new PowerMac or iMac?

[mark steven brooks]

Any opinions on which to get to run ProTools, Finale, Sibelius, Mach5
etc? Is there a noticeable difference in power between PowerMac and
iMac? Worth a grand more? Noticeable difference between i3, i5 and i7
processors? Any reason to NOT get the iMac? Opinions greatly appreciated.

[gjsmo]

On Aug 17, 9:32*pm, mark steven brooks >
wrote:
> Any opinions on which to get to run ProTools, Finale, Sibelius, Mach5
> etc? * Is there a noticeable difference in power between PowerMac and
> iMac? *Worth a grand more? *Noticeable difference between i3, i5 and i7
> processors? *Any reason to NOT get the iMac? *Opinions greatly appreciated.

Oh... plenty of reason not to get an iMac. Depends on what you want to
use it for, though.

An iMac has about the same upgradability as a laptop. You can replace
the hard drive and RAM, and maybe the CPU. Probably not the DVD drive
on an iMac.
A PowerMac is basically a PC, with Mac-specific stuff. It has PCI
Express, full-size RAM (oh, you didn't know iMac's took laptop ram?),
probably PCI slots, and certainly upgradable CD drives and CPU. It's
also more expensive, but generally more powerful.

There IS a noticeable difference between Core i3, i5 and i7 CPUs. But
it really depends on what you're doing. If it can be handled by a
decent laptop, an iMac will work, with whatever CPU they have there
now. If you need a workstation/server class computer, go for the
PowerMac with an i7 - or two.

At the local Guitar Center, they have some Macs in pro audio, and
they're ALL either MacBook Pros or iMacs. You probably don't need a
PowerMac.

Oh... it's actually a Mac Pro now. PowerMacs were G4s and G5s. Whoops.

[mark steven brooks]

gjsmo wrote:
> On Aug 17, 9:32 pm, mark steven brooks >
> wrote:
>> Any opinions on which to get to run ProTools, Finale, Sibelius, Mach5
>> etc? Is there a noticeable difference in power between PowerMac and
>> iMac? Worth a grand more? Noticeable difference between i3, i5 and i7
>> processors? Any reason to NOT get the iMac? Opinions greatly appreciated.
>
> Oh... plenty of reason not to get an iMac. Depends on what you want to
> use it for, though.
>
> An iMac has about the same upgradability as a laptop. You can replace
> the hard drive and RAM, and maybe the CPU. Probably not the DVD drive
> on an iMac.
> A PowerMac is basically a PC, with Mac-specific stuff. It has PCI
> Express, full-size RAM (oh, you didn't know iMac's took laptop ram?),
> probably PCI slots, and certainly upgradable CD drives and CPU. It's
> also more expensive, but generally more powerful.
>
> There IS a noticeable difference between Core i3, i5 and i7 CPUs. But
> it really depends on what you're doing. If it can be handled by a
> decent laptop, an iMac will work, with whatever CPU they have there
> now. If you need a workstation/server class computer, go for the
> PowerMac with an i7 - or two.
>
> At the local Guitar Center, they have some Macs in pro audio, and
> they're ALL either MacBook Pros or iMacs. You probably don't need a
> PowerMac.
>
> Oh... it's actually a Mac Pro now. PowerMacs were G4s and G5s. Whoops.

Yes, I meant Mac Pro. Thanks.

[WillStG]

On Aug 17, 9:32*pm, mark steven brooks >
wrote:
> Any opinions on which to get to run ProTools, Finale, Sibelius, Mach5
> etc? * Is there a noticeable difference in power between PowerMac and
> iMac? *Worth a grand more? *Noticeable difference between i3, i5 and i7
> processors? *Any reason to NOT get the iMac? *Opinions greatly appreciated.

Set up a workstation running Cubase 5 on a brand new iMac, 3.05 Ghz
Snow Leopard 21.5 in 4G ram - $1195. The thing is wicked fast, where
a few instances of Guitar Rig on top of basic NI instruments would
choke the 1.5 Dual Intel minimac, this thing didn't blink with over 13
instances, the processor ran at around a cool 25%. And the new pocket
SATA usb drives give you 750 gigs @ 7200 speed too.

So far, no problems, as stable as the mini mac running 10.4 was
(which is also now at 10.5 and also upgraded to Cubase 5.) Still on
NI Komplete 4 though.

