Buying new MacBook Pro - 32 gb vs 64 gb RAM ... or should I be thinking more bout Processing Power?

[madamus]

Hi all - so I am going to be buying a new MacBook Pro and I am trying to decide between 32 gb vs 64 gb of RAM for my Ableton shenanigans.

The way I use the program (Live 10) is as follows - several (up to 8 ) channels of live audio monitoring of individual drums/cymbals using contact mic triggers. Each of those individual channels are routed to varying numbers (say 1 - 4) of tracks running combinations of amplitude triggered soft samplers (multiple iterations of apTrigga) and plugins (mostly native, some not) - whose on/off switches and other automated parameters are adjusted semi-randomly or compositionally using the launch function to change between dummy loops. I started working in this format on my mid-2012 MacBookPro that I'd upgraded to 16 gb of ram. In 2019 I got a MacMini with 32 gb of ram. That has been serving me well -- but since I started integrating cymbal triggering in with the drum triggers (before I'd be live monitoring 5 inputs - kick, snare, toms, and vocals - and now I'm monitoring 8 with the cymbals), I am running into some digital clipping in some sections of my performances. 128 samples is the largest buffer I can work with. I am running my sessions of an external SSD.

I'm trying to figure out/decide a couple things. One - is this actually a RAM issue or a processor issue that I am running in to? I'm still wrapping my head around the difference - I wonder if the fact that this is a matter of live processing as opposed to running a bunch of virtual instruments makes a difference in what I should be focusing on. Also - if the RAM is the issue I'm deciding if it is more important to use the 32 gb as a creative limitation or if I'll be kicking myself for not going for the 64 gb once I get down my creative rabbit holes and there are complex routing structures I'm wanting to explore that aren't in my systems capacity. Another consideration is that if my new laptop has 32 gb, then I could use my MacMini as a backup if I ever have an emergency issue with my laptop the day of a show, as both computers would have a similar capacity to run the sessions that I'm creating...

Any guidance / questions / perspective would be appreciated!

[Tarekith]

I've been just fine with 16GB the last few years, especially on the newer M1 Pro. I think unless you're doing heavy orchestral scoring 64GB is way overkill, and likely 32GB is too.

[[jur]]

I've been just fine with 16GB the last few years, especially on the newer M1 Pro. I think unless you're doing heavy orchestral scoring 64GB is way overkill, and likely 32GB is too.

That's exactly what I was about to answer (expect than my m1 isn't "pro").

(Well, if you really want to be on the extra mega safe side, grab a 32GB but definitely nothing more).

[Pitch Black]

If you have the budget to consider 64GB of RAM, I think it would be better spent on either 16 or 32GB and upgrading the internal SSD to the biggest you can afford. The internal SSDs are faster than any external drive can ever be, and you could then store your showloads internally, instead of having to bring the extra drive to gigs.
Two ticks

In the studio, I always run the current projects I’m working on off the internal SSD. That way I get the absolute best performance out of the system, and these projects are always getting in-progress backups as part of my daily Time Machine regemin. When the project is finished it gets archived to two external HDs and deleted from the internal drive.

[Machinesworking]

The only reason for 64GB RAM is if you're doing large orchestral pieces with hundreds of tracks, and the only area of music where IMO Live is not the go to that makes life easier would be 120+ tracks of Kontakt, Opus, UVI, VSL libraries.

So if you're using Live I don't really see the point in more than 32GB of RAM, you'll probably never come close to using it.
Getting a large internal SSD is a better choice, and it will last longer, larger SSDs are less prone to wear leveling etc.

[Calagan]

I have to disagree with most previous answers. I’m using a mid-2012 MacBook Pro on stage, with 16go of ram.
My live set features mostly plugins, vsti (for 2 midi keybords and drums triggers) and many triggered samples.
Everything is deeply optimised regarding cpu hit.
But recently I had issues and noticed it was not related to cpu but ram access : in the activity monitor I could see that Live was using more than 20go for this live set !!!
Only with plugins, samples, many automations and many vsti.
No Kontakt and orchestral stuff.

