# Imac pro....December



## colony nofi (Jun 5, 2017)

So - the imac pro. Looks like a nMP updated, but inside an imac. Interesting.

By the sounds of what was said a month or two ago, there's still a more modular mac-pro update coming next year, but this is going to be an interesting one for composers.

How things perform on the updated standard imac vs the imac pro will be key for all us mac composers.

https://techcrunch.com/2017/06/05/a...ith-beefy-specs-real-ports-5k-starting-price/

Interesting times.


----------



## sherief83 (Jun 5, 2017)

I think it will be a very expensive solution. it starts at $5000, but that isn't even maxed to 18 core processor, 128gb of ram or the 4Tb (2 TB PCI cards) or the 16gb Graphic card. Also, you have to find a solution for your audio interface so your forced into buying a thunderbolt/usb one now or third party external thunderbolt PCI enclosure. Also, if you have other older SSD drives you don't want to waste, thats another external enclosure.

I'm foreseeing atleast $9k just to get it to comparable specs similer to 2010/2012 mac pro that offers up to 3.46ghz xeon 12 core, up to 128gb of ram and basically you can jam up to 11 SSD drives into it if you know what you are doing (that will be 22TB), plus the built in PCIE x luxury.

So if you are Rich beyond any imagination, its awesome and I'd personally go for it. I mean 18 Core processor, that will be its advantage. but if you are not THAT Rich but still want to stick with Mac, the towers are a Bargain still.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jun 5, 2017)

sherie, this is why I'm always ranting about how I will never buy another expensive computer card. My Metric Halo 2882 (FireWire) is still a youngster after more than a decade and a half, and I haven't heard anything to say the $30 Thunderbolt-FW adapter won't still work on the iMac Pro - not that I'm planning on buying one.

So how do I learn what I'm doing to jam 11 SSDs in a 5,1 Mac Pro? I have six drives in mine + an optical, and one of those is on a PCIe card (a cheap one  ).


----------



## jonnybutter (Jun 5, 2017)

colony nofi said:


> the imac pro. Looks like a nMP updated, but inside an imac.




If this new computer was inexpensive that would be different. But as mentioned above, the _base_ price is $5k. Probably good for photoshop and video editing.

I'm in the market for a new mac, but will probably pass on this. I know some serious users here use a fast iMac for DAW, but fact that it uses more/less laptop parts has always made me pause. I'm leaning toward a refurb. 4 core Vader, which is not ideal but almost half the price of this (including extra RAM).

Am I wrong about the iMac? I've had heat issues with my MBPs - i.e. parts failing (likely) because of excessive heat - and worry about the same thing in the iMac. I really don't need another screen either. And I'd love to have something smaller than a Cheese Grater.

Too bad it's taking Apple a year (at least) to redesign the mac pro, after almost 4 years since the vader.  Sigh.


----------



## sherief83 (Jun 5, 2017)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> sherie, this is why I'm always ranting about how I will never buy another expensive computer card. My Metric Halo 2882 (FireWire) is still a youngster after more than a decade and a half, and I haven't heard anything to say the $30 Thunderbolt-FW adapter won't still work on the iMac Pro - not that I'm planning on buying one.
> 
> So how do I learn what I'm doing to jam 11 SSDs in a 5,1 Mac Pro? I have six drives in mine + an optical, and one of those is on a PCIe card (a cheap one  ).



Glad you asked, so here we go...

So for 2010/2012 Mac Pros, you actually have built in 6 Sata 2.0 ports, not just the 4 bays but also two in the optical drive area. 

In the optical drive area, if you decide to take out your dvd drive and make it an external enclosure, that frees two Powered sata 2.0 plugs that you can use for two ssds. You just need one of those 3.5 to 2.5 kit (super cheap on amazon) to mount both of your SSDs into the optical drive area and Bam! you've got Sata 2.0 speed ssd drives.

So that is a total of 6 drives (including the 4 in bay) that is pre built, but then how do you get the other 6? thats right I mentioned 11 earlier but you can do up to 12 now that I think about it.

As you mentioned, 

You get one ( or three) of these babies here and I have one personally..

