Why are macs known for audio editing?

[Philippine Mango]

I just don't see why macs are known for audio editing because all they use are generic soundcards. Is there something I'm missing here? I've listen to audio come from a mac and I'm not impressed by it one bit. Please state otherwise and let me know if your a mac or PC user so I can ignore the mac users j/k

 

[Zim Hosein]

It's all about the available software Philippine Mango

 

[Raincity]

Ever try working with Pro Tools on a pc verus a mac

 

they're not

they're known for video editing, graphic editing, and desktop publishing

although with quark going away VERY soon, desktop publishing will be more PC
graphics are already half/half - tradition is the only thing keeping graphics on the mac

 

[mryellow2]

That's the truth Ruth. I work in a pc/mac environment and there is no practical difference between mac/pc versions of quark. In any case we're all moving to indesign/cs anyway.

 

[imported_Lucifer]

Wow, Philippine Mango tries so hard to make the Mac look bad. :roll:

 

[KingNothing]

A guy I know used Pro Tools on a mac and he said they were better at real-time processing than PCs were. Don't know if it's true or not.

 

[EyeMWing]

ProTools works far better on a mac - and any professional/semi-pro PCI sound card you can find has mac drivers, so the difference between mac/PC is nullified by that.

Also, a lot of professional audio equipment has Firewire interconnects - and Apple had those LONG ago, whereas the VAST majority of PCs still aren't shipping with them.

 

[Philippine Mango]

Well the reason I ask is because I was arguing with a friend and we were bitching back and forth saying "this platform is better". I think the reason why he thinks macs are better is because when ever he see pics of a studio, they have a mac in it...

 

[imported_Lucifer]

Remember Cold Mountain? Van Helsing? Both made on Macs. Pixar even uses Macs.

 

[pulse8]

Originally posted by: troytime
they're not

uhhh...Yeah they are.

As it's been stated, Pro Tools runs much better on a Mac.

 

[aplefka]

It's the software, I've gone over this with a friend who won't admit it. He says how Premiere is a match for a program that comes with a switchboard and probably the best setup/layout evar.

 

[pulse8]

Originally posted by: Thin Lizzy
Remember Cold Mountain? Van Helsing? Both made on Macs. Pixar even uses Macs.

Almost every studio film in at least the last 10 years has been made on a Mac.

The only ones that weren't were probably because they edited on film.

 

[Delleet]

Originally posted by: Philippine Mango
Well the reason I ask is because I was arguing with a friend and we were bitching back and forth saying "this platform is better". I think the reason why he thinks macs are better is because when ever he see pics of a studio, they have a mac in it...

How about getting a life?

 

[Xionide]

Originally posted by: Thin Lizzy
Remember Cold Mountain? Van Helsing? Both made on Macs. Pixar even uses Macs.

Ya and those movies suck ass.

 

[imported_Lucifer]

Originally posted by: pulse8

Originally posted by: Thin Lizzy
Remember Cold Mountain? Van Helsing? Both made on Macs. Pixar even uses Macs.

Almost every studio film in at least the last 10 years has been made on a Mac.

The only ones that weren't were probably because they edited on film.

Thats actually very interesting to know. Thanks for that info. My friends son is in Film Studies, and they make their own movies. They use a Powermac G4 466mhz with Final Cut Pro to edit their movies! He says it works very well too.

 

[imported_Lucifer]

Originally posted by: Xionide

Originally posted by: Thin Lizzy
Remember Cold Mountain? Van Helsing? Both made on Macs. Pixar even uses Macs.

Ya and those movies suck ass.

Not Apple's fault.

 

[thomsbrain]

Originally posted by: Raincity
Ever try working with Pro Tools on a pc verus a mac

i have, and PC's blow Macs away. Way more power, way less cost. Easier to upgrade. It's a no-brainer.

ok, the reason Macs are known for audio is all the major audio editing programs first came out on Mac, the biggest being Pro Tools. Pro Tools is a hardware/software combo, so your onboard audio is meaningless. Macs were chosen for this simple reason and no other: they all use the same hardware, so they are easy to make hardware compatible with. Pro audio companies don't have huge budgets or teams of people to work out every possible hardware combination and make sure their stuff works. So macs were king.

These days, with Windows NT-based OS's and whatnot, most manufacturers are offering PC equivilents of their stuff.

In fact, Digidesign, maker of Pro Tools has stated that from now on they will cease to offer Mac equivilents! Apple now has a big stake in one of their competitors, so it's see-you-later for Macs in the audio world.

