Custombuilt Music Computers

[stoersignal]

Platforms that I've seen for pre-built machines is Windows 7 or in some cases Linux, but I'd be interested in hearing Hackintosh alternatives as well, if that is allowed in the forums. I was into that until I realized building my own Mac Pro would gain me nothing and cost me more. Apple typically doesn't skimp on components.

really? i`m working on custom build hackintoshs since 4 years now. the last one i build 18 months ago and it was always way cheaper than the original AND more powerful because of overclocking options

[Stromkraft]

Platforms that I've seen for pre-built machines is Windows 7 or in some cases Linux, but I'd be interested in hearing Hackintosh alternatives as well, if that is allowed in the forums. I was into that until I realized building my own Mac Pro would gain me nothing and cost me more. Apple typically doesn't skimp on components.

really? i`m working on custom build hackintoshs since 4 years now. the last one i build 18 months ago and it was always way cheaper than the original AND more powerful because of overclocking options

As I said this was 11-12 months ago and I checked out more or less the same components (NewEgg and others): 6 or 12-core Xeon, double top of the line comparable graphic cards and all else to measure to the 2013 Mac Pro. Looking back I think I could have done with just the one graphic, which would have made it possible to construct a more attractive hardware package.
This because it turns out Ableton at least won't support the second graphics card for any non graphical computations (which I hoped for). Apple and other makers should have a standard for using graphic cards for intense work, but there isn't one that is attractive enough to Ableton at least. Of course 4 highres displays would be very cool to have in the studio, but that's not a requirement..

My thinking is, if I can save $2000 on hardware, fine. But I have to be 100% sure all components are and will be compatible with the current OS X and future versions (as far as can be reasonably expected). If I'm going to invest several thousands of dollars into a new machine I also need superfast service, if machine goes down, and reliability and replacement availability for the components.

Granted, much of the alternatives to what Apple uses in the Mac Pros, that are unknown to me, are a gamble or at least requires detailed study. No-one is guaranteeing me full compatibility when I build my own. When I buy an Apple machine most software and hardware makers give me that guarantee and usually own up to it if failing. That's worth a lot in the long run.

I feel the thinking must be the same for building Windows-based music production systems. There are readymade machines, built for the task and it's the whole thing; hardware, software, drivers, software, service, education and price that's relevant to evaluate. Price is just one factor.

So I'd put the music computer builders in the same boat here as Apple. They can guarantee me good components and reliability, in some case good service. This has to be weighed against putting together the machine of your dreams yourself and the work this entails. Of course, work is not free. However, knowledge and sharing it with other people interested in the same kind of solutions can go a long way making building your own machine attractive.

[login]

The reason of why audio apps cant use gpus is that they are not designed for real time processing.

[Stromkraft]

The reason of why audio apps cant use gpus is that they are not designed for real time processing.

Graphics are not real-time? Please elaborate.

[login]

http://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=2484010

[Stromkraft]

http://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=2484010

Thanks that's interesting. However as video codec decoding, for example, takes place under real time constraints and many graphic cards do that, it's obvious that "real-time" is a part of what graphic cards do. What user accepts late graphics rendering?
A well constructed musical app would use graphic card computations only for certain tasks. As long as there is an alleviation for the CPU(s) there could be an advantage. I suppose I/O could be a bottleneck or something else. What's clear already is that graphic cards can be applied to non-graphic tasks.

Even if you take out real time, graphic cards could be used for things like Audio rendering or other types of recalculations.

I still think lack of standards is the main obstacle here. Of course this is all speculation on my part. I find the idea reasonable, but I'll just have to accept that it's not here now.