MI ULTRA! Mac Studio

[sdelsolray]

PACE, makers of the iLok software protection products, announced yesterday that it was releasing native Apple Silicon iLok software for developers and end users. Many DAW and plugin makers have been waiting for this step. End users need to download and install iLok License Manager v 5.5.0 and synchronize their licenses with their iLok(s) and perhaps with the cloud (if they are using that to verify licenses for their computer).

[KevWind]

Originally Posted by sdelsolray

PACE, makers of the iLok software protection products, announced yesterday that it was releasing native Apple Silicon iLok software for developers and end users. Many DAW and plugin makers have been waiting for this step. End users need to download and install iLok License Manager v 5.5.0 and synchronize their licenses with their iLok(s) and perhaps with the cloud (if they are using that to verify licenses for their computer).

I saw that this morning that is good news .

[AcousticDreams]

I was hoping someone could explain these comments I saw in a discussion in Gearspace(which KevWind was also involved in)

I could have asked this question over there...However...I enjoy so much more the discussion on AGF Recording. More down to earth and more fact based here.

Here is what was said, that I do not quite understand:

"There is way too less talk about singe core speed with audio production which is exactly the same between M1 Pro, Max and Ultra. You just add cores (and graphic power) and therefore parallel processing capabilities.
Question is: Does one's workflow need more multicore power or more single core power? I tend to run out of juice with heavy plugin load with oversampling enabled with my M1 Pro on a single core. My sessions don't even make use of all ten cores.
Performance wouldn't change with Max or Ultra or more RAM.
I don't know anyone who ran out of multi core performance with M1 in audio production. "

When further asked as to what his chain was when he ran out in single core he said:

"It's bus chains with Soothe 2, TDR SlickEQ, Pulsar Mu, FabFilter L2, Saturn 2, etc.
They are all quite heavy on CPU load when used with oversampling. And I already max out the buffer size and I don't chose the highest oversampling."

Don't quite understand what is meant by single core? Don't all the cores get used? Isn't that the advantage of having multiple cores to share the load?

[KevWind]

Originally Posted by Knives&Guitars

I was hoping someone could explain these comments I saw in a discussion in Gearspace(which KevWind was also involved in)

I could have asked this question over there...However...I enjoy so much more the discussion on AGF Recording. More down to earth and more fact based here.

Here is what was said, that I do not quite understand:

"There is way too less talk about singe core speed with audio production which is exactly the same between M1 Pro, Max and Ultra. You just add cores (and graphic power) and therefore parallel processing capabilities.
Question is: Does one's workflow need more multicore power or more single core power? I tend to run out of juice with heavy plugin load with oversampling enabled with my M1 Pro on a single core. My sessions don't even make use of all ten cores.
Performance wouldn't change with Max or Ultra or more RAM.
I don't know anyone who ran out of multi core performance with M1 in audio production. "

When further asked as to what his chain was when he ran out in single core he said:

"It's bus chains with Soothe 2, TDR SlickEQ, Pulsar Mu, FabFilter L2, Saturn 2, etc.
They are all quite heavy on CPU load when used with oversampling. And I already max out the buffer size and I don't chose the highest oversampling."

Don't quite understand what is meant by single core? Don't all the cores get used? Isn't that the advantage of having multiple cores to share the load?

I am no computer wiz so take with a grain of salt But as I understand it some tasks in DAW audio recording and mixing are written to only take advantage of a single core and some are written to take advantage of multi core performance BUT I do not know which ones are written for single and which ones are written for multi.

I am not really certain what that guy was saying or why he claims to be maxing out an M1 Pro chip unless all the plugins algorithms he is using are only written for single core maybe ??? I don't know

But his initial statement may be referring to something along the lines of this I just googled

The M1 Max, which is currently available in Apple's MacBook Pro, achieved a single-core score of 1,739 and a multi-core score of 11,680 in the same Geekbench testing. While the single-core scores are roughly comparable, the M1 Ultra's multi-core scores are 105% higher than the M1 Max..

And this

Single core performance is important to process one audio stream (a track or bus with all plugins). But there is so much more going on in a DAW than processing just one audio stream (DAW software is very complicated software). All DAW tasks combined do take advantage of more cores.

