The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
At last: new Mac Pro!
Old 3 days ago
  #1021
Lives for gear
 
zephonic's Avatar
I think you give Apple too much credit here. Main reason why PCIe is such a niche thing is that laptops outsell desktops by more than 2:1.


https://www.statista.com/statistics/...d-desktop-pcs/
Old 3 days ago
  #1022
Gear Addict
 
juiseman's Avatar
 

PCI-E your referring too...

PCI is pretty dead.
Old 3 days ago
  #1023
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by juiseman View Post
PCI-E your referring too...

PCI is pretty dead.
True...

That said, I'm still using my Lynx TWO-B in a modern Ryzen system :-)
Old 3 days ago
  #1024
Quote:
Originally Posted by zephonic View Post
MOTU discontinued the PCIe-424 years ago. I doubt it will come back now.
True, but like the firewire interfaces, they still support it as best they can and keep the software up and running for us folks that like to hold on to things. My 828mk2 is still running as it has since 2004, but if something happens to it Im SOL cause they can't get proprietary parts for them anymore. They kept supporting it up until 2015 or so and they finally said they just couldn't repair anymore. 11 years of support for a single product aint too shabby at all in todays world.
Old 3 days ago
  #1025
Lives for gear
 
ponzi's Avatar
I have a workstation class mobo that was maybe new 5 years ago, I was just looking and it has at least 2 pci slots on it--thankfully I have no pci devices anymore. I recently put an m2 ssd into a pci-e card, and it benchmarked 5-10 times faster than the ssd thru sata. Per the specs, the samsung ssd I bought for the C drive specs (and benchmarks) at the top limit of sata 3 theoretical speed--no use paying for something faster than its sata host. Sadly, my mobo cannot boot from pci-e, so ssd is required for the boot drive.

I will note that its important to look at how the mobo shares and allocates the pci-e lanes. My m3 adapter is pci-e 3 and 4 lanes, so I made sure it got a mobo slot that supported that. Since I am using on-chip video, lots of lanes freed up due to no outboard video card.

PCI is a shared bus technology and the devices to some degree have to cooperate with each other and not hog the bus. Used to be the pci video card would hog the bus and squeeze out the pci sound card--leading to the usual gapping (buffer underflows). PCI-E is more of a switched protocol so the sharing issues are managed centrally, and of course much faster than pci.

Presumably the new mac pro can utilize pcie-hosted ssd to enable really fast ssd without worrying about what is soldered onto the mobo or how much it would cost to get a TB at time of purchase. But since its all vaporware today, details like this take a long time to get reliably determined.
Old 3 days ago
  #1026
Lives for gear
 
Monkey Man's Avatar
 

Spot-on about the PCI thing IMHO, Marcus.

I'm certain MOTU switched to TB and USB because of the trash cans and what Apple was saying. I don't think it's unreasonable to think that the company might "revert" to using PCIe.

I for one would be all over it 'cause I've never experienced better stability (rock-solid) than what the PCI-324 / PCI-424 offered.
Old 3 days ago
  #1027
Lives for gear
 
~ufo~'s Avatar
I don’t want to derail this thread any further, let alone into an UAD thread but the idea of six UAD-2 octo cards in this Mac Pro would be pretty funny because even at the base level 8 core version, I doubt doubling the price of it by maxing it out with UAD octos would effectively double DSP power, even at low(est) buffers.
I know some of you live UAD and are willing to put up with the very high cost per instance, but to me it would just be embarrassing to put 48 extra chips in there that together aren’t as capable as the low end CPU.

Horses for courses of course.

With the HDX thing I wonder the same thing.
I’d love to see some tests to see what’s more powerful.... adding (an) HDX card(s) to the Mac Pro or investing that amount of money into upgrading the Mac Pro processor and HD native...