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod...&cm_re=x2_pci_card_ssd-_-12-161-007-_-Product

I've had one for two years now and works beautiful (KNOCK on the wood!) and gives you Sata 3.0. You can fit 3 in your 2010/2012 mac pro pcie x which gives you 6 drives for a total of 12 drives and your Mac pro won't have any issues running them at all since all ssds are low power and the mac pro had the older 3.5 spinning drive power draw originally in mind.

The way I have it organized on my system is, any intense libraries that require alot of read speed, I put them on the Sata 3.0 PCI express SSDs. For any light libraries, I put them on the internal Sata 2.0 drives.

I've yet to run out of space and also I have yet to actually test any of the speeds, even from the Sata 2.0 drives. logic Rarely (like 2 times within the last 2 years and its because of my Audio card) ever runs into system disk too slow because of How much spread I have on all the drives. 

That is it pretty much! and the fun thing is, its all organized in ONE box which is something I Hope the new Mac pro will include in its design.


----------



## colony nofi (Jun 5, 2017)

So just to be clear - the imac pro is server class parts... this is nothing like a laptop. (I'm trying to see if its ECC ram or just standard DDR4...)

Now - in the past xeon's are not always the best VALUE for DAWs, but having used both the HP workstations and mac pro workstations on xeons, they can do some pretty crazy computation. Its just that standard i7's can also do a great job for audio. 
(The HP's for large channel count audio post production are awesome...and nMP does a pretty damn good job too.)

I think time will tell what sort of performance these will give. The new xeons are MUCH better than those in the 2012 MP. How much better for audio? composition? Again - time will tell.

I'm not sure about it - but I'm not going to dismiss it either. Kaby Lake imac's could also be quite good as well. 

B.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jun 5, 2017)

> Probably good for photoshop and video editing.



It looks like "high-end gaming" and "VR" are also targets. 

In general, not vis à vis the iMac, can someone please explain to me why I'm supposed to be excited about either one of those? Google Glass was one of history's most spectacular failures, I have zero interest in putting on a f-ing welding helmet, and "high-end gaming" is no more appealing to me than low-end gaming.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jun 5, 2017)

jonnybutter said:


> Am I wrong about the iMac? I've had heat issues with my MBPs - i.e. parts failing (likely) because of excessive heat - and worry about the same thing in the iMac. I really don't need another screen either. And I'd love to have something smaller than a Cheese Grater.
> 
> QUOTE]



For the price of a souped up Vader Helmet, you'd be better off with a top spec'd MacBook Pro (Kaby lake) and a brand new, custom built windows slave; all for under $5K.


----------



## Musicam (Jun 5, 2017)

The price? Well, i am rich.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jun 5, 2017)

Thanks sherie. Got it.

I do have one SSD in the second optical bay, but I just stuck it there without an adapter. It's 2.5", I think - very light, and just the stiffness of the cables prevents it from going anywhere (or did I use double-stick styrofoam tape? I may have). Then I have one single-drive PCIe card that I bought as an experiment; it turns out not to make a meaningful difference.

If I need more drives, a friend gave me a dual eSATA 3 card, but I haven't installed that yet.

My experience with SSDs and Logic is the same as yours. They're great.


----------



## mac (Jun 5, 2017)

Hopefully the imac pro will have more than one drive slot.


----------



## artomatic (Jun 5, 2017)

Couldn't wait for the Pro in December.
Just ordered the new 27-inch iMac with Retina 5K display 

4.2GHz quad-core Intel Core i7, Turbo Boost up to 4.5GHz
64GB 2400MHz DDR4 
 Hope this'll do a decent job handling audio and midi projects using VEP - with Blackmagic Multidock, 3 x 1TB SSDs.


----------



## Musicam (Jun 5, 2017)

Whats happen with Mac pro then?


----------



## jonnybutter (Jun 5, 2017)

Wolfie2112 said:


> For the price of a souped up Vader Helmet, you'd be better off with a top spec'd MacBook Pro (Kaby lake) and a brand new, custom built windows slave; all for under $5K.




