Should I take my macbook pro back? (Music recording/mixing question)

Davy101

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Aug 21, 2012
3
0
Hi, I have just prchased a 13" macbook pro 2.5ghz i5 with 8GB of RAM. I want to use it to record and mix music on (And use protools). But, I'm having second thoughts. I'm thinking maybe I should return it and get the 13" macbook pro 2.9ghz i7. It sounds like a no brainer, but money is a big issue for me so I really cant decide what to do, after all, this is a serious purchase for me I have been saving up for. The truth is i dont really know how significant the difference between the two computers is. Do you guys/girls think it would be worth paying the extra $200 plus tax to upgrade?


What about the 15" Macbook 2.3ghz i7?? Which one would you get (for recording/mixing and why??
 

Capt Underpants

macrumors 68030
Jul 23, 2003
2,861
3
Austin, Texas
I record music on a 2007 Macbook. Normally less than 16 audio tracks total.

You don't need to spend any more money on a better computer. You'll benefit more from using that money towards an SSD in the future -- especially if you have large sample libraries, or record/playback many tracks at a time.
 

Davy101

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Aug 21, 2012
3
0
I record music on a 2007 Macbook. Normally less than 16 audio tracks total.

You don't need to spend any more money on a better computer. You'll benefit more from using that money towards an SSD in the future -- especially if you have large sample libraries, or record/playback many tracks at a time.
OK. Thank you so much for your input. I just don't know very much about computers yet and wanted to make sure I made the right decision. In general, I am very ambivalent when spending money. If anyone has anything else to add that would be very helpful
 

logicpro7

macrumors 6502a
Sep 25, 2006
726
2
London UK
Keep the 2.5 13. I use the same mbp for productions and remixes for labels.

Just upgrade when you can afford it with 16gb ram and a SSD :)
 

derbothaus

macrumors 601
Jul 17, 2010
4,060
4
It depends on what your production style is. I wouldn't get the 13" 2.9GHz though as a replacement. If you want more power replace with the 15" Quad. Bigger screen and twice the cores. But you most likely don't need them unless you rely heavily on virtual instruments. Even then RAM is more important usually. Get the Mac and put a load close to the max you think you would expect it to do. If the CPU use stays within reason your good. If not then start thinking about swapping or weighing the price vs. performance etc.
 

bwhli

macrumors 6502a
Jan 9, 2012
557
210
Boston, MA
I think your laptop now is fine. I used to mix on a 2.66 GHz C2D. Recently upgraded to a rMBP, but the old one wasn't limiting in any way.
 

RAWphenom

macrumors member
Nov 4, 2010
78
0
606/859, KY
In case you weren't aware, which I doubt you were because of your join date, it is proper forum etiquette to wait at least 24 hours before bumping your own thread.

You, on the other hand, waited 10 minutes. I think that qualifies as a record somewhere.
 

chrslbrt

macrumors newbie
Aug 22, 2012
25
0
I got the 15 retina for audio production because of the quad core.

I also record music, as well as mix (but not master) my own records. I have never had a mac before, so I can't tell you how much that version will be able to run, but my previous computer had the same specs, and it did fine up til around 15-20 or so, fully loaded of course.

I've wanted to do more than that, so the boost in CPU power will help. As far as VST's go, that's mostly (perhaps all?) RAM dependent, so unless you want to add more tracks to your songs than you have currently, then you should be fine with what you have.

----------

In case you weren't aware, which I doubt you were because of your join date, it is proper forum etiquette to wait at least 24 hours before bumping your own thread.

You, on the other hand, waited 10 minutes. I think that qualifies as a record somewhere.
It's a bump man, it's not going to kill anyone.

Apparently, they didn't mention anything about "not being a douche" on the forum etiquette.
 

ryanmixnote

macrumors newbie
Feb 9, 2014
1
0
I got the 15 retina for audio production because of the quad core.

I also record music, as well as mix (but not master) my own records. I have never had a mac before, so I can't tell you how much that version will be able to run, but my previous computer had the same specs, and it did fine up til around 15-20 or so, fully loaded of course.

I've wanted to do more than that, so the boost in CPU power will help. As far as VST's go, that's mostly (perhaps all?) RAM dependent, so unless you want to add more tracks to your songs than you have currently, then you should be fine with what you have.

----------



It's a bump man, it's not going to kill anyone.

Apparently, they didn't mention anything about "not being a douche" on the forum etiquette.

Do you have 16Gg or 8Gb on your retina?
If I buy retina 15 inch, would it be enough with 8 Gb for mixing and producing music or do i really need 16 Gb?

Thanks in advance! :)
 

mrweirdo

macrumors 6502
Nov 21, 2005
370
0
I would think 16gb would be the safe bet even though 8gb might be OK for now. Really it depends on the software used.
 

CausticPuppy

macrumors 65816
May 1, 2012
1,483
18
Old thread, but maybe still relevant....

You don't need 16GB for audio recording unless you need to load gigs and gigs of samples into your virtual instruments. But these days they pretty much all stream from disk so as long as you have an SSD you're fine.