How Much Processer Do I Need? Options

[pigtails]

i am looking to buy a g4 powermac to run protools on. for the time being i will be using protools free, with a view to purchasing a m box later in the year. my tutor at college told me it's best to get a g4 with 1gig processor. however i have come across someone selling a g4 powermac and it's got 800mhz processor, 512ram 40gighard drive and is running os9 and os10.2. i am under the impression that i need os9 to run certain plug ins- if u know what i mean. i dont really understand about os. the bloke says it boots up in either os9 or os10. will this make a difference as to how it will run?
i'm really confused.......please help me.

[duelectrum]

Hi, I will tell you what's my experience with ProTools Free, maybe it will help you.
I use a '98 iMac (G3 233) with 160 MB RAM. This is a pretty old computer, but I can tell you that I never had problems with it. Just when I added a soft synth (Absynth), I've got problems with getting out of CPU, but this has nothing to do with ProTools itself, but with Absynth. Consider that ProTools Free offers just 8 audio tracks, so it doesn't take lots of processor capacity to handle this.
In case you install M-Box, you will get a ProTools 5 Light Edition in the bundle, which allows you to record more audio tracks, but what takes more processing performance are the plug-ins you will use (and how much you will use simultaneously on the same track).
Anyway, I think that if you buy this computer mainly for use with this version of ProTools, you will be well served even with an used 500 MHz G3.
Even if you have OS X installed, ProTools Free and LE will just run under Mac OS 9 (classic).

[Synthetic]

here is a good example for you

I run PTLE 5.3 on a 350mhz G3 and up to 30 tracks of audio and sometimes midi with up to 4-8 plugs running. Sometimes its sluggish with all that going on but it handles it.

So... IMHO a g4800 will work well for you... but the only consideration is buying a an older computer puts in the middle of the cycle of upgrading.... meaning, as fast as computers get... newer software requirements require newer computers and you may feel compelled to upgrade you computer or CPU sooner than if you had bought one the faster models out. Makes sense? The idealogy is to always buy the fastest computer you can afford as it will last longer before the need to upgrade but sometimes saving some cash means more

[boze]

'always buy the fastest computer you can afford'?? that seems like kind of a sweeping statement to me. just because it's what i always do doesn't mean it's right for everyone! =)

in fact, i think there are plenty of cases when somebody can say 'this G4 is good enough and i'll keep some money left over for that _______(soundcard or other piece of gear)!'

pigtails, what's yer budget? sometimes it's easier to give advice when the money available is right there to be factored in. a G4 800 is fine to do lots of stuff but for any price >$1100 it becomes less of a value.

i think synthetics comment about that 350mhz G3 is misleading. don't expect to get 60 tracks of audio and 16 plugins on your G4 800 just because it's twice as fast as his old beige or whatever. if you anticipate using soft synths and plugin effects, just bare in mind that they are very processor intensive. still, a machine like the one you're considering could do fine running a half dozen or so of the less beastly vst instruments with some room left over for effects and plenty of audio tracks. this sort of thing is a ballancing act, and you pay for more headroom so you can produce freely and worry about it less.

all that said, i think a G4 800 is an okay machine for a beginning audio producer, but i'd really rather know the pricetag to draw conclusions about value and what kind of performance you should be getting for that money.

oh-- and one last thing:
not sure if you know this- but used mac hardware is sometimes a bit of a rip-off because folks on ebay are just silly for the stuff and will pay more than it's worth for it. this is a boon for mac hw owners but can make it awkward when you're looking at getting a used G4 tower from a friend. the friend can be like 'well they're going for $1200 on ebay so i'll sell it to you for $1050, buddy!' and in reality the best thing to do is to let the friend sell it on ebay and get a refurb 12" pbook from the apple store for $1199. or something like that, ya know?

let us know what happens.