So I don't think the single core performance is the only measure of potential DAW performance as the guy on GS was alluding

BTW "Geekbench" is one of a number of computer performance test programs, that guys like Max Tech will use and reference in their Performance videos

[FrankHudson]

Originally Posted by Knives&Guitars

I was hoping someone could explain these comments I saw in a discussion in Gearspace(which KevWind was also involved in)

I could have asked this question over there...However...I enjoy so much more the discussion on AGF Recording. More down to earth and more fact based here.

Here is what was said, that I do not quite understand:

"There is way too less talk about singe core speed with audio production which is exactly the same between M1 Pro, Max and Ultra. You just add cores (and graphic power) and therefore parallel processing capabilities.
Question is: Does one's workflow need more multicore power or more single core power? I tend to run out of juice with heavy plugin load with oversampling enabled with my M1 Pro on a single core. My sessions don't even make use of all ten cores.
Performance wouldn't change with Max or Ultra or more RAM.
I don't know anyone who ran out of multi core performance with M1 in audio production. "

When further asked as to what his chain was when he ran out in single core he said:

"It's bus chains with Soothe 2, TDR SlickEQ, Pulsar Mu, FabFilter L2, Saturn 2, etc.
They are all quite heavy on CPU load when used with oversampling. And I already max out the buffer size and I don't chose the highest oversampling."

Don't quite understand what is meant by single core? Don't all the cores get used? Isn't that the advantage of having multiple cores to share the load?

Before I try to make a simple answer to a complex situation, let me repeat: you're over-thinking, over-worrying. Increasing your pre-purchase study will not smooth your way, you'd do better to save your energy to getting a new system up and running and over any teething problems IMHO.

How software uses multicores and other resources is complicated. Some software wasn't (and still isn't) written to efficiently use multiple cores. How parts of tasks get divvied up by computers is also a complex process too. Are multicores only of value with "special" software written with their cores in mind? Far from it. Evey modern computer is running scores of processes all the time, and any complex DAW project add scores (pun not intended) as well.

As a theoretical question, the other person's problem mentioned above has some interest, but it doesn't help you. Primarily we can't be sure that their analysis of multiple plugs ins running out of CPU power in one of the cores causing problems is correct. They can propose that theory because yes some software is more single core oriented. Why is that a mooted point for you? You don't know what software you'll be running in what density yet, and you can't "bench race" this problem to determine this because neither of us are experts in these matters. It's highly unlikely you'll become such an expert before buying.

The following is said with respect and honest concern, though I may be applying excessive corporal punishment to an expired draft animal. You need to get your new system and start your project, which may include some learning and trial and error etc, That will reduce the range of possible "could this go wrong?" worries to a smaller set of concrete concerns and learning curves -- and I say this because I'm just as prone to research purchases as you are.

If one of your chief concerns is being able to work on your project this year, with the fewest possible new hardware, new OS, new Apple Silicon issues* then get one of the still being sold Intel Apple Minis as I mention upthread. It may come with Big Sur (one Mac OS version back) -- and if not, Big Sur is likely installable. This is not likely the best "six year solution" for the lifetime of the computer, but it will minimize your issues in those above areas as you begin and maybe even finish your project. **


*Please, quick readers, this is not a knock on Apple Silicon! There's some really nice performance an efficiency being demonstrated with this generation. I just know that a lot of complex musical projects were successfully done on hardware such as this, so it's not an unworkable choice in 2022. If I were in K&G's place, I'd probably bust my budget a bit with a close to entry level Mac Studio myself.

**So, if a new, still sold, Intel Mac Mini with a modern I5 or I7 isn't a good six-year solution what does one do in 2026 or so when it may be an unsupported system or considered not powerful enough anymore? Some folks find use for such systems anyway (running Linux, or limited audio recording duties divorced from general computing or extensive VI use). Or you could sell it. If you buy one in 2022 you should still get a year of Apple Care free, and for now the ability to run the newest version of Mac OS if desired and install the latest version of Apple Logic Pro.

[jim1960]

Originally Posted by FrankHudson

Before I try to make a simple answer to a complex situation, let me repeat: you're over-thinking, over-worrying. Increasing your pre-purchase study will not smooth your way, you'd do better to save your energy to getting a new system up and running and over any teething problems IMHO.