So I would advise to just check in the activity monitor how much ram your Live set is using, and decide according to that info, instead of choosing a machine you’ll not be able to upgrade based on forum generic advices...

[Machinesworking]

I have to disagree with most previous answers. I’m using a mid-2012 MacBook Pro on stage, with 16go of ram.
My live set features mostly plugins, vsti (for 2 midi keybords and drums triggers) and many triggered samples.
Everything is deeply optimised regarding cpu hit.

The triggered samples are what is eating up RAM. Warping costs RAM. I doubt 99% of Live users would go above 32GB without getting into orchestral work, but yeah I think 32GB is the sweet spot for Live.

[Calagan]

I have to disagree with most previous answers. I’m using a mid-2012 MacBook Pro on stage, with 16go of ram.
My live set features mostly plugins, vsti (for 2 midi keybords and drums triggers) and many triggered samples.
Everything is deeply optimised regarding cpu hit.

The triggered samples are what is eating up RAM. Warping costs RAM. I doubt 99% of Live users would go above 32GB without getting into orchestral work, but yeah I think 32GB is the sweet spot for Live.

Just as an info : using one instance of Reaktor Form is using 400mo, and I use 3 or 4 in my Live set, on various songs, so it's already 1.6Go.
Soundtoys Effect rack is 150mo. A soft synth (Diva, Repro, Arturia stuff) is between 25mo to 100mo.

All this stacks up, specially that a live set you use on stage is not organized like a mixing set : for each song, I'm using 4-5 different vsti at different moments, some samples for background sequences, sometimes some sampled sounds triggered from Simpler/Sampler, and plenty of mixing plugins after each synth. And I've got around 20 songs... So you are reaching easily the Go of ram use for each song.
Because the way it is organized (only the used plugins are activated for a song), the CPU is not a big issue. But I discovered that adding songs and plugins makes it super heavy !...

But the only way to know is to check the Activity Monitor. I was the first surprised by the amount of memory this set is using (even if my stage session takes 6mn to recall on my computer, so I should have some suspicions...

Anyway, I truly think each one has a specific use of Live, and should judge what machine he or she needs based on what limits his/her workflow.
I was thinking to take a 16gb ram M1 machine just by reading stuff on internet, but at the last moment I bought a 32gb one because I saw this issue in my specific workflow.
The toy should arrive in few days, I will give some feedback if someone is interested...

[Calagan]

By the way, I just checked, and the way I'm using samples doesn't use any RAM (almost).

If you just use a wav sample in a clip, without any warping (or just warp option ticked so you can launch the clip in the middle of it or after x bars), if you launch this clip when triggering a scene and don't tick the "ram" box in the clip options, it takes only few mo of RAM for a 90mo wav file...

I didn't test how much ram is used when recording a lot of stuff, specially when you do this live...

And finally, just launching an empty Live set is using 400mo - so this is the RAM Live in itself is using when it does nothing and has no plugin anywhere.

[Machinesworking]

Ten years ago I was using a MacBook with 4GB of RAM for live sets and had to be a bit careful.
I generally keep instruments and plug ins to a minimum running live. Reaktor has always been a resource hog, I'm not surprised it's pushing your set up, but realistically you should tighten up your set.

But the only way to know is to check the Activity Monitor. I was the first surprised by the amount of memory this set is using (even if my stage session takes 6mn to recall on my computer, so I should have some suspicions...

Personally I would never use a live set that took 6 minutes to load. I hope you at least bring an iPhone to plug through the system in case Live crashes or freezes during a performance.

[Calagan]

I never had any problem in 8 years of gigs.
until I added the plugin that crossed the 16go limit...

[Pitch Black]

Hi all - so I am going to be buying a new MacBook Pro...

The way I use the program (Live 10) is as follows...

