what runs Live better PC or MAC?

drush · Post by **drush** » Wed Nov 17, 2004 2:28 am

Desiduous wrote:can anyone reccomend a good external soundcard to use with a centrino laptop for Live performance?

echo indigo

AdamJay · Post by **AdamJay** » Wed Nov 17, 2004 2:58 am

as you are in Canada, i'd go for the Compaq R3320CA for $1699 Canadian from HP/Compaq.
Athlon 64 3000, 512MB, 60GB hd, Superdrive (DVDRW/CDRW), 802.11b/g Wifi, XP Home, etc.

www.hp.ca

its the same guts as my HP zv5000z, which is the same as the Compaq R3000z. But for some reason in Canada, HP/Compaq equips the HP's all with Intel CPU's and the Compaq's 90% with AMD cpu's.

i get great battery life, and mucho power for ableton live.

considering you're in Vancouver, if you can get or use an address in Seattle and order from HP US, i'd go with the HPzv5000z or CompaqR3000z. same specs, costs less, and you can make a custom order (faster cpu, etc.)

bensuthers · Post by **bensuthers** » Wed Nov 17, 2004 6:13 am

> We are talking about performance and raw power.

no. you are. i'm not. i'm talking about making music.

AdamJay · Post by **AdamJay** » Wed Nov 17, 2004 6:17 am

bensuthers wrote:> We are talking about performance and raw power.

no. you are. i'm not. i'm talking about making music.

i beg to differ...
the title of the thread is
what runs Live better PC or MAC?
runs being the operative word. Computers "run" programs, as in they execute code. The code for Windows is executed by x86 hardware with nearly triple the effeciency as the code for MacOS on PowerPC hardware.

was the title of the thread Which platform breeds more creativity? , or was it Can i make better music on a PC of MAC?
no, it was neither.

"We" meaning the collective US, as in all those who have replied to the original post. Replies are answers considering the post was a question.

The English language is a very specific language. But it only works when it is interpreted correctly.

dfusion · Post by **dfusion** » Wed Nov 17, 2004 6:47 am

Desiduous wrote:what runs Live better PC or MAC?

Until Apple releases a G5 Powerbook (or something that performs like a G5) then you will get more processor value for your $ with an Intel or AMD laptop if you plan to use Live. Live is about as CPU efficient as Garageband (which ain't much!). But GB is free and just a teaser to buy Logic, so I wouldn't expect it to be optimized.

Live's performance on Mac (especially a Powerbook) is not represenative of how well a Mac can perform with other applications. Logic on a Powerbook will run circles around Live. The Abletons are in denial that Altivec won't provide benefits to the G4 and G5 CPU. All plugins (VST or AU) that are Altivec optimized use less CPU than non-Altivec plugins, yet Ableton claims if they Altivec optimize Live there will be little benefit. Logic's own plugins are SUPER optimized because they are built in to the Logic software, so why can't Ableton do this with their included plugins? As of right now even Live's included plugins are mediocre with CPU usage. Maybe the Altivec debate is true with the Warp Engine, but that's only a piece of the puzzle. BTW, all of what I say applies to PC. Just replace the word "Altivec" with "Hyperthreading".

*END RANT*

j · Post by j » Wed Nov 17, 2004 7:36 am

Deeper Optimization Please!!!

toneroll · Post by **toneroll** » Wed Nov 17, 2004 2:46 pm

PC's are more powerfull than macs ... at ANYTHING...

fastest G5 in the world against a water cooled athalon 64 4000 (cheaper too. ----------------- not a bleedin chance . sorry ...

its a choice of powerfull pc or a stylish trendy mac....

coz in the future it wont matter check this http://www.transitive.com/

ill be able to run all the exclusive MAC progs on my rig soon

[/url]

dfusion · Post by **dfusion** » Wed Nov 17, 2004 5:04 pm

toneroll wrote:its a choice of powerfull pc or a stylish trendy mac....

Are you suggesting a PC is not stylish? Or trendy? What would you consider a PC? Please explain.

drush · Post by **drush** » Wed Nov 17, 2004 5:08 pm

dfusion wrote:
Desiduous wrote:what runs Live better PC or MAC?
Until Apple releases a G5 Powerbook (or something that performs like a G5) then you will get more processor value for your $ with an Intel or AMD laptop if you plan to use Live.

hate to beat this dead horse, but it's very likely that you'll always get more value for your $ when it comes to running Live with a PC (with the current code configuration of Live). imagine how much a G5 powerbook is going to cost.... my AMD laptop already outperforms the 2.5ghz G5 desktop that costs at least twice as much.

peterkirn · Post by **peterkirn** » Wed Nov 17, 2004 6:51 pm

Okay, folks. My PowerBook G4 / 1GHz is now sitting 2" from my 1.4G Pentium M Toshiba. They're both superb machines, they both have their ups and downs, neither is for everyone.

