Is mainstage good for pro use?

Posted this on the Logic discussion thread...
Playing night after night with mainstage, I always get some audio glitches.
Here is my setup:
mac mini server i7 quad core
8 gigs Ram
Minstage 2.2
Omnisphere 1.5
Kontakt 5.0.2
RME Fireface UC
Buffer @ 128 samples
Samplerate 48K
Any tips to tweak the Mac mini?
I have all audio files onthe second HD
energy saver, HD never goes to sleep
MainStage, Mac OS X (10.7.3)

I have the same mac as you, with 8 GB also. I am using a MOTU Ultralite mk3 for audio inputs.
The only other difference is, I am not using Kontakt or Omnispherel: primarily Apple plug-ins, Toontrack Superior Drummer, and a few wave plugs. I am using a buffer size of 64, but 44.1 sample rate.
This is the most stable set up I have had, with no drop outs, glitches, crashes .... all is good. I would think you should be able to get good results also.
I suggest you take things out of the equation, one at a time, and see if you can isolate where the problem is coming from. Some suggestions:
- are all drivers and plug-ins current (especially RME)
- run MS in 32 bit if you are using any 32-bit plug-ins (the bridge can cause problems)
- if you have 64-bit plugs, try running MS in 64-bit
- try running without Kontakt for awhile, then without Ominishpere for awhile. Any changes?
- try 16-bit, 44.1 kHz. Good enough for live performance, less CPU.

Similar Messages

24" iMac for Good for Pro Use?

Hi,
I am considering getting a 24" iMac. I would like to get a Mac Pro with a pro display but my budget does not stretch that far. I have no worries about the speed of the Duo 2 Core 2.4Ghz, my concern is about the DISPLAY. I am going to be working in Photoshop editing images. I am a professional photographer. I went to my local Apple Store and took a look and I did see on the 20" the gradient thing. On the 24" it looked better but with a flat grey background image it did look completely uneven.
Are these displays up to handing pro work? Does the glossy screens render colors badly, even after a calibration. How concerned should I be about this?
Thanks,
Martin.

I recently faced the same dilemma. I am also a pro photographer and need to have my monitor calibrated to my Epson 2200. I decided that the glare from the new IMAC LCDs was unacceptable and would make it difficult to edit my photos. In addition, the new glossy screens have more impact than the matte screens due to increased contrast and color saturation which would also make calibration difficult. About 4 weeks ago, I bought a white 24" previous generation IMAC with a matte screen since I didn't want to spend the additional money to buy a Mac Pro.
The screen on my new computer has a light to dark gradient going from left to right that is not optimal for photo editing. This seems to be a common issue on both the new aluminum 24" and the white 24" LCD screens. Hopefully Apple will come up with a fix for this issue.
The screen is also too bright but thats just another issue.

New iMac for Pro Use

When we replaced our last Pro Machine back in 2005 it was replaced with an iMac 20". Well we use it for Graphic Design and it served us well until the logic board failed. So we ordered a new i5 27" iMac. Anyone else use iMacs for pro Macs? We run Adobe creative suite 4, Freehand, Quark and office. Any issues with these apps running Snow leopard? Do you feel the performance of the iMac will do well with these apps?
By the way I found a place that repairs the logic boards in G5 imac so I removed and sent it out for repair. If all goes well this will be a nice hand me down for the kids. So far they love the G4 12" powerbook we handed down to them. 9 year old twins using macs which the prefer over the PC.

Sounds like you're on the track, I found a link from Apple that offers a competitive upgrade from Freehand to CS4 for $199. If your business is relying on it then that might be the road to take.
I've heard of some work arounds for your Laserwriter but not being a LW owner I don't have any experience. The good news is high quality Laser printers have come way down in price, I have 2 connected to my system (both HP's) that work great. The youngest one (Color LJ 2600N) is about 4 years old and works great as does my little black and white LJ 1012 which is my everyday work horse.
Another solution is HP has a new line of printers out that are inkjets but cost up to 50% less to operate than a laser and provides very high quality. If you at all interested the link is:
http://www.shopping.hp.com/product/printer/Officejet/1/storefronts/CB023A%2523B1 H
Talk to you later,
Roger

WD Caviar Green drives - Only good for certain uses!

