Operating Systems > macOS

Audio - mac vs PC

<< < (3/4) > >>

Calum:
me too, but i don't have a mac.

VoidMain, i get yr point, but surely a sound is only as good as the original signal? if a program is creating duff sound, no amount of good speakers is going to sort the problem.

Actually the cool edit problem is a matter, largely, of opinion, i think my version of cool edit was a lot older than my version of sound forge, so it was hardly a fair test...

Void, maybe you should get a mac for your audio stuff? now that they run BSD and linux, they should be solid as a rock, and have good hardware to match, plus you get to run all those mac multimedia apps on them... (you know this of course, just practising my sales pitch for when i am washed out and need to get a job in a computer shop)  :D

voidmain:
I would love to have had a Mac to do it but already had PCs and spend a lot on sound equipment and band gear so money was tight at the time (according to the wife anyway).  And at the time it wasn't BSD based and I didn't know what hardware was available to do what I wanted to do. For instance the Layla board had 8 1/4" input channels and 10 1/4" output channels.  I frequently recorded 4-8 channels simultaneously. Maybe there was a Mac version of that board. It was made by a company called "Echo".  The price was right and had the right number of recording inputs.

As far as software screwing up the sound quality. If said software is just playing a WAV or MP3 file for instance, they all should pump out the same data on the output end (the format that makes it to the audio DAC in the sound hardware). The algorythms used should be the same. The software is not responsible for doing the digital->analog conversion. Of course I am no expert in audio software development so much of this is strong speculation. Hopefully someone who has more intimate coding level experience with audio software could agree/disagree with my speculation.

davebrock:
I have to say looking at some replies and doin a bit of research....it seems that it is without doubt windows itself that is the major pain in the ass for recording, there's nothin wrong with most pc hardware it's just the crap os that most pc's have (preinstalled of course!!!) :-( Y,know a lot of studios still use amigas? strange but true! bit OT but, anyone used NT for audio? How does it compare? And also are any other Mac users pissed off with the lack of multitrack software for OS X? Cubase SX looks good, but where is Pro Tools??? :-(

voidmain:
Actually as crappy and crash prone as win95 is, it is much better than NT for multitrack recording etc..  NT has way too much overhead. If only there were good multitrack Linux apps. I believe one day they'll come. I'm pretty sure Cake Walk has a Mac version don't they? Cool Edit Pro and the Sonic Foundry apps would be good Mac apps too.

ravuya:
Everyone uses Pro Tools, and most custom audio apps (MetaSynth) are Mac-only.

Cake Walk is kind of crap, IMO. Sorry to say so.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page