Certainly now that you can up the voices in HD Native and there are few plugins that are aax-DSP only.
Old 3 days ago
  #1028
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAW PLUS View Post
Of course the price is important, but in the case of a certain model, no matter what it is, either you can afford it or you can't. Either you think it is good value or you don't. Comparing it to the pricing of individual parts is not an argument you can use anywhere. Do you do that when buying a car, a coffee machine or headphones? Or, for self builds, a Neve channel strip or a Manley compressor?
Yes we do compare parts... pickups, strings, transformers, capsules, wire baskets, neck stock, tweeters, faders, etc etc etc... of course we can compare parts in computers... sure some people would never swap out pickups in a guitar, or RAM in a computer... but lots of us can, and the components and their cost absolutely affect the value of an item. It's totally valid to inspect the components in this machine & comparison shop them, especially because of the outlandish price tag... It's also completely valid to be emotionally repulsed or insulted by extravagant markups. That's a much more complex and interesting response than just "you can afford it or you can't."

Last edited by Philter; 3 days ago at 08:45 PM..
Old 3 days ago
  #1029
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by lowkey View Post
I have been.
It’s too Pro for many. Extremely suitable for some. Targeting an industry that needs a great deal more than audio guys do.
And less... RTL through the host processor isn't a big deal for video guys, but it sure is for audio guys... It's just not a smart system for pro audio
Old 3 days ago
  #1030
Lives for gear
 
brucerothwell's Avatar
 

Perhaps it can be thought of this way:

Does anyone here, that is whining about the pricing structure of the new Mac Pro, spend high dollars for the "best" in other categories of gear?

Such as:
  • Consoles
  • Microphones
  • Preamps
  • Compressors
  • Speakers
  • Amplifiers

If so, why?

Does having the best computer solution for your serious music production efforts not rate with you, but a super-nice mic does?
Old 3 days ago
  #1031
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by brucerothwell View Post
Perhaps it can be thought of this way:

Does anyone here, that is whining about the pricing structure of the new Mac Pro, spend high dollars for the "best" in other categories of gear?

Such as:
  • Consoles
  • Microphones
  • Preamps
  • Compressors
  • Speakers
  • Amplifiers

If so, why?

Does having the best computer solution for your serious music production efforts not rate with you, but a super-nice mic does?
Computers aren't the same as audio hardware; they're interchangable, they don't color the sound or sound different, they don't interact differently with other gear (besides obvious interface/port differences.) That's a bad analogy, it doesn't work. If computer "A" costs $2000 but computer "b" costs $6000, but either A or B will do the same job, is the more expensive one somehow "better" for the task, or are you just overpaying? That's rhetorical, yes you're just overpaying... yet a lot of people will overpay, either out of ignorance over how computers work, or for the sheer bling factor, where you feel validated by owning something expensive, or maybe you're signaling you have money. Like a magpie, LOL
Old 3 days ago
  #1032
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by brucerothwell View Post
Does having the best computer solution for your serious music production efforts not rate with you, but a super-nice mic does?
A great guitar sounds better than a not so great guitar. A Mac Pro doesn't sound better than a Dell Inspiron.
That was easy, wasn't it?
Old 3 days ago
  #1033
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by brucerothwell View Post
Perhaps it can be thought of this way:

Does anyone here, that is whining about the pricing structure of the new Mac Pro, spend high dollars for the "best" in other categories of gear?

Such as:
  • Consoles
  • Microphones
  • Preamps
  • Compressors
  • Speakers
  • Amplifiers

If so, why?

Does having the best computer solution for your serious music production efforts not rate with you, but a super-nice mic does?
Those items typically hold their value, and in some cases become more valuable. A computer loses value drastically since technology moves so quickly. You can also make the same music with a lesser computer, but not really the same case with lesser gear. Granted, Apple computers do hold value more than PC, but they still decrease quite a bit. My current imac cost me $600 on CL - it sold for 2k new.
Old 3 days ago
  #1034
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sascha Franck View Post
A great guitar sounds better than a not so great guitar. A Mac Pro doesn't sound better than a Dell Inspiron.
That was easy, wasn't it?
Depends who’s playing it.

Just like the value of this machine will depend on who’s using it.
Old 3 days ago
  #1035
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wattsy View Post
Just like the value of this machine will depend on who’s using it.
Yet, the sound will be identical. Whereas with guitars it's different.

Besides, I don't give a damn whether my guitars are expensive or not, either. All I need is them to work and be suitable for the job.
Old 3 days ago
  #1036
Lives for gear
 
brucerothwell's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sascha Franck View Post
A great guitar sounds better than a not so great guitar. A Mac Pro doesn't sound better than a Dell Inspiron.
That was easy, wasn't it?
Reliability and stability and performance power is important with computers.

