Article:  |
The Ultimate Portable Studio | |
| Subject: | Not a hugely impressive article. | |
| Date: | 2005-07-04 09:15:49 | |
| From: | Lovemoose | |
|
Response to: Not a hugely impressive article.
|
||
|
"a disgruntled PC user" eh? Disgruntled? yes, but only about your assumption. I can "tell you from experience". PC user? yes. Mac User? guess what? yes! I work on both platforms, both professionally and privately. I have used and installed pro tools on both mac and pc. I have configured numerous flavours of mac and pc over the years. Back in 1991 I used Performer on a Classic. In 1993, I bought my first PC and Turtle Beach soundcard. "Know what hyperthreading is?" Of course I do, (and by the way, it's eminently feasible to disable/enable it without resorting to the nuclear option of a reinstall), but my argument in my comment was that if you're in possession of the level of technological understanding required to run any DAW, then you're comfortably in possession of the level of knowledge to install a pc or a mac music system. In the past it was true that it was tricky to get things to work on PC, however, I would surmise it was roughly the same level of knowledge you needed to get OMS working on a mac at the time. In truth, not that much tweaking needs to be done on either platform these days, as many happy owners of both will tell you.
|
||
Showing messages 1 through 2 of 2.
-
Not a hugely impressive article.
2005-07-04 14:57:22 gfantsaez [Reply | View]
I wrote you a long response and then my nephew quit Safari. ^%^%#*^@# Sorry for the delay in responding...
Ok let me start over again... First of all, I apologize if I ruffled any feathers calling you disgruntled. Obviously, you know your stuff and I respect everything you had to say. That doesn't mean that I agree with it.
I too started doing music on a PC in 84 using an old program called Texture. Then I moved to Sequencer Plus until I discovered the Mac Plus and Performer in 89. I switched to Opcode's Studio Vision in 91 and then Pro Tools in 95 after they implemented MIDI.
I have to speak from my own experience and say that installation on a PC is still quite a few more steps than a Mac, even in 2005. Just the simple fact that the Mac has a functional desktop (not just for shortcuts) rather than having to go to My Computer to see a hard drive, open a simple window or open a CD that was just inserted is a bit stupid in my opinion.
As I said previously, last week I went to a drummer's studio in NYC and installed the new M-Powered Pro Tools on a Laptop PC running Windows XP. We had to install two sets of drivers, disable hyperthreading and then install Pro Tools. When we booted Pro Tools, it would not recognize the hardware. We called M-Audio and had to remove and re-install the drivers twice before Pro Tools would see the hardware. The drummer would never have been able to do this installation on his own. (And you mention OMS, most people 5 years ago couldn't configure that either.) I have spent a great portion of the last ten years doing support, installation and training around the country and I can tell you that when I convert a PC user to a Mac user, they are relieved and thrilled and always say, "this is so easy, why can't PC's be this easy?" Maybe it's become 2nd nature for you, but for most professional musicians, who have spent their careers playing an instrument or working with tape machines, computers are overwhelming. The mac is less overwhelming. If you do use both, you would have to agree that there is truth to that statement.
Your 2nd paragraph talking about MIDI controllers - I agree with you that having a volume knob is convenient - but the audience to whom I was writing this artcle for, is most likely a bit intimidated by MIDI as well. Maybe not, but the Keystation 49e does have a Volume slider, just not the vast amount of sliders that the Oxygen or Radium has. I still think for "most" musicians (new to recording), the sliders are not that neccessary and not really used.
Lets talk sofware.
Digital Performer: Love the Midi - hate the Audio.
Ableton Live: Love it but don't agree that ALL music is loop based. I like thinking of music linearly, not as a series of loops. Live is great for tracking drums and playing with loop based arrangements.
Cubase: Hate it.
Nuendo: Love it. Great for post. Way too deep for most people.
Logic: Love it!! Use it for writing, especially techno/pop. Still not crazy about the audio. I feel Logic is again too deep fo most people.
Adobe Audition: Never really liked Cool Edit but haven't seen it since Adobe bought it. Would love to play with it.
Sonar: Never played with it.
Pyramix or Rosegarden: Never played with it.
As I stated in an earlier response, Pro Tools is the standard in professional music. For me, the ability to communicate musically with as many people as possible is invaluable. But, I would switch software in a heartbeat if I saw something better. I just haven't when it comes to dealing with audio. Pro Tools is the most like a visual tape machine to me. For Midi, I agree PT is not the big cheese but Pro Tools 6.9 made some major MIDI improvements. For songs consisting of mosly acoustic instruments but also have a pad or piano, I'll use Pro Tools for MIDI. For songs written primarily with MIDI instruments, I use Logic. Then I export my Audio instruments in Logic and do all the drums, vocals and guitars in Pro Tools.
I never said that PC's were for accountants. I said that the Mac was made for creativity and it is. It ships with software to do music, photos, video, etc and the Apple software is simple, brilliantly designed and easy to use. It all works together. Your iTunes shows up in iPhoto and your iPhoto shows up in iDVD and etc etc etc... There's a reason that Apple Computer is doing so well. They deserve their success. They appeal to a market that wants to spend less time figuring out how to use their computers and more time being creative. This might peave you a litttle bit (and I don't mean to) but I feel that the Mac also appeals to people who are willing to spend more to get more. So, what is your oninion, if PC's are so easy to use and great for music, why don't more pro's use them? Why does most every major studio in the country have Macs in the studio and PC's in the office?
Again, I'm just debating with you. I really appreciate your comments and wish you and your PC a long, happy life together.
Gina
I'm a Mac systems administrator and programmer and I have dealings with opinionated and ignorant Windows users from time to time. They typically have no experience with Mac OS X and tend to project their own experiences (of fragile and insecure systems) onto the Mac platform. They also fail to see that the PC market is so disparate that one Windows user's experience can not be generalized as the common experience for all Windows users. We Mac users have a different experience. When I read that the Mac is "more creative and less technical", I know exactly what you mean. That's my experience too. In my opinion the user interface may be a large part it but this may be debated. After all we've seen poor interfaces become accepted and their limitations overcome with practice (take the QWERTY keyboard as an example). I think more compelling reasons for Mac's superiority in creative fields are its platform integration and reliability. Apple integrates the hardware and software to work together as a single platform. This gives us the common Mac experience. Add to this the Mac's lack of vulnerabilities that commonly plague Windows and its robust UNIX subsystem and you have an extremely reliable and rock-solid computer. These are the things that ultimately give credence to your statement. I also like to think that Apple's GUI guidelines and Aqua, by contributing intuitive and joyful interfaces, contribute to one's productivity as well.