New MacBook for Podcast

[ebook]

I haven't posted on Macrumors for ages because I haven't upgraded in ages, but just recently my 5 year old MacBook died on me and I think it is time for an upgrade instead of a repair. The problem is I haven't been keeping up with everything and I have no idea what I should look at ... MacBook Pro ... Air ... ahhh!

My computer would mostly be used for the basics, but I do record a weekly podcast. Right now my rig consists of a variety of outboard equipment all run through a Mackie Onyx 820i. Of course the Mackie is Firewire 400 so I'm already using one adapter, but I realize that if I wanted to keep using it then I would have to have more adapters in the chain (any worries there).

Also, from time to time I do record Skype calls using Call Recorder, but I assume that anything out there now would be equal to or better than what I have been using.

Any suggestions?

 

[ChrisA]

Any current model Mac will be up to the task of recording an audio-only podcast.

You will need to buy a (1) Thunderbolt to FW800 adaptor/dongle and (2) a FW400 to FW800 cable.

The "air" is really nice because of the light weight and battery life. If you need to carry the computer around with you, that's the one. Of the MBP line the retina's display is much better and for both of these, the built-in SSD makes it seem very fast.

One thing, apple is abandoning Firewire and some older FW interfaces are not working with Mavericks. Check that the Mackie does work with Mavericks or yo will be buying a new USB interface.

 

[ebook]

Thanks for the info and heads up on the FireWire issue. That would not be cool as I really wasn't planning on having to replace anything other than the computer. I did a little searching and it seems like there are mixed reviews regarding the Mackie and Maverick. I like having all the routing options and the multiple channels being sent to my computer. Are there USB 3.0 mixers out there that send more than a stereo signal?

 

[ChrisA]

Thanks for the info and heads up on the FireWire issue. That would not be cool as I really wasn't planning on having to replace anything other than the computer. I did a little searching and it seems like there are mixed reviews regarding the Mackie and Maverick. I like having all the routing options and the multiple channels being sent to my computer. Are there USB 3.0 mixers out there that send more than a stereo signal?

Just plain USB 2 is fast enough for audio work unless you are getting into 8 or 16 tracks.

Work out the math: let's say you are recording 24-bits at 96K, Call it 100K. This means 2,400,000 bits per second per track. Let's say you have four tracks that is 9.6 megabits per second. USB 2 can handle 480 megabits per second. so you are not even close to needing USB 3 as you are using only 2% of USB 2.0

OK I was not 100% honest. With USB, I think you want to never use more than about maybe 20% of the full bandwidth. But with our track of 24/96 you still are not even close to using 20% of the usb 2.0 bandwidth. On top of this you will need to push two more tracks out to the monitor speakers and you are writing to a disk drive all at the same time. Hence my 20% limit or 10% if you want to be more conservative.

The reason for using FW400, even when USB 2.0 was technically faster was the the USB hardware required a LOT morCPU power to process. With USB the CPU handles every byte. FW400 offloads some work from the CPU.