A Dell Inspiron is a Chevy. The new Mac Pro is way beyond that.
Old 3 days ago
  #1037
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sascha Franck View Post
Yet, the sound will be identical. Whereas with guitars it's different.

Besides, I don't give a damn whether my guitars are expensive or not, either. All I need is them to work and be suitable for the job.
Yup, which is why for guitarists that don’t need the features or craftsmanship of an expensive guitar are better off choosing a cheaper option better suited to their needs...
Old 3 days ago
  #1038
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by brucerothwell View Post
Reliability and stability and performance power is important with computers.
I would agree.
But well, you seem to doubt there's stable systems below a certain price tag. Which is just not true. All over the years, all my machines have performed well and very stable. That includes several Windows PCs and laptops.
Your analog equipment analogy is flawed on almost all levels, really.
Old 3 days ago
  #1039
Lives for gear
 
~ufo~'s Avatar
Bruce if the Mac Pro was specced optimally for audio, your statement would be perfectly valid.

It’s not that the new Mac Pro is specced poorly for audio, but it’s not exactly optimal. It’s over specced in areas where it doesn’t count for audio and where it counts for audio it’s specced in a way that is much pricier than necessary and may actually limit audio performance.
The much cheaper i9 line in that machine would probably perform better for real time audio tasks and I doubt the Xeons would even make a difference in offline renders, but I lack the expertise to state that with any kind of certainty.

I’m sure the 6k Mac Pro will perform handsome for real time audio, but the much cheaper i9 iMac (with much poorer cooling) might even beat it at some audio tasks and surely a pc or hack with that i9 (which typically go for about 3-3.5k, pre configured) will certainly perform better for audio.

Like it’s been suggested before. This new Mac Pro is in a segment higher than most audio pros need and in the lower specced versions (8/12 core) it just doesn’t offer a great price performance ratio.

The 6-core 3.33 cheese grater that many of us still use, offered a much better price performance ratio.
One could also build a cheaper, better performing pc or hack back then, but at least the 6 core Mac Pro offered a good bang for buck.

That machine is now the i9 iMac. Not the 8-core Mac Pro.
At least, so it appears to me.

Last edited by ~ufo~; 3 days ago at 09:44 PM..
Old 3 days ago
  #1040
Lives for gear
 
brucerothwell's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sascha Franck View Post
I would agree.
But well, you seem to doubt there's stable systems below a certain price tag. Which is just not true. All over the years, all my machines have performed well and very stable. That includes several Windows PCs and laptops.
Your analog equipment analogy is flawed on almost all levels, really.
No, I see there are levels of quality, stability and performance related to the price tag of computers.

Regarding my analogy related to analog gear, maybe it is flawed to some degree, but it is still true that with DAW's being so crucial to music production these days, the reliability of a studio computer means something.

Also, with a Mac Pro, at the level we are speaking of with the new version, and the OSX operating system itself, it is the highest level of reliability and performance available in a a turnkey and vendor-supported computer system, I believe.

I do not consider Windows in the same category as OSX, as Windows is under the highest level of attack from viruses, etc., and OSX is not, and is based on Berkeley Unix -- s superior and more stable OS.

And a hackintosh system offers no vendor support at all, except what you might get from the individual component makers.
Old 3 days ago
  #1041
Lives for gear
 
TAFKAT's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by zephonic View Post
You are an esteemed member of this forum, and your benchmark work over the years speaks for itself.

But when it comes to Mac threads, you just can’t help yourself, mate.
Come on Zed,

For the most part I was defending the general consensus here from Apple users, including yourself, that Apple have the ability to be able to deliver multi tier tower solutions, and could have rolled out those solutions.

The original Mac Pro was exactly that , a tiered solution, multiple single CPU solutions scaled to dual multiple CPU solutions , multiple chipset/motherboard options to accommodate. Apple could have done the same, and I doubt there is a Mac user in this thread that would have complained

The discussion that went a little south was due to the original premise that if Apple hadn't gone too Pro ? ( for audio, etc ), then they would have had the video guys bitching about them not being Pro enough. That then after some twists and turns , eventuated into the extreme high end video guys are already writing it off as not Pro enough, hence my damned if they do, damned if they don't comment.

