which current 24 inch 2.66,2.93 or 3.06 ghz imac is best for audio production??

Discussion in 'iMac' started by maddmikemo, Mar 29, 2009.

  1. maddmikemo macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
    #1
    HEY guys..


    i love the apple environment and i have used macs before. anyway i will be getting one shortly but before i do i want to know which imac (preferably) would be the best for audio production ...

    im looking for this to be a computer that could record and produce audio in real time very well and i also want to be able to multitask .... i want everything to basically do the job the right way without too much struggle and i want it to be efficient.... also would you suggest 8 gb or 4gb or ram...... Besides audio production i will be using it for internet acess and itunes and dvd watching and maybe some computer games if i have time to mess around

    any other suggestions would be very helpful

    also i apologise if this has already been posted but i havent found a similar post
     
  2. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
  3. maddmikemo thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
    #3
    nice

    lol ty hellhammer i was leaning that way too but is there like a performance chart that would compare the models of imacs at doing different tasks????
     
  4. NRose8989 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2008
    #4
    Any one should do the job just fine.

    People have been using the older white MacBooks for audio production without much problems.

    Also I would just start out with 4GB (2x2GB) of ram for now. The price of 4GB sticks is still pretty high and chances are your not even going to use up all 4GB unless your a HEAVY Adobe Creative Suite user or running a virtual machine with more than 2GB of memory.

    I don't even fill up 4GB of memory and I use Final Cut Studio and CS4 quite a bit.
     
  5. maddmikemo thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
  6. IrishBritish macrumors member

    IrishBritish

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Location:
    SC in the woods
    #6
    Yeah that $1000.00 upgrade is a bit much!!For now i would go with the 3.06ghz with 4gb ram should be great....But for $50.00 more definately get the
    ATI radeon hd 4850....
     
  7. maddmikemo thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
    #7

    so im going with the 4gigs for now... i could upgrade and what would you say the difference between 2.9 and 3 ghz???

    also i dont want to be excessive at spending because my dad is insisting to get the mac for me. (if i were buying it i would max out lol)
     
  8. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #8
    3.06GHz model has slightly faster processor (0.13GHz, not noticeable) and better GPU (GT120 vs. GT130) and 1TB HD.

    No major differences and you can always take the GT130 or ATI 4850 for 2.93GHz model
     
  9. Manwithnoname macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2009
    #9
    Yeah I would say you simply don't need that top end processor, they don't make a difference, its the GB and GFX card that make the difference.

    I will do the same as you and Im going for the 2.93 even though I can easily afford the top model. I just find it almost embarassing to tell people I'm spending over 1.5K on a computer.

    Go for the 2.93 with GT120 or upgrade to GT130.
     
  10. Bye Bye Baby macrumors 65816

    Bye Bye Baby

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2004
    Location:
    i(am in the)cloud
    #10
    Go with the graphics and the RAM.

    Always better than paying for extra speed that you never really get to see.
     
  11. adamcz macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2003
    #11
    If you're doing consumer/prosumer level audio production (such as recording only a handful of instruments at a time and not a full symphony orchestra), then any iMac will be good.

    If you're using a lot of virtual instruments or recording very large ensembles, then a Mac Pro would be a more appropriate machine. Audio production could mean anything from recording your guitar in garage band to scoring hollywood films, so it depends on what you want to do.
     
  12. jtgotsjets macrumors 6502

    jtgotsjets

    Joined:
    May 20, 2004
    Location:
    Lawrence, KS
    #12
    Why is everyone suggesting he max out his video card? Are you people high?

    You're doing audio- you don't need a powerful video card. Any of the three iMacs will do. The most important thing, depending on the exact work you're doing, is probably ram, but $1000 for the extra 4 gigs is probably not going to be worth it. Processor speed isnext important, but unless you're running a lot of complex plugins, even the lower end iMac will be fine.
     
  13. maddmikemo thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
    #13
    thanks

    thanks so much to everyone who has replied...

    im going with the 2.93 ghz , 1 tb, 4 gigs of ram....

    now i plan on connecting a mixer to the usb port or line in port (or where ever one would connect). ill be using a few mics, my keyboard and sometimes many mics for guitar and drums (band like setting)

    theres more info to make my goals more specific
     
  14. spacepower7 macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    May 6, 2004
    #14
    Personally, I would stay with one of the Nvidia graphics cards. They are cooperating with Apple on the CUDA or whatever that "video card helps out the OS" standard is. ATI is not yet a part of that SIG.

    If you're doing recording over USB or the analog interface, any iMac will be good enough. Any current iMac will beat out a Dual G5 which are still used in production environments all over the world.

    Check out the music/computers forum at www.gearslutz.com
     
  15. Redbeastmage macrumors member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2009
    #15
    For what you're doing, the machine you're looking at is just fine. The difference in processor between the 2.93 and 3.06 is most likely no more then a few minutes of processing time over a long day session, and that's assuming you're doing a lot of plugins and such.

    I did what you're looking to do with a duel 2.7g5 for a few years and never felt the need for more. So going to a brandy new iMac should be perfect for what you want to do.
     
  16. Lucius14 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2009
    #16
    At least every Mac can be used for Audioproduction.
    I´m a Pro and I started in 2000 with a G4 350 Mhz and this old Baby ist still runnin in the Studio (now with Protools-Extention-Cards), but even before I did a lot of good Music on a High Level on that Granny-Mac....you only have to deal with the ressources .

    Here at Home I done my Stuff for the last 2 Years on a Powerbook G4 1,33 Ghz and I pushed that one allways straight to the Limit ( coz nowadays the Plugs and Softsynths are no longer that ressourcefriendly as in the early days..)

    So 2 Weeks ago I got myself a IMac (white) 17" with Intel Core Duo 1,83 Ghz and this is a performance Blast for me....before I need to use the Freeze-Function or I bounced complete Tracks coz of the Performance Limit, now I don´t...

    So if you don´t need to record let´s say more than 10-12 Audioinstruments via a USB-Interface at the same Time, there´s no Prob with any of the Imac, otherwise you will also need a good USB/Firewire-Interface for that kind of Work, or a Promac with the possibility to put some Extentioncards in it..
    But in the End, the Mac & the Performance of it only define the Way you Work, not the Quality of the Outcome....
     

Share This Page