I originally set up my Mac Pro as follows:
Bay 1 - Original 640GB Drive - MacOSX
Bay 2 - 1.5TB Caviar Green - RAID 1 striped with Bay 3
Bay 3 - 1.5TB Caviar Green - RAID 1 striped with Bay 2
Bay 4 - 2.0TB Caviar Green - Time Machine Backup
The RAID 1 array was mounted as the /User directory.
From the start there were annoying lags on a semi-regular basis. Even with only a few things open, like 1 instance each of Dreamweaver, Safari, and iTunes, I would get the spinning beach-ball of death for a few seconds every 30-45 seconds, and sometimes for as long as 10-20 seconds. Occasionally iTunes would actually cut out as it tried to play music.
Whenever these problems got bad I checked the Activity Monitor, did a 'top' in the terminal, even ran diagnostics a few times. No problems were ever obvious. Tons of available CPU time, tons of available RAM, no disk problems. Still, the system ran like a 386 with 640kb of RAM, not a 3.0Ghz Quad-core Nehalem with 12GB of RAM!
I started suspecting the disks as the culprit and looked into the Caviar Green drives a little further...
Western Digital lists the spindle speed as "Variable 5400-7200 RPM'. In fact, each drive is tested to determine the speed with the best performance/economy balance, and that speed is locked into the drive. This means that two otherwise identical Caviar Green drives can have two widely different spindle speeds. Put those two into a striped RAID array, and you get the problems I had.
Before reporting a bad computer to AppleCare I decided to confirm the drive theory by replacing the two Caviar Green drives in the RAID array with Caviar Black drives. Right now I have 4 instances of Safari, 2 Terminals, 2 Finder windows, Dreamweaver, Remote Desktop, Photoshop and iTunes running, and have seen zero glitches so far. The system is finally running like it should! The Caviar Green drive I have in bay 4 as my Time Machine backup is fine - this is actually a good application for these quieter, lower power drives. Just don't put them into a RAID array where you expect reasonable performance!
The two Green drives are going back to NewEgg tomorrow (minus a restocking fee because I am past the 30-day return window).
P.S., The Caviar Black drives are just fine for a software-based RAID 0 or RAID 1 array like this. WD makes the more expensive RE3 drives for RAID arrays, but the only difference is the amount of time the drive is allowed to take for error recovery. The Black drive could be down long enough to be dropped from an array (10 seconds or more), but the RE3 always comes back within 7 seconds after error recovery to prevent this. So you only benefit from the RE3 drives if you are running with a hardware RAID card, like you'd need for RAID 5.

Sorry, typo...
Table should say RAID 0, not RAID 1:
Bay 1 - Original 640GB Drive - MacOSX
Bay 2 - 1.5TB Caviar Green - *RAID 0* striped with Bay 3
Bay 3 - 1.5TB Caviar Green - *RAID 0* striped with Bay 2
Bay 4 - 2.0TB Caviar Green - Time Machine Backup
The *RAID 0* array was mounted as the /User directory.

Considering Mac Mini for Pro use

Hi.
I'm considering to buy a Mini for replacing my 400Mhz G4.
I mainly use Photoshop and Illustrator for drawing/coloring (large files, hi resolution and so).
I wanted to know if anyone uses a Mini for similar purposes and how well does the machine do. I'm pretty sure I'd definetly do better than my current G4, but anyway, I want to hear any comments about that.
If you wonder why I don't consider a MacPro, cost is the main reason, although I know it would be the best choice in the long term. But since I don't work with video or 3d apps, I guess a Mini would do well.
Thanks in advance!

Some people claims Intel processors are way better than G5. Do you guys agree?
As an example, my G5 dual processor G5 powermac has a broadly similar overall performance to a 1.83 Core 2 Duo mini. The G5 gains in hard drive speed (because it has a 7200rpm unit over the mini's 5400rpm device) but the mini holds it's own, and in fact slightly betters, the DP G5 for CPU performance.
Going a bit further, my 2.4GHz C2D iMac is roughly twice the overall performance of the G5 DP Mac.
It woul;d be hard to draw any conclusion but that the Intel C2D processors are very fast, and certainly have more overall potential than the G5 CPUs - particularly when you consider heat. G5 systems run very hot indeed, and the G5 powermacs for example have very complex cooling systems to help handle that. Intel C2D processors run much cooler by comparison, meaning that they can be put into smaller enclosures with less cooling - or be driven much harder.
I've been searching for G5 Power macs for sale, as well, but I would like to make the best choice in terms of performance and also, thinking of future software, OS, and so.
My take on this is very simple really - that as much as the G5 systems are incredibly powerful in their own right, they're a computing dead-end now. As macOS and software develops, there isn't going to be any appreciable effort to produce software that is optimized for these processors. Indeed, increasingly a likelihood that software will not be written to run on them at all. That doesn't mean these systems are fit for nothing - on the contrary. What it means is that if you have needs that are met by current software that runs on a G5 system, the G5 is very capable and has the advantage of being expandable. However, if you are looking ahead at possible uses into the future, you really couldn't consider a G5 to be a good investment for the future in comparison to an Intel-based Mac. Bear in mind too that future MacOS releases are almost certainly to be heavily biased towards Intel hardware.
Since I own both PPC (G4 and G5) and Intel Macs, I can tell you that in practice my Intel systems get far more use for far more intensive applications. That's the platform I would suggest makes the most sense, unless you can get hold of a DP G5 for very little money, and not only have the software you need for it already, but also know that over time, you are not likely to branch into other uses where software choices may be constrained.
The very fact an Intel mini can run Windows if needed (either via Boot Camp or virtualization) makes this platform a more attractive proposition to many.