Will

[gjsmo]

On Aug 23, 3:12*am, WillStG > wrote:
> On Aug 17, 9:32*pm, mark steven brooks >
> wrote:
>
> > Any opinions on which to get to run ProTools, Finale, Sibelius, Mach5
> > etc? * Is there a noticeable difference in power between PowerMac and
> > iMac? *Worth a grand more? *Noticeable difference between i3, i5 and i7
> > processors? *Any reason to NOT get the iMac? *Opinions greatly appreciated.
>
> * *Set up a workstation running Cubase 5 on a brand new iMac, 3.05 Ghz
> Snow Leopard 21.5 in 4G ram - $1195. *The thing is wicked fast, where
> a few instances of Guitar Rig on top of basic NI instruments would
> choke the 1.5 Dual Intel minimac, this thing didn't blink with over 13
> instances, the processor ran at around a cool 25%. *And the new pocket
> SATA usb drives give you 750 gigs @ 7200 speed too.
>
> * * So far, no problems, as stable as the mini mac running 10.4 was
> (which is also now at 10.5 and also upgraded to Cubase 5.) *Still on
> NI Komplete 4 though.
>
> Will

Of course the Mac mini would gag. It's barely got room for a CD drive,
let alone a fast CPU.
The new one might work better, since the CPU is faster now. But an
iMac is still probably the best bet.

[WillStG]

On Aug 23, 7:07*pm, gjsmo > wrote:
> On Aug 23, 3:12*am, WillStG > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Aug 17, 9:32*pm, mark steven brooks >
> > wrote:
>
> > > Any opinions on which to get to run ProTools, Finale, Sibelius, Mach5
> > > etc? * Is there a noticeable difference in power between PowerMac and
> > > iMac? *Worth a grand more? *Noticeable difference between i3, i5 and i7
> > > processors? *Any reason to NOT get the iMac? *Opinions greatly appreciated.
>
> > * *Set up a workstation running Cubase 5 on a brand new iMac, 3.05 Ghz
> > Snow Leopard 21.5 in 4G ram - $1195. *The thing is wicked fast, where
> > a few instances of Guitar Rig on top of basic NI instruments would
> > choke the 1.5 Dual Intel minimac, this thing didn't blink with over 13
> > instances, the processor ran at around a cool 25%. *And the new pocket
> > SATA usb drives give you 750 gigs @ 7200 speed too.
>
> > * * So far, no problems, as stable as the mini mac running 10.4 was
> > (which is also now at 10.5 and also upgraded to Cubase 5.) *Still on
> > NI Komplete 4 though.
>
> > Will
>
> Of course the Mac mini would gag. It's barely got room for a CD drive,
> let alone a fast CPU.
> The new one might work better, since the CPU is faster now. But an
> iMac is still probably the best bet.

Well I guess I should have qualified, the dual intel mini mac did
plenty of audio tracks in a singer songwriter creative preproduction
situation, and a decent number of VST's if you freeze instrument
tracks. A lot of good songwriting output with lots of overdub tracks
over the last year from that setup - but of course it had processor
limitations, so we used ext. effects (lexicon, Metric Halo, etc.). But
the new iMac upgrade @ 3Ghz is wicked powerful by comparison and has a
lot of processor headroom, and the all in one design is ergonomic and
convenient for building workstations. 3Ghz w/ 4 gigRam for $1195,
with a 21.5" monitor and wireless keys/mouse is pretty decent - but
tell me a better deal and I'll listen. I mean I wouldn't build a large
commercial facility exclusively around one, but as part of a
production chain that ends up doing drum overdubs and mixing on a Neve
console, it has enough power for some fairly serious work I think. At
least, enough to make me want to spend my money on one, but if you
have a better idea for a system that is easy for casual users to
understand....

[Danny T]

On Aug 23, 2:12*am, WillStG > wrote:
> On Aug 17, 9:32*pm, mark steven brooks >
> wrote:
>
> > Any opinions on which to get to run ProTools, Finale, Sibelius, Mach5
> > etc? * Is there a noticeable difference in power between PowerMac and
> > iMac? *Worth a grand more? *Noticeable difference between i3, i5 and i7
> > processors? *Any reason to NOT get the iMac? *Opinions greatly appreciated.
>
> * *Set up a workstation running Cubase 5 on a brand new iMac, 3.05 Ghz
> Snow Leopard 21.5 in 4G ram - $1195. *The thing is wicked fast, where
> a few instances of Guitar Rig on top of basic NI instruments would
> choke the 1.5 Dual Intel minimac, this thing didn't blink with over 13
> instances, the processor ran at around a cool 25%. *And the new pocket
> SATA usb drives give you 750 gigs @ 7200 speed too.
>
> * * So far, no problems, as stable as the mini mac running 10.4 was
> (which is also now at 10.5 and also upgraded to Cubase 5.) *Still on
> NI Komplete 4 though.
>
> Will