It would be well worth updating to Live 11 when you get your new Mac so that it runs native on Apple silicon - do you plan to?

[fishmonkey]

So I would advise to just check in the activity monitor how much ram your Live set is using, and decide according to that info, instead of choosing a machine you’ll not be able to upgrade based on forum generic advices...

this is good advice. personally i wouldn't go lower than 32 GB if buying a new machine for the purposes mentioned in the original post.

I have to disagree with most previous answers. I’m using a mid-2012 MacBook Pro on stage, with 16go of ram.

the new MacBook Pros are very different beasts to your venerable 2012 model though. the SSD speeds blow your MBP out of the water, so virtual memory (where some SSD space is used as virtual RAM) is seamless in comparison.

[madamus]

Thanks for all of these responses everyone, this is super helpful. For more context, the largest session I'm currently working with has 70 tracks. 54 of those are live monitoring either from one of the 8 inputs audio routed from another track. At most about 40 or so are actively processing audio at any given time (though others might still be reading speaker on/off automation that is keeping them inactive). I checked my activity monitor and it looks like Live is using just over 5 GB real memory and almost 14 GB virtual memory at the point where my session sometimes clips (it doesn't happen all the time - seems to do it when I'm actually performing rather than rehearsing, of course ) And on the activity monitor the CPU is at 217%. This is on the 6 Core i7 MacMini 2018 running Live 10. 16gb is out of the question for me, it's really whether I'm going to do 32gb or 64gb.

The only reason for 64GB RAM is if you're doing large orchestral pieces with hundreds of tracks, and the only area of music where IMO Live is not the go to that makes life easier would be 120+ tracks of Kontakt, Opus, UVI, VSL libraries.

So if you're using Live I don't really see the point in more than 32GB of RAM, you'll probably never come close to using it.
Getting a large internal SSD is a better choice, and it will last longer, larger SSDs are less prone to wear leveling etc.

I think this sums things up nicely. As I mentioned above, currently my largest track count for live processing is 70. While I can certainly see myself going higher as I'm integrating more cymbal triggering into the set, I'm also considering the comments about a larger SSD. Especially because I'd have to upgrade to the Max M1 Processor (+$450) to even have the option for 64 GB (+$360 compared to 32 GB) we're talking about $800 more, as opposed to a $180 (1 TB) or $540 (2 TB) increase for SSD upgrades. So I'm gonna go with 32 gb and extra SSD space. Speaking of which - how much headroom % wise should I be guaranteeing myself? I know there is the 90% rule for not slowing down program speed... but what would really be the optimum range to keep my drive space below? I can imagine myself keeping under 500 GB on a 1 TB drive so that I maintain 50% headroom if I'm responsible about offloading what I'm not currently using onto externals... but the 2 TB is tempting too.

Another question - is there any reason I should be opting for 10 core rather than 8 core processor? If I'm maxing out 2 cores right now, does that really make much of a difference?

It would be well worth updating to Live 11 when you get your new Mac so that it runs native on Apple silicon - do you plan to?

I likely will at some point - I'm hearing a number of folks with headaches from the glitches that are still being worked out in 11, so I may hang back for a bit and let those get sorted out before I make the switch.

[[jur]]

Another question - is there any reason I should be opting for 10 core rather than 8 core processor? If I'm maxing out 2 cores right now, does that really make much of a difference?

Those new machines really are serious beasts. I'm not even sure you would touch the limit of 8 cores...

It would be well worth updating to Live 11 when you get your new Mac so that it runs native on Apple silicon - do you plan to?

I likely will at some point - I'm hearing a number of folks with headaches from the glitches that are still being worked out in 11, so I may hang back for a bit and let those get sorted out before I make the switch.

Wait... don't think about running anything less than L11.1 on a silicon mac, you will regret it.
I mean, you can do it and it will run, but not very well and your thousand dollars spent on this machine would feel like wasted money.