Victor, I agree with what Frank is saying... you do seem to have a tendency to get yourself deep in the brush and spend so much time trying to find the "best possible" that the art takes a back seat to the tech.

Where things stand with Apple computers right now ...today... you can spend a bit more to gain some future-proofing (however, we cannot quantize that since we have no way to know future software requirements) or you can spend less and know you're fine in the short-term. So weigh the pros and cons then pick a direction. Either way you go, you can feel pretty assured you'll be set for some years.

[KevWind]

Just to add one more thought to what Frank and Jim are saying

Way back in the 70's and when I was selling Consumer to Audiophile level stereo gear ... My first advice to people shopping (and it still applies to pro audio gear as well ) .....was. " Come up with a realistic budget range First , because there is usually steady improvement from entry level to upper midlevel price ranges. And so to not go off the rails or "round and round and round in circle game" (as per Joni)

[AcousticDreams]

Originally Posted by FrankHudson

Before I try to make a simple answer to a complex situation, let me repeat: you're over-thinking, over-worrying. Increasing your pre-purchase study will not smooth your way, you'd do better to save your energy to getting a new system up and running and over any teething problems IMHO.

It's highly unlikely you'll become such an expert before buying.

The following is said with respect and honest concern, though I may be applying excessive corporal punishment to an expired draft animal. You need to get your new system and start your project, which may include some learning and trial and error etc, That will reduce the range of possible "could this go wrong?" worries to a smaller set of concrete concerns and learning curves -- and I say this because I'm just as prone to research purchases as you are.

If I were in K&G's place, I'd probably bust my budget a bit with a close to entry level Mac Studio myself.

Originally Posted by jim1960

Victor, I agree with what Frank is saying... you do seem to have a tendency to get yourself deep in the brush and spend so much time trying to find the "best possible" that the art takes a back seat to the tech.

I so much appreciate all of you have great advice and help you given to me on AGF Recording. I would not be where I stand today if it was not for my AGF brothers. You have spoken words so true about my thinking process.

I am a huge believer, that there is no one way...no absolutely way, no right way of achieving a goal. Each of us has our way of operating. Each of us has our way of getting to our desired point. Each of us has our Limitations. And for myself, Preparatory work is the answer.

I have already made several mistakes over the last 6 years in buying microphones, preamps and interfaces thinking they would be good enough. But they weren't. Now I am happy with my gear, again thanks to the suggestions right here on the forum. Computers are not as easy to buy and sell as mics & preamps. it is not like a guitar that you can play and say...o.k this is right for me. Or like a Microphone that you can sing into and say " hey that sounds like how I want to be represented. Knowing exactly what I will be getting into and how to prepare for it is the only way to make sure I am making the right decision.

Being an analog man, one who builds or refinishes his own furniture, makes his own wood arrows, was a custom maker of knives entirely made by hand, and a commercial photographer in the analog days = I understand the pathways of putting things together with earth's elements. With analog, you can handle the parts...you can see how the parts might go together. you can add or subtract parts and configure to your own liking.

In the digital world....I have no understanding how the parts go together. Instead I must rely on the information stated. I can not take apart my apple and modify it to my liking, like I can with my guitar, steel, wood. So research, research and having a good understanding before hand of what I may face, is the path I need to take with computers.

I had already pretty much made up my mind that I am going to get the Mac Studio with MI MAX chip. Even though I know there will be some problems( as others have mentioned), it still makes the most sense to me. But even though I have pretty much already made up my mind , I still doesn't hurt to explore exactly what I will be in for.

There is no immediate hurry for me to start recording. A couple of months from now will be just fine. I still have songs to complete. I still have more acoustic panels to build. Modifications to do on my acoustic guitars. Heck, I have not even tried out several pieces of my new recording gear yet. And I have had my Demeter Preamp now for several months and not even turned it on.

Have no doubt...I will get a new computer....most likely the Mac Studio with Max chip. In the meantime....ha ha ha ha...I will ask questions. It is my nature. I will try and prepare myself so that I at the very least, know where to get help.

In the end, You can not take the stripes out of this Zebra and make him a Horse. I am a in this example...a Zebra who's stripes are etched into my skin. Questions are my stripes.

[jim1960]

Originally Posted by Knives&Guitars

Have no doubt...I will get a new computer....most likely the Mac Studio with Max chip. In the meantime....ha ha ha ha...I will ask questions.