Be sure to upgrade our cubase 5 to 5.5.1 It just came out

[gjsmo]

On Aug 23, 9:54*pm, WillStG > wrote:
> On Aug 23, 7:07*pm, gjsmo > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Aug 23, 3:12*am, WillStG > wrote:
>
> > > On Aug 17, 9:32*pm, mark steven brooks >
> > > wrote:
>
> > > > Any opinions on which to get to run ProTools, Finale, Sibelius, Mach5
> > > > etc? * Is there a noticeable difference in power between PowerMac and
> > > > iMac? *Worth a grand more? *Noticeable difference between i3, i5 and i7
> > > > processors? *Any reason to NOT get the iMac? *Opinions greatly appreciated.
>
> > > * *Set up a workstation running Cubase 5 on a brand new iMac, 3.05 Ghz
> > > Snow Leopard 21.5 in 4G ram - $1195. *The thing is wicked fast, where
> > > a few instances of Guitar Rig on top of basic NI instruments would
> > > choke the 1.5 Dual Intel minimac, this thing didn't blink with over 13
> > > instances, the processor ran at around a cool 25%. *And the new pocket
> > > SATA usb drives give you 750 gigs @ 7200 speed too.
>
> > > * * So far, no problems, as stable as the mini mac running 10.4 was
> > > (which is also now at 10.5 and also upgraded to Cubase 5.) *Still on
> > > NI Komplete 4 though.
>
> > > Will
>
> > Of course the Mac mini would gag. It's barely got room for a CD drive,
> > let alone a fast CPU.
> > The new one might work better, since the CPU is faster now. But an
> > iMac is still probably the best bet.
>
> * * *Well I guess I should have qualified, the dual intel mini mac did
> plenty of audio tracks in a singer songwriter creative preproduction
> situation, and a decent number of VST's if you freeze instrument
> tracks. *A lot of good songwriting output with lots of overdub tracks
> over the last year from that setup - but of course it had processor
> limitations, so we used ext. effects (lexicon, Metric Halo, etc.). But
> the new iMac upgrade @ 3Ghz is wicked powerful by comparison and has a
> lot of processor headroom, *and the all in one design is ergonomic and
> convenient for building workstations. *3Ghz w/ 4 gigRam for $1195,
> with a 21.5" monitor and wireless keys/mouse is pretty decent - but
> tell me a better deal and I'll listen. I mean I wouldn't build a large
> commercial facility exclusively around one, but as part of a
> production chain that ends up doing drum overdubs and mixing on a Neve
> console, it has enough power for some fairly serious work I think. *At
> least, enough to make me want to spend my money on one, but if you
> have a better idea for a system that is easy for casual users to
> understand....

Well, since you asked...
Would you care to build a system? It would be a PC, of course, but you
can sometimes get Mac OS X to run on a PC (don't rely on it though). I
just built a $1500 computer, it's got a 3.2GHz Phenom II X4
(overclocked to 3.7GHz), 4 gigs of ram, 2 1TB hard drives, 2 DVD
burners, an ATI Radeon 5830 with 1GB of VRAM... really nice, actually.
That price includes a $150 case and about $130 for keyboard and mouse.
I used a 21" Apple Studio CRT I had lying around, works great
(1600x1200 resolution, best color ever).

This system might be overkill for you, and probably is for me. But
think about it. It's cheaper than an entry-level Mac Pro or similar
iMac, more upgradeable than an iMac, and more customizable than
anything Apple sells. Just pair stuff together that fits, and it
works. I love Macs, but they're too expensive for me right now. So I
have a PC, which I'm going to run OSx86 on.

You could also look at Linux, if you're into free stuff. 64 Studio has
plenty of free programs, and I know it comes with some kind of DAW.
I could even throw together an audio-specific workstation if I had an
hour...

[gjsmo]

I should mention that a quad-core CPU REALLY will improve anything
multi-threaded by a lot (vs. dual core). I would find it hard to
believe that a DAW could be not multi-threaded.