 

[Czar]

alot of movies are edited using final cut pro, but alot are also not

there are basicly two reasons why pro's use macs, some very good software is only available on the mac and that the people doing the job only know how to use a mac since the mac has generaly been first to bring alot of graphics software on the market. This ofcorse is changing, quite fast.

 

[miniMUNCH]

Audio editing and sound design is predominant;y done on Mac for reasons that others have stated.

Pixar, Lucas film / ILM, and other major CGI houses do most of their graphics and visual effects on Linux with little old-time SGI and maybe a few Windows or OS X stations thrown in.

My brother-in-law works at chief system engineer at Lucas film...linux is his main OS but his laptop is a powerbook.

 

[thomsbrain]

Originally posted by: pulse8

Originally posted by: troytime
they're not

uhhh...Yeah they are.

As it's been stated, Pro Tools runs much better on a Mac.

no, it really doesn't. it just flat out doesn't. i've tracked and mixed multiple projects on both platforms (multiple computers on each platform, too) and i would give my left nut to never have to use Pro Tools on a Mac again. and it really has nothing to do with interface or any of that bull because they are identical once you're in the program. the reasons have to do with

A) speed. Macs simply aren't fast enough to run enough native real-time plugins. mixing is a fvcking nightmare because you have to apply so many of the plugins ahead of time in order to stay ahead of the dreaded dropout. with HD systems it isn't so much of an issue, but even then you have to bring up the question: why would you pay so much extra for your computer if it isn't doing anything other than being a glorified video display and hard disk controller?

B) reliability/stability. i don't like to reboot. i really don't. i ESPECIALLY don't like to reboot when i've just done 2 hours of fvcking amazing tracks and it's all gone thanks to the bomb. and i REALLY fvcking hate re-installing operating systems in the middle of projects. that just sucks.

none of the above has ever happened to me when running Pro Tools on a PC. all of the above has happened to me when running macs.

good riddance, apple. Pro Tools won't miss you.

 

[LethalWolfe]

Originally posted by: pulse8

Originally posted by: Thin Lizzy
Remember Cold Mountain? Van Helsing? Both made on Macs. Pixar even uses Macs.

Almost every studio film in at least the last 10 years has been made on a Mac.

The only ones that weren't were probably because they edited on film.

I'm am going to qualify this statement by saying they were cut on a Mac based Avids, not cut w/FCP. FCP has only recently started showing up on the radars of big budget projects as a viable alternative to Avid. Although it has been eating into Avid's market share in the low and medium budget areas for a few years now.

Part of the reason the Mac platform is such a favorite, at least in the video world, is because Apple has control of the hardware and OS so there are significantly fewer variables for developers to worry about (proc, mobo, chipset, sound card, drivers, fireware, video card, etc.,). Companies like Avid can spend more time getting their product to work very well as opposed to just getting it to work.


Lethal

 

[pulse8]

Originally posted by: Czar
alot of movies are edited using final cut pro, but alot are also not

there are basicly two reasons why pro's use macs, some very good software is only available on the mac and that the people doing the job only know how to use a mac since the mac has generaly been first to bring alot of graphics software on the market. This ofcorse is changing, quite fast.

Most big budget movies are still edited using Avid machines.

Apple's Final Cut Pro has come a long way in a short time, but Avid is still the most stable software I've ever used. I don't think I've sat at a FCP system that didn't crash every few hours of use.

 

[nakedfrog]

I would go with history/tradition. I know Trent Reznor of NIN used them extensively, but I don't know if he's switched over or stuck with the Mac route because he already had all the equipment and was familiar with it. I'd be willing to bet that's part of the reason now, producers/engineers are already familiar with their current process and like many, don't want to change yet.

 

[loic2003]

Originally posted by: Philippine Mango
I just don't see why macs are known for audio editing because all they use are generic soundcards. Is there something I'm missing here? I've listen to audio come from a mac and I'm not impressed by it one bit. Please state otherwise and let me know if your a mac or PC user so I can ignore the mac users j/k

The answer you seek is because the on board sound of the apples is sweet and they have the lowest latency of all computers. This of course is critical when it comes to audio editing.

Coupled with the OS, the software available, the fact they're now 64 bit and they can have loadsa memory means they are the best for the job.

The recording industry likes them: Linktastic

I use both PC's and macs, so make your mind up whether you wish to ignore me