Hi Wolfie,

I already have a fast windows slave, but what you say would be interesting if I didn't. Still only 32gb of ram in the MBP.



colony nofi said:


> So just to be clear - the imac pro is server class parts



Thanks colony nofi. I didn't know that. iMac Pro still too expensive, but I should consider another iMac I guess. Although I'm going to be traveling a fair amount in the next few years and something small (like the vader) would make life easier.


----------



## Musicam (Jun 5, 2017)

Cheap and best products!


----------



## handz (Jun 5, 2017)

Sad its too expensive even for the basic model - which usually is a joke in Mac lineup. Processor is the last thing I would be caring about well same or GPU - as for most things you dont need this to be maxed out except you wanna play games haha


----------



## mac (Jun 5, 2017)

jonnybutter said:


> Still only 32gb of ram in the MBP.



Where are you seeing that? I didn't hear about any ram increases for the mbp.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jun 5, 2017)

No, it's still only *16*GB in the MBP. That's what all the uproar was about when they announced the previous one, and it's still the same limitation in the new processor-upgraded ones.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jun 5, 2017)

Wow. Memory has become expensive, even the older 1333 MHz DDR3 kind.


----------



## jonnybutter (Jun 5, 2017)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> No, it's still only *16*GB in the MBP. That's what all the uproar was about when they announced the previous one, and it's still the same limitation in the new processor-upgraded ones.



Sorry, my bad. It's still a rumor (for the forthcoming 15" MBP). https://www.macrumors.com/2017/01/16/kaby-lake-macbooks-ming-chi-kuo/ It _ought_ to be true though...


----------



## desert (Jun 5, 2017)

Was this Apples attempt to compete with the new windows surface computer?


----------



## byzantium (Jun 5, 2017)

I did some price comparisons in euro (pretty close to dollar, and relatively the same) in order to try to get some (Apple) context on the iMac Pro price and performance:

* New iMac (today): Kaby Lake i7 (4-core) 4.2GHz, 32GB RAM, 1TB SSD, 5K screen - €4,379

* Current Mac Pro (2013): 3.5GHz 6-core (Xeon), 32GB RAM, 1TB SSD, no screen - €4,699

* Upcoming iMac Pro (Dec+): 8-core Xeon, 32GB RAM, 1TB SSD, 5K screen - €4,999

* Upcoming Mac Pro (mid-late 2018?): ? ? ?

In this context / comparison at least, the iMac Pro seems a very valid and interesting one-computer audio solution.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jun 5, 2017)

This would be fantastic, except that it has the new "scissors" keyboard, which sucks. The previous one is the best keyboard in history.

https://www.apple.com/shop/product/MQ052LL/A/magic-keyboard-with-numeric-keypad-us-english?fnode=56


----------



## byzantium (Jun 5, 2017)

For me, the keyboard would be a relatively small thing, and surely - he said - if it's bluetooth, you can use an older favourite one instead.

I guess there will questions over how upgradeable iMac Pro might be after initial purchase, and it won't have the portability of a Mac Pro cylinder / cylinder replacement, but at this point it looks like it will be a pretty good machine to run an audio/VI workstation on.

i.e. worth waiting for / past the current new iMac, but possibly not for undoubtedly-more-expensive later Mac Pro...


----------



## chimuelo (Jun 5, 2017)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> Wow. Memory has become expensive, even the older 1333 MHz DDR3 kind.



I warned yuze guys about plants making RAM forced to retool for SSDs.
Leads to shortages and higher prices until Summer 2018 when new Fabs come online.

DDR3 is the cheapest of all right now but much higher than when DDR2 was phased out.

Anyone buying RAM should go to Amazon not Newegg, create a list for public view, and pick kits out.
You'll get updates on prices and quantity and can get some good deals, but I don't think we'll be seeing many more.

I stocked up on 1600 x 8GB sticks.
Z97 boards and 4790k CPUs.
Not very happy with Micro$oft, Int€£ and Appl€'s planned obsolescence.

I'd hate to be a developer trying to keep up with the unnecessary semi annual hardware software dances.