[Synthetic]

'always buy the fastest computer you can afford'?? that seems like kind of a sweeping statement to me. just because it's what i always do doesn't mean it's right for everyone! =)

in fact, i think there are plenty of cases when somebody can say 'this G4 is good enough and i'll keep some money left over for that _______(soundcard or other piece of gear)!'

i think synthetics comment about that 350mhz G3 is misleading. don't expect to get 60 tracks of audio and 16 plugins on your G4 800 just because it's twice as fast as his old beige or whatever. if you anticipate using soft synths and plugin effects, just bare in mind that they are very processor intensive. still, a machine like the one you're considering could do fine running a half dozen or so of the less beastly vst instruments with some room left over for effects and plenty of audio tracks. this sort of thing is a ballancing act, and you pay for more headroom so you can produce freely and worry about it less.

ok... ummm when I say buy that fastest CPU you can... "afford" I didn't say forget any other gear purchases and spend it all on the CPU. The idea is buy only what you absolutely need and spend as much of your budget on your CPU as possible. So if you budget is $1500 and you need an audio interface too... then figure out what is best audio interface that will work for your needs and spend rest on CPU. Obviously, its not goinna the best idea to spend whole $1500 on CPU and then let it sit while you save money for audio interface use your head... buy only what you need and spend as much as possible for fastest CPU. You will appreciate that later as you upgrade your OS (each OS upgrade requires more muscle from the CPU) or when you upgrade any of your music software. There is some new stuff that is like Moog Modular plug that barely runs a G4 400mhz machine by itself. So if you don't have any interest in the new apps or systems that come out... then ignore the "buy fastest CPU" theory as its not important. But I don't know many people that think like this myself. I have an older system and let me say that's no fun wishing you could run some of the new stuff including OSX but I now sit wishing to upgrade.

What i mentioed about the my G3 system is only misleading if you assume. Never assume anything. One of life's biggest mistakes. I only mentioned it as an example of what is possible. Obviously, you are still limited by A) hardware (drives and CPU) B) software (PTLE is limited to 32 tracks now).

I agree with you mostly as most of what you said is a recap of my post... I only didn't mention saving money for other gear because this seemed obvious

Used Macs are like Harley's, Honda's, or Toyota's really... they are more in demand (and componets last longer) than used PC's and thus they hold their value better. Shop around and if you are not in a hurry... you can find some good deals on used computers as people replace them with newer ones

This post has been edited by Synthetic: Wed 24 Sep 2003, 23:11

[wizeman]

Just a quick q...

I *have* a iMac G4/800, and today use it only for MIDI. The audio goes to a Korg D8 (8 track HD recorder) but I feel I really need more audio tracks (submix after submix and copying ahead doesn't cut it anymore). Am I right in assuming, then, that a (for instance) FireWire M-410 would enable me to get something like *off the top of my head* a 24 track audio recorder using Cubase SX and still have enough CPU headroom over for effects (pretty standard stuff, like some reverbs etc)? Price-wise the difference is huge between that interface and buying a bigger stand-alone HD recorder like the Korg D1600 or Roland 24-track etc. Any comment?

[Synthetic]

wizeman... while you seem to have plenty of CPU power to do what you want... what you may be lacking is an external drive for recording the audio on. When using your computer for recording... I think your hard drive plays a big role in how many tracks you can use... so the internal drive in your imac may work but not sure if it has the throuput to keep up with 24 tracks especially if at 24bit rates... so if you decide to take your recording to the software end... you might want to conisder an external firewire or SCSi drive

[wizeman]

Well, speak of the devil... I have a 160 GB ext FW HD that I have been running a film server on, but it crashed yesterday so I'm going to have to reformat it today (Norton, Drive 10 and DiskWarrior3 all failed to rectify the situation). So there we are :-) Thanks for the prompt reply, this def seems like the way to go. Went by the local music shop today and asked for a comparison between the Roland 24 track stand-alone and this solution; they said that while the Roland sounds better (better A/D converter), the M-Audio will sound *better* than my Korg D8. and that I should be able to have at least 16 audio tracks w effects using the G4/800. So for a reasonably modest amunt of cash (esepcially if I sell the D8 second hand, which might mean it's an even trade!) I would effectively double my recording power :-D Sure, still only 2 inputs but hey, that's what I'm used to, so...

If anyone has any reason why I shouldn't go for the M-Audio FireWire 410, now's the time to speak up ;-)

Thanks again!

[boze]

do we know folks here who have given the thumbs up to m-audio's osx drivers for the 410?

[Synthetic]

well if only 2 inputs doesn't bother you... why not conisder the Mbox (sorry I am PT fan so had to suggest)? With the Mbox and PTLE you should be able to get 32 tracks. Also the pre's on the Mbox are probably a little better than the M-audio... this is just a suggestion but really these days there are so many options