FWIW - Visual content creators fall under a pretty wide umbrella, ( as do audio ), the visual professionals I have dealt with are more heavily dependent on GPU to do the the heavy lifting, so as I noted , a socket 2066 solution works very well with the GPU arrays afforded by the platform. For lower tier, even the 1151 platform will suffice with a large GPU. Thats who/what I was referencing, I wasn't specifying the extreme top end tier.

Either way , this is gearslutz, and I have read far more disruptive dialog on this thread , most from so called Macheads. The simple fact that the Hackintosh dialog is even permitted on GS still amuses me, as a few years back even the mere mention would be shutdown due to risk of legalities.

Carry on, I hope you find a solution that is most applicable.


Last edited by TAFKAT; 3 days ago at 10:06 PM..
Old 3 days ago
  #1042
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ~ufo~ View Post
Bruce if the Mac Pro was specced optimally for audio, your statement would be perfectly valid.

It’s not that the new Mac Pro is species poorly for audio, but it’s not exactly optimal. It’s over specced in areas where it doesn’t count for audio and where it counts for audio it’s specced in a way that is much pricier than necessary and may actually limit audio performance.
The much cheaper i9 line in that machine would probably perform better for real time audio tasks and I doubt the Xeons would even make a difference in offline renders, but I lack the expertise to state that with any kind of certainty.

I’m sure the 6k Mac Pro will perform handsome for real time audio, but the much cheaper i9 iMac (with much poorer cooling) might even beat it at some audio tasks and surely a pc or hack with that i9 (which typically go for about 3-3.5k, pre configured) will certainly perform better for audio.

Like it’s been suggested before. This new Mac Pro is in a segment higher than most audio pros need and in the lower specced versions (8/12 core) it just doesn’t offer a great price performance ratio.

The 6-core 3.33 cheese grater that many of us still use, offered a much better price performance ratio.
One could also build a cheaper, better performing pc or hack back then, but at least the 6 core Mac Pro offered a good bang for buck.

That machine is now the i9 iMac. Not the 8-core Mac Pro.
At least, so it appears to me.
Well put! And yes the i9 certainly looks like it’s the best option for most audio workflows, which is why I’d say now is great time to build a hack if none of Apple’s offerings suit your needs.
Old 3 days ago
  #1043
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by brucerothwell View Post
Perhaps it can be thought of this way:

Does anyone here, that is whining about the pricing structure of the new Mac Pro, spend high dollars for the "best" in other categories of gear?

Does having the best computer solution for your serious music production efforts not rate with you, but a super-nice mic does?
If you read the "whining" you would see that it's specifically because the base model is NOT "the best computer solution". If it was people wouldn't be "whining".

Like some of us have said: Many other manufacturers manage to create different lines of computers. Whatever it is that warrants the high price tag of the base model it's highly plausible that Apple could have had an additional line starting at a lower price but giving up certain... 'nicities'.

That's the point many people have made.

Not that nobody can, will or should buy a highly specced version of the Mac Pro because they won't benefit from it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by brucerothwell View Post
Also, with a Mac Pro, at the level we are speaking of with the new version, and the OSX operating system itself, it is the highest level of reliability and performance available in a a turnkey and vendor-supported computer system, I believe.
If we're talking about the base /entry level then that's almost certainly entirely clearly untrue. I don't think it's even close.

Quote:
Originally Posted by brucerothwell View Post
I do not consider Windows in the same category as OSX, as Windows is under the highest level of attack from viruses, etc., and OSX is not, and is based on Berkeley Unix -- s superior and more stable OS.
Fortunately that doesn't mean Apple couldn't have provided a more cost effective base model or different line of Mac Pro. Unfortunately they didn't do that.
Old 3 days ago
  #1044
Lives for gear
 
brucerothwell's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ~ufo~ View Post
Bruce if the Mac Pro was specced optimally for audio, your statement would be perfectly valid.

It’s not that the new Mac Pro is specced poorly for audio, but it’s not exactly optimal. It’s over specced in areas where it doesn’t count for audio and where it counts for audio it’s specced in a way that is much pricier than necessary and may actually limit audio performance.
The much cheaper i9 line in that machine would probably perform better for real time audio tasks and I doubt the Xeons would even make a difference in offline renders, but I lack the expertise to state that with any kind of certainty.

