3 ms·
Not really - I use hardware EQs, comps, etc. The only software costs are Reaper and a reverb (which I hope to replace with a Bricasti next year). I ended up dum
by ScottWhigham 13y ago
Not really - I use hardware EQs, comps, etc. The only software costs are Reaper and a reverb (which I hope to replace with a Bricasti next year). I ended up dumping Pro Tools over about a two year period and switching back to all hardware. So it's a disappointment to me to see this pricing. It's as though they've said, "Musicians - they can just buy a regular Mac. The Mac Pro is for graphics and video people who need all this extra hardware."
- bashinator 13y agoIf all the heavy lifting in your studio is being done in hardware, why do you need a high-end workstation?
- ScottWhigham 13y agoYou really don't nowadays - the key things to battle are latency though, and that's often a metric of "How fast is your processing? How fast are your disks? How long are your cords?" The faster Xeons and the faster bus speeds will make big strides in that regard (thus keep your mic cable runs short and you'll be okay). However, the Mac Pro has been a studio staple since it's inception. I suppose we studio folks are surprised that we've basically been regarded as "not significant" by Apple. Unlike previous Mac Pros, this is not a machine built with "music studios" or musicians in mind. We aren't even considered. You'd be nuts to pay $3000 for a "base model" for a recording studio. You still have another $1000-$2000 that you'd need to spend for disk space, monitor, mouse, and keyboard. It's crazy.