audio hardware when it becomes available. Should you need/want a high end sound board or capture board down the road, your machine will be more than capable. Should you want 8 monitors down the road [each with a sound panel or control board] you'll have the platform to do it.

The Mac mini will be able to do everything you do today with little or no future proofing.
 

ender78

macrumors 6502
Jan 9, 2005
329
17
L int. said:
another question: Is there a big difference performance wise between a fully upgraded Mini and a MacBookPro (except the graphics card - which counts for 3D & heavy photo/video editing)?
The Mac mini comes with at best a 1.83 Ghz Core Duo. The MBP tops out at 2.16 GHz today. The difference is not night and day but definately noticable. Any encoding or CPU intensive tasks will of course be markably faster on the MBP.
 

L int.

macrumors member
Original poster
Aug 13, 2006
37
0
Amersfoort, NL
ender78 said:
One big reason to get the MP is that it will allow you to buy PCI-E audio hardware when it becomes available. Should you need/want a high end sound board or capture board down the road, your machine will be more than capable. Should you want 8 monitors down the road [each with a sound panel or control board] you'll have the platform to do it.

The Mac mini will be able to do everything you do today with little or no future proofing.
I haven't thought about that, yet.

That was very helpful, thanks...
 

SheriffParker

macrumors 6502a
May 24, 2006
579
0
The land of love
ender78 said:
The Mac mini comes with at best a 1.83 Ghz Core Duo. The MBP tops out at 2.16 GHz today. The difference is not night and day but definately noticable. Any encoding or CPU intensive tasks will of course be markably faster on the MBP.
No. The fastest mini is currently a 1.66 Ghz Core Duo.
 

AlexMaximus

macrumors 6502a
Aug 15, 2006
870
258
A400M Base
Mini or not Mini..

I had to choos just recently regarding investing in a Mini. I have decided to go with a Dual 1,42 Powermac G4 and I am super happy.
The reason I do not like the Mini is because of no upgrades and no extension slots. On top of that the weak spot is a slow Harddrive bus system and a even worse graphic option. Just in case you stick with a Mini, you want to invest in the smallest Harddrive option inside, but buy the external Harddrive soluton which fits under the Mini with the same nice design. This way you can eliminat the 4200 rpm low budget standard crap harddrive with a 7200 rpm external. You can set the Mini to boot from this external drive, which will compensate some speed of the even worse integrated graphic onboard chip solution. Because of the onboard graphic chip takes System Ram away you will have to max out Ram from start.
This means at the end of the day you will end up with a Mini over 1000 US dollars, which is the reason I have decided better go with a old premium system then with a new low end system. But heck, it's philosophy anyways.

I wish you the right desicion, man:D
 

jroad

macrumors member
Mar 24, 2006
49
0
AlexMaximus said:
I had to choos just recently regarding investing in a Mini. I have decided to go with a Dual 1,42 Powermac G4 and I am super happy.
The reason I do not like the Mini is because of no upgrades and no extension slots. On top of that the weak spot is a slow Harddrive bus system and a even worse graphic option. Just in case you stick with a Mini, you want to invest in the smallest Harddrive option inside, but buy the external Harddrive soluton which fits under the Mini with the same nice design. This way you can eliminat the 4200 rpm low budget standard crap harddrive with a 7200 rpm external. You can set the Mini to boot from this external drive, which will compensate some speed of the even worse integrated graphic onboard chip solution. Because of the onboard graphic chip takes System Ram away you will have to max out Ram from start.
This means at the end of the day you will end up with a Mini over 1000 US dollars, which is the reason I have decided better go with a old premium system then with a new low end system. But heck, it's philosophy anyways.

I wish you the right desicion, man:D
I'll just point out that the intel core duo minis have internal hard drive speeds of 5400 rpm as shown here.
 

KingYaba

macrumors 68040
Aug 7, 2005
3,416
12
Up the irons
Either get a MacBook Pro or a Mac Pro. Don't get the "consumer" machines. If you don't have the money don't fret, because any new mac will be able to run those programs. It's just others do it faster than others ;) And of course it suits your ego ;)
 

jarednt1

macrumors member
May 2, 2005
53
0
KingYaba said:
Either get a MacBook Pro or a Mac Pro. Don't get the "consumer" machines. If you don't have the money don't fret, because any new mac will be able to run those programs. It's just others do it faster than others ;) And of course it suits your ego ;)
I have no need for all the power of the Mac Pro, but I just bought one because I wanted the best.
 

L int.

macrumors member
Original poster
Aug 13, 2006
37
0
Amersfoort, NL
quruli said:
I don't even know what a computer is and I bought a Mac Pro :D
according to my slogan (at least with sports equipment): never blame the equipment...:D

allright, seems that i will return to my initial intent: go with the best.
 

L int.

macrumors member
Original poster
Aug 13, 2006
37
0
Amersfoort, NL
ender78 said:
One big reason to get the MP is that it will allow you to buy PCI-E audio hardware when it becomes available. Should you need/want a high end sound board or capture board down the road, your machine will be more than capable. Should you want 8 monitors down the road [each with a sound panel or control board] you'll have the platform to do it.

The Mac mini will be able to do everything you do today with little or no future proofing.
how would the situation be with an imac instead - if i understand right, the MP has 4 slots from which one is occupied with the graphicscard. No PCI-E extension for imacs, right?
 

I'mAMac

macrumors 6502a
Aug 28, 2006
786
0
In a Mac box
The iMac would be good it just cant be upgraded. A low end Mac Pro would be a good choice. As you need more you put more in. Mac Pro is good like that. OR you could wait a few weeks. They are releasing a new iMac. Probably gonna beef up the gfx card and processor speed (maybe even RAM?) And there is a rumor that it would be 23" :) Not sure if it will be upgradeable though.
 

jne381

macrumors regular
Feb 27, 2006
208
0
Grand Rapids
For simple little recordings, the mini should be fine. If you want to run with the big dogs, your gonna have to go MacPro. Recording multiple tracks at once is going to demand a lot out of a Mini, don't forget that it is much more convenient to run lots of plug-ins at once during mix down, and I don't think the Mini is capable.
 

danhig123

macrumors member
Sep 1, 2006
54
0
Hey!

Well I have owned a powerbook for 3 years. Its a 1GHz PPC G4 with 768 meg of ram.

I run Pro tools and Logic and with this machine, which is slower than all the current line of macs, I could run 32 tracks of audio (from an external firewire drive) and a fair few plug-ins, as long as they weren't too processor heavy. I could run one or two instances of Space Designer if I was lucky, but the computer would slow down dramatically.... oh and it overheats a lot!

If this is all you would want to do with your computer then go for the mini... or even a laptop. They will presumably be able to perform better than my powerbook (which I write this on and still works just fine)... and the build quality of these machines is good enough to last for a good few years if you treat it right. I estimate that I could get two more years out of this laptop before it craps up on me.

As I say. The powerbook is fine for that level of work. I have outgrown it in my processing power requirements and I have just invested in a Mac Pro!

It is a beast!

If you think that down the line you will need some serious power, then this is your machine. Unlike my Powerbook, I can't see myself running out of processing anytime soon. When I first bought the powerbook I thought I might run into some speed issues someday. This thing. Well I doubt it.

Then again, I am sure some lovely plugin manufacturer will surely create some plugin which manages to chew up all 4 of my processors.

Danny