PC Quad-core + Pro Tools & Cubase or iMac + Pro Tools & Cubase

[Carkus]

Hi there I really need help on making this decision!
I already have a PC:
Quad-core 2.33Ghz
4 Gig RAM
500 Gig SATA (7200 rpm)
350 Gig SATA (7200 rpm)
300 Gig SATA (7200 rpm)
Crappy PCI Firewire card
Windows 7 64-bit (Evaluation Copy)
Windows 7 32-bit (Evaluation copy)
Windows SP 3 (Currently in use)
Pro-Tools M-powered 8 (Not working)
Cubase Sx3 (Working)
BFD 2 (Working)
M-Audio Profire 2626 (Not working due to FW card)
Emu 0404 (Working)
I've been hacking to get Pro tools working for a while and have almost thrown in the towl. So i've decided to have a look at the 24" iMac
2.93GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
4GB memory
640GB hard drive1
8x double-layer SuperDrive
+ External Firewire hard drive 1TB
I really want to get all apps and hardware running smoothly with no errors. Should i spend 70$ on a top notch FW Card, pimp out the PC a bit more and wait for all software apps to come out with thier Windows 7 64-bit versions (not knowing how long that will take!), to get the PC working to its full potential,..... or should I buy the iMac (is there any other type of Mac in that price rage that has better performance?). I am new to Mac so a bit reluctant on spending so much money .. . . . .... ... please hepl.

[richiebee]

Dilemma indeed. Digidesign is way behind on 64 bit compatibility anyway, so maybe a Mac is your best choice at this time. Unfortunately, when 64 bit hits the big time which will happen soon, you might be left somewhat in the dark. Whether that will affect you may well depend on how you use your DAW and whether the spec of the Mac will stress it now. Remember that the iMac is not very upgradable.

Cubase SX will not run on an Intel Mac by the way. Or if it does, it will be unstable. It was never designed to run on an Intel Mac - it pre-dates them. So, if you want to keep using Cubase and you want to go the Mac route, you'll need to upgrade.

I'm curious as to why you want to use Cubase and Protools. You can work with Cubase in the same way as with ProTools (ie, all editing in the main project window) so workflow shouldn't have an impact. Are there features that ProTools gives you that Cubase doesn't?

[Carkus]

I've been using Cubase Sx3 for a while so i'm familiar with the interface, i have never used Pro Tools and have heard people going on about how Pro Tools is the "industry standard" and its so easy to use. I thought i would give it a go but i never realised that it was so fickle on a PC. I'm starting to think i might go Mac pro and Cubase 5. That will sort out the upgrade and Cubase issue and i won't have to upgrade for quite some time.The only thing that is holding me back is i could be using the money for acoustic treatment which i really need. I really want to do live recording in a awsome sounding room but i think its going to be harder than i thought. To me Mac's are overpriced.

[brandondrury]

i have never used Pro Tools and have heard people going on about how Pro Tools is the "industry standard"

It's not the home recording industry standard. http://www.recordingreview.com/blog/...ard-mentality/

The only thing that is holding me back is i could be using the money for acoustic treatment which i really need.

This is where it gets fun. We can play around with new gadgetry or we can actually put effort into making better sounding music.

This is a no brainer and deep down you know it. Put $2k into bass traping and use what you've got. Those bass traps will still be there long after your new Mac or PC are doorstops.

Brandon

[Carkus]

I agree! I i need to focus more on the quality of sound in the room rather than having a over fancy PC. Thanks for the help!

[brandondrury]

I already have a PC:
Quad-core 2.33Ghz

It seems to me you already have a fancy PC.

Brandon

[richiebee]

Originally Posted by Carkus

I've been using Cubase Sx3 for a while so i'm familiar with the interface, i have never used Pro Tools and have heard people going on about how Pro Tools is the "industry standard" and its so easy to use. I thought i would give it a go but i never realised that it was so fickle on a PC. I'm starting to think i might go Mac pro and Cubase 5. That will sort out the upgrade and Cubase issue and i won't have to upgrade for quite some time.The only thing that is holding me back is i could be using the money for acoustic treatment which i really need. I really want to do live recording in a awsome sounding room but i think its going to be harder than i thought. To me Mac's are overpriced.

Cubase isn't 64 bit on Macs yet. It is in Windows though. What's more, Cubase is known to perform better in Windows than in OSX.

If you're sticking with Cubase, I would keep the computer you have. Maybe wipe the hard drive if things are really screwed up, and start with a nice clean machine.

For what its worth, we went with ProTools where I work in 2005 pretty much to enable us to interact with the clients that use our facilities. We've not had to swap ProTools files with a single client. Many don't use it for starters, so we end up giving consolidated wave files instead. They can still take it away and mix... there's no need to be compatible unless you're someone who will start a project in one place, maybe take it home to do some editing, bring it back the next day to mix, take it home... blah, blah. Not many people do that. Start on one DAW, finish on another, yeah maybe, but not flit between them like crazy. That's pretty much recipe for mixing disaster, particularly if both venues aren't acoustically treated to a high level.

ProTools and industry standard are irrelevant to most people in the home recording world. If you want to learn it to be prepared for work in a large studio, its relevant. If you don't have those immediate career aspirations, then its not.

[Chingas]

Treat Your Room.

It's that simple Brother. So long as you have a way to record right now, then treat your room first. Everything else comes later.

As for the PC, sounds like your running an 8000 series cpu. If that's the case, most likely on the LGA 775 socket, for a fraction of the cost of a new PC and from the leftover money you'll have from the treatments, hook yourself up with the 3.0GHz cpu for that slot. You'd be looking at the Q9650 from Intel. That yields you an extra 8MB of L2 Cache over the 8200. This will help out your PC overall as mixing in the box stresses out your PC worse than Sandra herself!

I know you are running XP SP3 and I despise Vista but even the RTM copy of 7 isn't ready for what you want to do...drivers! If you find compatible drivers for 7, use it. Be warned tho, 64 bit OS means nothing when it has to scale back to 32 for all processing tasks within a given program. It's less strain on the computer to install 32 only then to run 64 and scale back to 32 for whichever DAW you select to use.

So here's the deal. I'm not sure which Mobo you got your rig sitting on but you might want to think about maxing the Ram. 4 2GB sticks will kill your 4GB max now. XP puts a stranglehold on the max Ram it really sees but if you trick out 7 you can go up to 32GB I believe. 7 should also allow you to add USB sticks and use them as virtual memory to aid in the process of real time audio plug-ins and mixing in the box. Take a look at what you got and hook it up for the meantime. Then when all is said and done, look new next year.

Hope this helps.

[Carkus]

I've sold my Quad-core and bought the new quad-core Mac Pro. I got cash for my PC quadcore and the Mac i'm paying off over 36 months. So i've ended up adding the money from the pc quad-core to my acoustic treatment lumpsumand and hopefully be able to get a wodden floor put in. Thanks for the help, i will have before and after pictures when its done. Independent media! Kick ass

[Chingas]

Another great idea. Good luck with your endeavors.