Is Photos for Pro use?

Perhaps it is just me, but I find Photos to be a serious step backwards. All I wanted added to Aperture or iPhoto was the ability to select different editing software as can be done in Lightroom. I like the improved Facial Rec, but the functionality has been totally destroyed. The Flickr & Facebook connectivity was much better than Photos. If you are using Aperture or Lightroom, in other words a pro, this is not, in my opinion, the photo managing software for you. It seems Photo is for the consumer market; not the prosumer, or Pro market.

Well you can argue feature by feature, but the editing tools are richer in Photos, the whole iCloud Library and cross-devices stuff is also a big step up on iPhoto. There are losses too - Places, metadata display and so on. It certainly seems to be built with an iPhone shooter in mind, but that is the most popular camera these days. So for me, there's little of use, but I do think the 'replacement for iPhoto' is a defendable position.
But make no mistake, they have done away with Aperture. They've just decided that they're not working that end of the market anymore. Time to look at apps like Lightroom, Capture One and so on.

IWeb Update good for me - using 10.4?

Aloha - I'm afraid to do the new iWeb update as the last two QT updates have messed with my FCP. I'm still using 10.4.11 - and was told my issues with QT may be b/c of that. So - I was wondering if I should hold off on the iWeb update or does the operating system have no relation to iWeb updates?
ALSO - We just launched a new site using iWeb for our business - http://www.livingoceanproductions.com/LivingOceanProductions/Home.html -
We're an u/w imaging business in Hawaii - many of the movie files are not playing on the site - they show up with a ? sometimes - other times they seem to work fine. I made my own template instead of using the movie page they have - could this be an the problem? A couple movies always play fine and are around 12mb - whereas some of the smaller file sized movies take forever to load.
Any insights?
Many Mahalos
Bryce

Hi and thanks for your replies! This page has problems with people:
http://www.livingoceanproductions.com/LivingOcean_Productions/REQUIEM.html - and 3 different people I know using Internet Explorer and Windows XP say that just a white screen pops up when they go to the page?
Other people tell me that when they go to it, there is a ? mark over the movie file?
Also - having troubles with pages that have more than one movie file - do you all think it is better to have only one movie per page? I was thinking of just having jpegs up so that if people click on a photo (thinking it's a movie file), it goes to a new page each time. Could this be my best route with the slow load times in iWeb?
Again - thanks for your comments.
Aloha
Bryce

New Quad Processors for Pro Use

Hey guys, I have a question for those of you who have bought one of the new Quad Processor PowerPC G5's. I work at a Graphic house doing professional Advertising and Marketing. So...my questions is really should we wait till next year when Adobe starts supporting the Intel Based chips (and by that time the Intel Based PowerMac's will be on the market) or do we go with the Quads now. I'd like some feedback from people who have quads now and are using programs like Quark,Photoshop, Illustrator, Flash, and similiar programs.

Right up my alley! I have a new Power Quad at home and love it!!! In a professional sense it comes down to how bad does your business need them NOW. If you absolutely can't wait these Power Quads are awesome and will be able to stay current and quite effective with the uncoming evolution of software for many years. If you can wait around a year I would opt for that. I personally had to ugrade now and I have no reget. From a business point of view it would be a better long term chioce to wait for the switch. Keep in mind thought that just because the Macs have switched (and the high end Macs won't go that route for awhile) there will be a wait for all the applications to reprogram and debug and add to the cost of the switch. Many current apps will be able to run on the Intel units but until they are written to run natively there will be a translation step that will make many of these apps useable on the IntelMacs but much slower until they run natively. Guess it boils down to how bad does your business need 'em now. One other note - the Quad is a bit quicker overall with the basic graphics stuff you mentioned, and that do at work, only scratches the surface of the capabilities of the multi-processor set-up of the Quads. The video and audio rendering is where these baby's REALLY save you hours of thime. Happy shopping!
G5 Quad Mac OS X (10.4.5) 4 GB RAM, 500GB ATA HD, NVIDEA GeForce 7800 GT, 23" HD Cinema Display