I'm betting the Mac Studio with the M1 Max chip will keep you viable for the next decade. It feels like we've really turned a corner and we finally have computers within reach that can handle anything we through at them. I've never been in a reality where I didn't have to work around the limitations of my studio computer. The software always seemed to want a bit more than the computer could deliver. The M1 chips look like they're putting that behind us.

As to current compatibility issues, those will get worked out ...they always do. As anyone who has been working on Macs for a long time knows, we don't jump on a new OS. We wait ...and we wait ...and we wait. I'm very happy for others to discover the compatibility problems while I continue to use the older OS that has no compatibility problems. That's just how it is and I accepted that many years ago. I'm figuring to make the leap to Mac Studio in the beginning of 2023.

Here's something that appears to be true and helpful to know... when Mac announces a new OS, any computer you buy before the launch date will ship with the previous OS even if it ships AFTER the launch date.
Why is that helpful?
Let's say all or nearly all the kinks are worked on Monterey by the end of this year and Apple announces a new OS will drop on 01 Feb 2023. From what I've observed, if you order a computer on 31 Jan 2023 it will ship with Monterey and not the new OS even if the computer doesn't ship until sometime in February. That happened for me when I ordered my iMac and I've heard it happen that way for a bunch of people over the years. Apparently the order date determines which OS your computer ships with. For us, that's brilliant because a new OS likely comes with compatibility problems we'd rather not have to wait out.

So an announcement of a drop date for a new OS could influence my buying time table but other than that, I'm just waiting for the Monterey kinks to be worked out.

[Chipotle]

Originally Posted by jim1960

The software always seemed to want a bit more than the computer could deliver. The M1 chips look like they're putting that behind us.

Doubtful. It's always an arms race. As processor speed, memory speed & capacity, storage space increase, the software will increase right along with it. It's an axiom of computing that software will eventually consume all available resources.

That said, I'm glad we've reached a stage where that doesn't happen every couple of years. Your garden-variety desktop can now be usable for 6-8 years before really bogging down, and software/hardware *incompatibilities* often drive change, rather than the system speed per se.

But yeah, the M1s are far enough ahead they'll last the foreseeable future.

[kurth]

Originally Posted by sdelsolray

PACE, makers of the iLok software protection products, announced yesterday that it was releasing native Apple Silicon iLok software for developers and end users. Many DAW and plugin makers have been waiting for this step. End users need to download and install iLok License Manager v 5.5.0 and synchronize their licenses with their iLok(s) and perhaps with the cloud (if they are using that to verify licenses for their computer).

they'll be lucky to stay one step ahead of the Russians, now they've legalized piracy...especially since russians are some of the best hackers in the world.

[sdelsolray]

Originally Posted by kurth

they'll be lucky to stay one step ahead of the Russians, now they've legalized piracy...especially since russians are some of the best hackers in the world.

I fail to see how this is relevant to our discussion.

[jim1960]

Originally Posted by Chipotle

Doubtful. It's always an arms race.

I didn't say that condition would last forever. But it should last a good long time. I'd bet it will be 5-10 years before we start to see software that demands more than what the current machines and those that will come out within the next year deliver (start to see, not it becoming commonplace and a necessity). I've been using home computers since the days when understanding MS-DOS was a necessity. While there has been a steady upward slope of development, I don't recall seeing any jump of this magnitude in the past 30+ years. I'm truly excited by this.

[kurth]

Originally Posted by sdelsolray

I fail to see how this is relevant to our discussion.

What's the purpose of ilok? .....to defeat piracy....which just became alot more complicated for western corporations....like apple and microsoft. That's relevant. As well, with said development, I'd recommend keeping highend workstations offline for awhile.

[jim1960]

Originally Posted by kurth

What's the purpose of ilok? .....to defeat piracy....which just became alot more complicated for western corporations....like apple and microsoft. That's relevant. As well, with said development, I'd recommend keeping highend workstations offline for awhile.

I'm not sure I understand your point either. Were the hackers not really trying before and now they're going to become super-hackers? Hacking isn't anything new. Companies have been dealing with it for a long time. That said, I don't see how that has any bearing on this discussion regarding the level of currently available computer power for the home user vs the requirements of the software we're using.