Which Mac Pro for Ableton Live?

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by rbro, Mar 12, 2009.

  1. rbro macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2003
    #1
    I've been doing as much research as I can and I'm about ready to go for the Octo 2.26 w/12GB ram. I'm using it mainly with Ableton Live an a buttload of 3rd party plugs such as Omnisphere, NI Kore 2, NI Komplete 5, and more. So whaddya think? I'm moving from a Powerbook G4 that I've had for the last 7-8 years, so I'm expecting to be impressed. Do you think this is a good choice for Live?
     
  2. aliot macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2008
    #2
    No matter.I've using live6 on my mac pro 2.66G quadcore for a year.I don't see any problem on it.Mac pro is more than enough for most of software sound source,even NI massive.but one thing I have to notice,you have 12G of ram but you can only use 4G virtual memory for a single program,you know what I mean,do you?
    :cool:A good musician should know how much thing you need to do.In the worst situation we can still freeze track.So don't need to worry about peoformance too much.
     
  3. rbro thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2003
    #3
    Are you saying that you don't think 12gb will be enough?
     
  4. rockinrocker macrumors 65816

    rockinrocker

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2006
    #4
    No, he's saying you won't actually be able (ton? harhar) to use all 12 since Live is 32 bit (and can't access more then 4 gig).

    If I were you, I'd just start with the stock RAM and see how much you use (you have iStat, right?), then see if you need to upgrade.

    Then proceed to rock.
     
  5. Daim macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #5
    So what do those cheesy benchmarks (without any unit?!) mean exactly?

    http://www.barefeats.com/nehal04.html

    When we insert 8GB the 4GB are accessed by Live faster than 4GB will be accessed if we insert 6GB? Or the other way around?

    Sorry, but those benchmarks look kind of useless to me..
     
  6. Daim macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #6
    What about audio units running in Live.. propably each of those can access another 4 or 8 gig.
     
  7. aliot macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2008
    #7
    most of them not,they share with DAW.Some like EXS24 in logic or kontakt can direct access to HDD are exceptions.
     
  8. Daim macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #8
    I highly doubt that plugins like Reaktor will share the 4GB Live is using.

    I think the decision is actually pretty easy:
    6GB = 6 Slots used.. raplacing 6 Dimms when upgrading RAM.. no thanks
    8GB = 4 Slots used but slower RAM access.. no thanks
    12GB = faster RAM access and no need to upgrade anyway
     
  9. rockinrocker macrumors 65816

    rockinrocker

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2006
    #9
    ????

    Plugins are opened within the app, and thusly subject to the ~4 gig limit.
    Reaktor is more CPU intensive (compared to say, Akoustic Piano, which just has **** tons of samples) so it's maybe not the best example, but using lots of plugs is the main (audio related) reason for the push for 64 bit.
     
  10. Daim macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #10
    Can you back that up in any way?
     
  11. aliot macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2008
    #11
    If you really want to know,you can use activity monitor to check how much memory you are using.When your virtual memory reach 4G....you will see.
     
  12. Daim macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #12
    Yes, but then it will be too late. Still deciding to take 6GB or 12GB.
     
  13. fabriciom macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2008
    Location:
    Madrid, España
    #13
    If your are using Live you need to be looking for a macbook pro. Not a mac pro. Live is for realt time (live) "productions" not for processor intensive productions that would require Logic Pro. Other wise your are using the wrong tool for the job.
     
  14. nicolasmasset macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 25, 2007
    Location:
    Belgium
    #14
    I disagree. I have logic and live and find myself using only live nowadays. For dance music anyways. Live is just so incredibly creative for production in the studio, it's truly been an eye opener. And Live hardly ever crashes. Logic on the other hand :confused:
     
  15. mingus51 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2008
    Location:
    Midwest
    #15
    Can you explain the "slower RAM access" you mentioned?

    I was thinking 8GB of RAM myself and wasn't aware this would be slower than 6GB?

    Thanks
     
  16. nemodomi macrumors member

    nemodomi

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2008
    #16
    Performance varies by module count?
     
  17. rockinrocker macrumors 65816

    rockinrocker

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2006
    #17
    Yeah, there's no doubt that Live is geared towards, well, playing live, but it can work as a regular DAW too. Maybe the UI's a little cramped, but it'd work.
    Different strokes for different folks.
     
  18. mingus51 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2008
    Location:
    Midwest
    #18
  19. Daim macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #19
    I got a macbook pro for years and it's the biggest pain in the world to plug that thing to my screen and to my soundcard and to the power supply each single day. And there's plenty of producers using Live on desktop machines. Actually everybody I know. Just because you can perform your music live with it, doesnt't mean you cannot produce complex tracks which need a lot of resources.
     

Share This Page