Are you referring specifically to Cubase? As I understand it, Nehalem isn't the issue. Supposedly better multi core scaling is going to be included in future updates within the version 5 cycle.
I'm not holding my breath, but here's hoping....
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
The right MacPro for Music Production?
- Thread starter mingus51
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Are you referring specifically to Cubase? As I understand it, Nehalem isn't the issue. Supposedly better multi core scaling is going to be included in future updates within the version 5 cycle.
I'm not holding my breath, but here's hoping....
50-60 tracks, about a dozen VST's, crap tons of effects, and this is the load:
Next to a Bosendorfer Imperial Grand in my living room, that's the most beautiful thing I'll _ever_ see!
8-D
8-D
8-D
Thanks for making my day!!!
the answer:
So far with a few exceptions, most of my Music applications prefer faster cores over more cores. Many tasks performed by music and wave editors can't (as in can not rather than do not) make use of multithreading. That's just the way it is for some stuff.
+ i doubt theyll have such good scaling before any other app, after all, took them long enough for sidechain...
quadcore mac pro is about 3 years old and is considered to be ALSO a pro audio app and even apples own Logic had/has a hard time even with 4 cores, not to mention 8. some synths/effects never jump cores during playback.
+ i doubt theyll have such good scaling before any other app, after all, took them long enough for sidechain...
quadcore mac pro is about 3 years old and is considered to be ALSO a pro audio app and even apples own Logic had/has a hard time even with 4 cores, not to mention 8. some synths/effects never jump cores during playback.
ouch, low blow on the sidechaining comment, lol.
But yeah, it'll be interesting to see how running on different threads/cores unfolds across the different DAW's. It seems like what's even possible is still an open question in a lot of ways....
Having read the comments thus far I'm left thinking that my software choice is really the bottle neck here and I'll find no more/less advantage going with either 2.8 octo 08 or 2.xx octo 2009
Other than future proofing for a "someday" plan for SL and software developers taking advantage of multi-core (or is it multi-threading?)
If I'm correct then I guess the 2009 models is the way to go b/c I get the corp. discount and I can't find any used 2008 models that aren't "as is" or not really much of a discount considering what I could have gotten a new one for if I had jumped about 2 months ago (I know, shoulda-woulda-coulda)
What I'm fearing is that until Cubase updates to the current hardware then I'm running my software on a 2.26 ghz computer? That's slower than my current MBPro dual core (assuming I'll not see a benefit of multiple cores given my software)
Hmmmmmmmm
Other than future proofing for a "someday" plan for SL and software developers taking advantage of multi-core (or is it multi-threading?)
If I'm correct then I guess the 2009 models is the way to go b/c I get the corp. discount and I can't find any used 2008 models that aren't "as is" or not really much of a discount considering what I could have gotten a new one for if I had jumped about 2 months ago (I know, shoulda-woulda-coulda)
What I'm fearing is that until Cubase updates to the current hardware then I'm running my software on a 2.26 ghz computer? That's slower than my current MBPro dual core (assuming I'll not see a benefit of multiple cores given my software)
Hmmmmmmmm
I just ordered my 2008 2.8 Ghz Octo - 8 Gig Mac Pro. I am using Logic Pro with Apogee Ensemble. I would go with the Mac Pro 08, if you can get that mac anywhere for a good price.The Mac Pro 2009 would be fine too, but much more expensive
naah, its not THAT crappy, its just not THAT good. all DAWs are wasting resources because im yet to see a DAW with good thread management...
I wouldn't bother with 8 cores for music production unless you are doing really high track counts, this would be what I'd buy from the mac store and then upgrade the boot drive to a WD velociraptor:
2.66GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon
6GB (3x2GB)
640GB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s
NVIDIA GeForce GT 120 512MB
One 18x SuperDrive
Apple LED Cinema Display (24" flat panel)
Apple Mighty Mouse
Apple Keyboard with Numeric Keypad
Logic Studio
2.66GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon
6GB (3x2GB)
640GB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s
NVIDIA GeForce GT 120 512MB
One 18x SuperDrive
Apple LED Cinema Display (24" flat panel)
Apple Mighty Mouse
Apple Keyboard with Numeric Keypad
Logic Studio
You have a Bosendorfer in your living room???
Sweet. I just have one in my Mac....
Nope, 'fraid not. But if I _did_, then it would be about one of the only things to top that processor-activity graphic. ;-)
(Someday, hopefully...)
I disagree. The main drawback is the 8 gig RAM limit on the new quads. No, you can't use it all now, but once our apps go 64 bit you can bet your bippy that we will.
And why would somebody spend all that cheese on an ACD to use for music?
I still say the best value for music production is an '08 2.8 Octo.
And is this driven by your bench test? Experience? or do you feel that in the coming years audio apps will be slow to embrace what could be potentially great about the Nehalem processors?
In other words, is 2.8 Octo still a viable solution for 3-5 yeras despite whatever advances SL, 64 Bit apps, etc. may bring?
I'd lean slightly towards future proofing if I thought there was the chance I'd see gains in buying "newer" within 3-5 years...Otherwise I'll buy 2.8 2008 model and wait for a 2010 upgrade.
I could afford the new 2.66 Octo, and REALLY wanted the new architecture/ faster memory, etc., but went with the 2008 Octo 2.8. As for future proofing, it will be many years before that machine can't handle what you throw at it. I'm hard pressed to max it out now and I do a ton of virtual instruments and audio and plug ins.
The thing is, I want my Mac to work NOW. Who knows how long it will take all the third party (and Logic, for that matter) to become rock solid on the new Pros, or Snow Leopard. I mean some programs and plug ins took a full 6 months to come up to speed with the Intel/Leopard switch. Spectrasonics is still July before Trillian comes out.