1. You will get more Live performance out of a PC laptop than a Mac dollar-for dollar. I haven't seen anyone effectively argue otherwise. For whatever reason, Live (looking at ONLY that app) tends to run lighter on the CPU on roughly comparable laptops. I've tried moving the same file among laptops.

2. This hasn't stopped ANY Mac users from performing with Live, and generally here in NYC I see about 75% Macs running Live in performance. The difference just isn't a dealbreaker, especially if you're careful about signal routing and CPU load which is an essential skill on EITHER platform.

3. Overall value is another matter. If you're a huge Windows fan and know every last Registry hack, you're not going to get much value out of a shiny new PowerBook. If you want some of the slick advantages of OS X and the iApps and find the Mac easier to use, don't listen to the PC users, get what you want.

I don't think there is a definitive answer as to which platform to get, because I'd be really surprised if there's a user for whom the choice doesn't matter at all EXCEPT for performance in Live.

I've been impressed by some of the free software on Windows and the wealth of hardware options. My Toshiba was dirt-cheap and runs great. It's solid, well-built hardware. On the other hand, I curse at it regularly because it lacks FireWire 800, gigabit Ethernet, and bus-powered FireWire and has several times hosed its own M-Audio drivers. These are all things I take for granted on the Mac.

Look, I think if anyone claims the choice is black-and-white or one is broadly superior in every category, they just don't know the two platforms. But, hey, I also appreciate loyalties and passions, so I won't try to dissuade either platform. I'll just keep making music on both. And maybe lug my old Apple IIc to my next gig, just to really confuse people. :-)

Peter Kirn, createdigitalmusic.com

MarkH · Post by **MarkH** » Wed Nov 17, 2004 10:33 pm

Peter - Very well said.

bensuthers · Post by **bensuthers** » Wed Nov 17, 2004 10:35 pm

well, ok.

you're all right.

i'm wrong.

(but very comfortable).

toneroll · Post by **toneroll** » Wed Nov 17, 2004 11:23 pm

all i meant dfusion was that for cheap you can build a well powerfull pc , but it might not look like a g5 or have one of those big glass flat screens.. apple put money into makin their shit look good and thats reflected in their price... you cant uprade it yourself and cant overclock it.. a pc you can, but the case might be an ugly fucker...

pax · Post by **pax** » Thu Nov 18, 2004 1:49 am

Those big fancy screens are also SWOP certified, meaning that they are calibrated so that the colors you see are the colors a printer sees. It's great for color proofing.. PCs are clumsy at best for color proofing.

Won't do you any good if you just play music, but there are many reasons why artists choose mac including tight video/audio/print integration.

My home computer is a Athlon 3400+. I love it for what it is, but if someone wants to trade me for a g5 with a 23-inch HD monitor please message me and we'll talk.

php · Post by **php** » Thu Nov 18, 2004 2:08 am

dfusion wrote:
Desiduous wrote:what runs Live better PC or MAC?
Until Apple releases a G5 Powerbook (or something that performs like a G5) then you will get more processor value for your $ with an Intel or AMD laptop if you plan to use Live. Live is about as CPU efficient as Garageband (which ain't much!). But GB is free and just a teaser to buy Logic, so I wouldn't expect it to be optimized.

Live's performance on Mac (especially a Powerbook) is not represenative of how well a Mac can perform with other applications. Logic on a Powerbook will run circles around Live. The Abletons are in denial that Altivec won't provide benefits to the G4 and G5 CPU. All plugins (VST or AU) that are Altivec optimized use less CPU than non-Altivec plugins, yet Ableton claims if they Altivec optimize Live there will be little benefit. Logic's own plugins are SUPER optimized because they are built in to the Logic software, so why can't Ableton do this with their included plugins? As of right now even Live's included plugins are mediocre with CPU usage. Maybe the Altivec debate is true with the Warp Engine, but that's only a piece of the puzzle. BTW, all of what I say applies to PC. Just replace the word "Altivec" with "Hyperthreading".

*END RANT*

I agree, Altivec optimization would make a tremendous difference with software instruments and effects like reverb that are floating-point intensive. It has less to do with enhancing multitrack recording capability, but I want to use Live as a softsynth host and not a 64+ track audio recorder. I just got Logic Express 7 and it is noticeably more optimized to my Mac than Live 4 is. Trouble is that even with the increased efficiency of LE7, I much prefer working with Live 4. Now if Ableton finally gets Altivec support for Live, I have a feeling that I won't be using Logic Express 7 much at all.

what runs Live better PC or MAC?

Re: what runs Live better PC or MAC?

Re: what runs Live better PC or MAC?

Let's settle this once and for all!

Re: Let's settle this once and for all!

Re: what runs Live better PC or MAC?