Rewire Mainstage into Logic Pro / internal soundcard

Hey there, Logic Users!
I noticed that some of the Mainstage sounds are not too shabby and I would like them to load into Logic Pro.
Since my external soundcard is pretty much fried, I wanted to know if there's a way to rewire Mainstage into Logic Pro using the internal soundcard that the iMac provides?
Thanks for all the responses,
VN

videonoob wrote:
I noticed that some of the Mainstage sounds are not too shabby and I would like them to load into Logic Pro.
Hi
Mainstage and Logic share exactly the same plugins, channel strip settings and the like (with the notable exceptions of Playback and Loopback, which are only available in Mainstage).
There should be no need to attempt to hook up Mainstage to Logic simplly to load any sounds into Logic. Save the plugin presets or channel strips in Mainstage, and then Load them in Logic.
CCT

Mac Mini or iMac good for graphic apps?

I currently have an older G4, dual processor, 450 MHz, 768mb RAM running Tiger. I'm a graphic designer working mainly with Quark, Freehand, Photoshop. I'm not a heavy Photoshop user. I'm trying to decide if I should upgrade to a G5 tower, or if the new iMacs or Mac Mini would work for me. I've heard that the Mac Mini could be a step backwards for my type of use. Any informed opinions would greatly help. Obviously speed is not my number one concern, but I wouldn't want to be slower! I do have an external CD/DVD burner and I need to keep my external ZIP drive.
Thanks,
Kristi

The Mac Mini may not be good for your use (Intel Macs in gerneral) do not have a native version of Photoshop (PPC only app so it would run under PPC emulation), so unless you have 1+GB RAM it would run slow, not as slow as on your current machine though so you might not notice the way some others might. The Mac Mini (even the core solo 1.5Ghz) will be much faster than your current machine, any modern Mac would be.I would go for an iMac since it, IMO, is going to be a better buy, since it doesn't cost that much more, and is a top of the line consumer machine. If you don't do much Photoshoping the G5 Power Mac is overkill, IMO. You may even want to look at refurb G5 iMacs if you want to save a little money.

IPad for college use.

Would an iPad be good for college use?

You will be surprised just how much you use the iPad...goes every where...so go for the largest storage you can afford. You will need it with text books.

What Systems are the Pros Using for Premier, After Effects, and SpeedGrade?

I bought the full Creative Cloud in hopes of making a career for myself in audio/visual editing. The problem is, my system doesn't seem to be able to handle the software, particularly when changing back and forth between the three programs mentioned above. Beyond that, my first project failed to export properly. Moreover, all throughout its development the system lagged badly. And this is after having followed all the preferences recommendations available in the Adobe's tutorials and elsewhere on the Web.
Here's my system:
SYX-P67A-C43: Intel Core i7 2600 (an 8-core unit) at 3.4GHz, with 8 Gigs of RAM (soon to be 16) with a GTX 550 NVidia Card, 1Gig of RAM.
As you can see, this is far in excess of what Adobe claims to be the minimum system requirements. It's obviously NOT.
What systems are the Pros using (like the guys in the tutorials) for Premier, After Effects, and SpeedGrade? Give me the exact machines with all the specs so I can price one up.

...although a little " old" now.....the fundamentals of your machine are still OK to get started IF you : 1. INCREASE your system memory to the full 32 GB....should make a BIG difference in performance.....8 GB is NOT enough, it will HINDER performance. 2. OVERCLOCK your CPU !!!.....many owners of your CPU have been safely running at 4.5 Ghz or HIGHER...some at 4.8 Ghz !!! This OC will make a DRAMATIC improvement as CPU speed is a huge factor in performance. 3. Improve your video card to a new NVidia 970 with 4 GB of video memory. 4. Check and MAKE SURE the power supply in your machine is ADEQUATE to handle everything, esp. if you overclock the CPU....generally 850 to 1,000 watts of a quality make is good. 5. Use a fast storage system...that means a SATA III SSD as your "C" drive, ( boot drive), being a Crucial M550 series,( or, M600 series), OR, a Samsung 850 Pro series SSD, ( more expensive). Other SSDs are NOT recommended, only these two makes are recommended for technical reasons. On this "C" drive, you should have Operating system, Programs, and Windows page file ONLY !! Your "D" drive can be ANOTHER single SSD to be used as a "cache drive" for all the previews, media cache, and cache files that Premier Pro creates PLUS, it can ALSO serve as the "Global Performance cache" used in After Effects. All your media and project files can go on your "E" drive. HERE you would have LIMITED OPTIONS because your motherboard only has TWO SATA III ports, ( which would already be used b the "C" and "D" SSDs). You NOW have only 4 SATA II ports left ......you COULD RAID 0 four 1 TB HDDs off these ports and have a 4TB backup drive connected to one of your TWO USB 3 external ports.....any DVD or Blue-ray can ALSO go on an external port.
However, if you are into spending REAL MONEY !!!.....Go Haswell E and X99 all the way !!...THAT will give you great performance !!