I’m sure the 6k Mac Pro will perform handsome for real time audio, but the much cheaper i9 iMac (with much poorer cooling) might even beat it at some audio tasks and surely a pc or hack with that i9 (which typically go for about 3-3.5k, pre configured) will certainly perform better for audio.

Like it’s been suggested before. This new Mac Pro is in a segment higher than most audio pros need and in the lower specced versions (8/12 core) it just doesn’t offer a great price performance ratio.

The 6-core 3.33 cheese grater that many of us still use, offered a much better price performance ratio.
One could also build a cheaper, better performing pc or hack back then, but at least the 6 core Mac Pro offered a good bang for buck.

That machine is now the i9 iMac. Not the 8-core Mac Pro.
At least, so it appears to me.
I guess that depends on if you are happy with expansion being external via ports, or internal via slots.and bays.

Look everybody... I'm not happy about the high prices either, but I also realize that to get the "best" Apple has to offer, there is always a high price.

Old 3 days ago
  #1045
Lives for gear
Old 3 days ago
  #1046
Lives for gear
 
TAFKAT's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by norbury brook View Post
Part of the reason PCI isn't as widespread in the audio industry today as it was is entirely because Apple dropped PCI support and told everyone it was dead and to move to TB.
That was definitely part of the shift, it was far more feasible for the audio developers to focus on devices that could be used external of the system and on laptops, and with Apple being such a considerable % of the audio market, it made sense to assign limited budgets away from PCIe.

Those that have stuck it out, you will find have a strong internal R&D , ( RME, Lynx , AVID ) and anyone who has used those PCIe solutions know their immediate benefit.

I think the argument for a tower extends past PCIe audio devices tho, the simple ability to be able to stuff a system with appropriate and expandable storage is another big one, and probably more so than actual PCIe slots in many cases. I service enough clients who don't have anything in the system PCIe past the graphics card , but if they wanted to install some UAD's for example, the option is there.

Old 3 days ago
  #1047
Lives for gear
 
weezul's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by brucerothwell View Post
And a hackintosh system offers no vendor support at all, except what you might get from the individual component makers.
Just for the record, every time i've RMA'd a genuinely faulty product it's been sorted pretty quick. Not as quick as walking into an apple store, for same day granted (I mean, I don't even know if they can do that, but I've heard stories) but I do believe that comes with it's own costs that I don't have to spend (AppleCare, is it?) But I've had a faulty SATA SSD replaced, and a faulty NVMe drive replaced. In fact, the NVMe got collected from my door yesterday (tuesday), and it's replacement is arriving tomorrow (thursday). Gotta hand it to intel for that one.

It will be interesting to see how quickly these proprietary SSDs in MacPros can be changed as an example, for peasants like myself, or some huge company who just bought 100 of them.
Old 3 days ago
  #1048
Lives for gear
 
~ufo~'s Avatar
Cooling is another advantage of a tower.

However, I doubt the PCIe nature of Audio cards has that much advantages over TB if at all.
Avid have dropped the hd native card and now only offers the TB version.

Somehow I doubt there’s something inherently beneficial about being PCIe vs TB, in audio world. I suppose it’s cheaper. But what else?
Bandwidth doesn’t seem a problem. TB can daisy chain... it can be integrated into a converter unit.
Really... what’s the big advantage of PCIe since TB?
If my cheese grater had TB I’d trade in my HD Native card for the TB version without a doubt.
Old 3 days ago
  #1049
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wattsy View Post
Yup, which is why for guitarists that don’t need the features or craftsmanship of an expensive guitar are better off choosing a cheaper option better suited to their needs...
I own some pretty expensive guitars and some pretty cheap ones. I play all of them roughly as much. What does that say about me?
Old 3 days ago
  #1050
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sascha Franck View Post
I own some pretty expensive guitars and some pretty cheap ones. I play all of them roughly as much. What does that say about me?
While I think we’ve gotten about as much use out of this analogy as we can, I’d say the only thing I can gather about that statement is that you like guitars.

I too have fairly expensive guitars that I have no right owning given my horrendous playing. I also have cheap $150 knock offs. I like guitars. I like computers.
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump
Forum Jump