So, I'm working away smoothly and worry free for what I know will be at 4 - 5 years. Hell, my G5 Dual 2.5 worked for me for 5 years!
Not to mention I saved over $2000 Canadian. I simply can't imagine there is $2000 worth of performance in the new Mac Pro.
The thing is, I want my Mac to work NOW. Who knows how long it will take all the third party (and Logic, for that matter) to become rock solid on the new Pros, or Snow Leopard. I mean some programs and plug ins took a full 6 months to come up to speed with the Intel/Leopard switch. Spectrasonics is still July before Trillian comes out.
So, I'm working away smoothly and worry free for what I know will be at 4 - 5 years. Hell, my G5 Dual 2.5 worked for me for 5 years!
Not to mention I saved over $2000 Canadian. I simply can't imagine there is $2000 worth of performance in the new Mac Pro.
Yeah, kinda all those things. I just don't see the new ones being that much more "future proofed" then the '08's.
Yeah, their bench marks are better (on some things), but how much does that incremental improvement cost? Over a grand? (I thought I saw somewhere that there're 08's octo's going for ~2k now).
I dunno, either way you'll get a great system, it just seems like the '08's a better value over all. My $.02
Small point to bear in mind. Since the drive bays are now soldered rather than cabled to the mainboard, there aren't any internal 3rd party hardware RAID solutions for the new Mac Pros, so your only options are to go with the Apple card, only use external drives or do it in software.
Amen to that! Mine cost $3150 CAD w/ 8 Gigs of RAM - new, not refurbished. I got a good trade in for my G5 though which helped.
i think audio apps will have trouble even getting to work on Snow Leopard. we all know how Leopard was in the beginning with audio apps. that great that every single pro user stayed on Tiger.
on some still are there.many people say that 8core is an overkill for audio anyway.
to be honest what bugs me is the RAM (and i dont want to get more because anyway i cant use it properly due to logic's 32bit limit) and HD which is SLOW because its cluttered. i need to get a third drive.
Hmm in the UK they're going for £1899, which is more than they retailed at, I don't think the UK has any left
I think I'm going to grab an upgraded 06/07 MacPro for ~$2000 and run it into the ground. So far I've found one 8x2.8 for sale in Canada (new), and it's only $100 less than I can get an upgraded '09 4x2.66.
I doubt I'd get much for my G5, just going to pass it on to my g/f.
2006 Mac Pro 2.66, 5 gigs of ram with 4 drives, an acer 24" screen.
Playing a 16 stereo audio tracks , 2 instances of Omnisphere, 2 instances of Superior Drummer 2, Synthogy, all littered with plugs.
CPU floating around 11% to 21%. Total ram being used shows 3,590 MB, 1521 unused, with my Tascam FW 1884 buffer setting @ 64 (low latency)... This is the original Mac Pro, I've been so happy to finally have a machine cover all my base's.
Wondering what SL and any Logic update would do to make this run any more efficient?
Guess if I had $4000 eating away at my wallet, I'd get the new machine...
Not yet though.
Later
Brian
Playing a 16 stereo audio tracks , 2 instances of Omnisphere, 2 instances of Superior Drummer 2, Synthogy, all littered with plugs.
CPU floating around 11% to 21%. Total ram being used shows 3,590 MB, 1521 unused, with my Tascam FW 1884 buffer setting @ 64 (low latency)... This is the original Mac Pro, I've been so happy to finally have a machine cover all my base's.
Wondering what SL and any Logic update would do to make this run any more efficient?
Guess if I had $4000 eating away at my wallet, I'd get the new machine...
Not yet though.
Later
Brian
I was on the sonikmatter forum the other day going over some discussions about Logic going native 64 bit, and from what I gathered it seems that one of the major devs had stated a while ago that it could be counter productive for Logic to be a native 64 bit app. Some of the arguments went over my head, but I think it stems from the fact that the code base is more efficient running in a 32 bit environment, and changing the codebase to 64 bit could cause performance degradation.
This I'm sure wouldn't matter to the super dupa mac pros out now, and to be released in the future, but it could be more than irksome for notebook owners who'd see the biggest drop in performance.
If this info is true I'm hoping that Logic stays the route it's on, 32 Bit with EXS addressing it's own RAM, and maybe expanding on that to allow more plug ins and instruments, 1st and 3rd party to address their own RAM. I guess a kind of 32/64 bit hybrid.
Sorry I don't have the link, but check for some of Oscwilds (I think that's his name) posts on sonikmatter.
Edit-
P.S I'd agree that if you can find a last gen octo 2.8 at a good price I'd snap it up, with the money you'd save over the newer models you could grab some decent Plugins/Powercore/Duende/Outboard.
OK, so you wouldn't save a grand, but that's still a lot of money.
myca said:
Hm, that's an interesting tidbit about Logic. I guess maybe the 64 bit thing isn't such an issue since EXS can address it's own RAM?
I would agree if you were saying for video editing, but the DDR3 ram and the quickpath tech used in the new xeons and i7 will be better for latency when using audio samples, either for something like BFD2, Kontakt or similar.
Cubase will go 64bit eventually on Mac, so will Logic, eventually, but Snow leopard is not 64bit either it's both 32 and 64bit, I doubt logic will move towards 64bit until logic 9 or logic 10 perhaps and probably not until the OS after Snow Leopard.
(i'm not 100% sure on my info but i think i'm somewhat there)
Besides I doubt you'd use 8 gb of RAM even if Logic or Cubase was suddenly 64bit, Audio is not HD video, you're not moving around massive pieces of information at any one time, unless your maybe scoring for a film and 100% native in your effects etc.
Monitors I agree with I've got two Dell 2408s as i think the Apple monitors are too expensive for what they are, but i'd rather have two 23" apples sitting on my desk