Whats a good mac to use for a home flight simulator with flight controls and foot pedals?

whats a good mac to use for a home flight simulator with flight controls and foot pedals?
My old 6100 AV worked great on A10 ATTACK, back in 1993.
whats a good set up now a days?
I havent seen any MAC set ups as a lot of the after market accessories are on Windows platform.
Is there a way or should I get a dedicated simulator on PC?

The fact that USB flight input devices appear to Windows only is not a limitation; for Mac most are programmed through the sim itself. I know X-Plane does that.
I've simmed a lot and know that good sims need a lot of processor and video hardware horsepower, and you'll also need a lot of RAM. They also run up the internal temps. A Mac Pro has better cooling than an iMac. You can get a program like SMCFanControl to manually set up the fans speeds before starting the sim.
I know of no sims today that will still run on a PowerPC Mac (2005 and earlier) so you need to look to an Intel Mac with top specs. If looking at iMacs, start by looking for the quad-core i7 processor. Those models usually came with an up-rated video card. Thing 12 to 16GB RAM.
My 2010 iMac has the 2.93gHz i7 processor, video hardware (ATI 5750) with 1TB VRAM, and 12 GB of RAM. It runs the x-Plane 10 demo fine but I've not bought the full version because v10 seems to make foot pedals darned near mandatory, and I don't want $100 worth of pedals under my regular work desk at the moment.

Is the i7 13" MacBook Air good for me if I use...

Trying to see if a MacBook Air would be good for me if I use:
-Photoshop, iPhoto, and other photography apps from the Mac App Store? (I just recently picked up a DSLR to get into for photography so I imagine I'll be using these programs frequently)
-Vuze
-Handbrake (how long does it usually take for an Air to rip a DVD?)
-Casual Gaming (The most intensive game I'm looking at is Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas. Can the air run it?)
-Mail
-Internet (some online videos, etc)
With all these uses, would a i7 13" MacBook Air be able to handle all these tasks for me and perform them all reasonably well?

Smiller,
I think the hesitation to answer comes from the fact that a good portion of your questions are at least somewhat subjective. I have the 13" i7 4 GB x 256 GB MBA, and I find the unit perfectly satisfactory performing most of the task you mention. However, I don't do all of them, all the time either. It's been a couple of months since I ripped a DVD, and I didn't time it. I think it took me an hour and a half to rip a two hour movie. On my MacBook Pro, which I recently sold, it maybe would have taken a bit over an hour to perform the same task.
Then again, for most of my tasks that I do everyday, the MBA would edge out the MBP. The SSD makes a big difference for certain tasks. Albiet, you could equip an MBP with an SSD and the advantage in certain cases would disappear, and the MBP would reign in all cases, except of course portability.
For your photo, internet, bit-torrent work you will probably find the MBA perfectly suited, provided the screen size is adequate for your taste. You see, we then again run into a subjective area.
What can I say, go to an Apple Store and give it a whirl. Find out first hand.

Is microsoft 365 good for macbook pro???

Is microsoft 365 good for macbook pro??

http://www.apple.com/support/pages/
If you want a standard word or word processing, I like the "look" of Pages but the reason I first bought my first Mac (1989) still use Word, though its support on Mac may not be up to its PC cousin.
MacBook Series Forums
https://discussions.apple.com/community/notebooks?view=discussions
http://www.apple.com/support/macbookpro
Mac OS X Forum
https://discussions.apple.com/community/mac_os?view=discussions
This forum deals with a desktop/tower 65lb Mac Pro
http://www.apple.com/support/macpro
Mac OS X Help
http://www.apple.com/support/macbasics/
Isolating Issues in Mac OS
https://www.apple.com/support/osx/
https://www.apple.com/support/osx/https://www.apple.com/support/quickassist/
https://www.apple.com/support/quickassist/http://www.apple.com/support/mac101/help/
http://www.apple.com/support/mac101/help/http://www.apple.com/support/mac101/tour/

Is mainstage good for pro use?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for