----------



## NYC Composer (Jun 5, 2017)

Apparently, the rise in the stock market has Apple thinking that pros will pay any price for a fast machine.

As a forever Apple computer owner, I think the pricing is ridiculous. As an Apple stockholder, I sure hope they're right.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jun 5, 2017)

byzantium:



> For me, the keyboard would be a relatively small thing, and surely - he said - if it's bluetooth, you can use an older favourite one instead



Oh, my comment about that has nothing to do with the new computers. It's because that's the keyboard lots of people wanted them to come out with years ago - a complete Bluetooth keyboard with a 10-key. Now they finally come out with it, and it has their shitty new key mechanism. Why did they replace the best keyboard ever made with a lousy one?

So yes, I certainly do use the previous Magic Keyboard - which as I said, is my favorite of all time (and I'm really picky) - plus a separate Belkin 10-key that matches it. When I wore out my last one, I bought one of the current Magic Keyboards... and got rid of it immediately, then found one of the previous ones that have the right amount of travel.

However, they also use the same mechanism on their laptops. That would be a serious issue for me if I were going to buy one. But I'm not.


----------



## Pat Human (Jun 5, 2017)

And it seems that at least RAM will not be upgradeable by the users themselves. 
https://9to5mac.com/2017/06/05/imac-pro-ram-and-space-gray-accessories/

We all know Apple pricing in terms of RAM. Unfortunately, another pass for me on Apple Hardware...


----------



## Soundhound (Jun 5, 2017)

Oy. Who wants to pay 50% more for ram? And if the iMac Pro is any guide, how much is the new Mac Pro going to cost? More than a Tesla? Less? Roughly equal?





Pat Human said:


> And it seems that at least RAM will not be upgradeable by the users themselves.
> https://9to5mac.com/2017/06/05/imac-pro-ram-and-space-gray-accessories/
> 
> We all know Apple pricing in terms of RAM. Unfortunately, another pass for me on Apple Hardware...


----------



## mc_deli (Jun 6, 2017)

This iMac Pro seems like a massive kick in the teeth for pro users. It's massively overpriced. It's for the rich and major corporations.
Its non-upgradeable hardware means it is bad for the environment and will have the shortest possible lifecycle.
It is a cunning bit of market research. Depending on how many and who they sell to they can either put off the Mac Pro, price the Mac Pro sky high, or not make the Mac Pro at all.
And whatever decision they make on the MP, and however they justify it, it won't be transparent.

(I should state that I have specifically avoided investing in Apple stock because I don't agree with their business practices).


----------



## mc_deli (Jun 6, 2017)

chimuelo said:


> Anyone buying RAM should go to Amazon


Please don't buy from Amazon. They don't pay tax, their pay and conditions for workers are awful and they allow vendors to use shady business practices (e.g. to avoid paying customs duties etc.). All this massively disadvantages local communities and businesses.

(I should state that I have specifically avoided investing in Amazon stock because I don't agree with their business practices).


----------



## NYC Composer (Jun 6, 2017)

Pretty OT, but-

I can understand people refusing to invest in the corrupt and manipulated stock markets. I am the steward of our little family retirement portfolio, and I can tell you from some years of investing that there really is no such thing as an ethical corporation. Corporations are in business to make money for shareholders and to provide huge salaries for top management and board members. That's pretty much it.

You could invest in your country's bonds. Of course, every time your country does something you massively disagree with, you are therefore culpable.

So to be moral, no investing. Put your money in a bank and make a tiny bit of interest.

Wait! Banks, especially the big solvent ones, are MASSIVELY corrupt. Can't go there.

Time to put your money under your bed, hope it doesn't get stolen and watch as inflation eats it at an average on 2% a year. Have fun!


----------



## erikradbo (Jun 6, 2017)

It feels the iMac Pro is specifically built for graphical applications, and though it will perform great with audio I'm figuring it's really a premium price for getting there. This was a good article for comparison: https://recombu.com/digital/article/apple-imac-pro-vs-old-imac-27-inch#


----------



## Musicam (Jun 6, 2017)

I love Apple, but I watch two problems: if you live in a humid place, the screen will have fog. But the big trick is that the imac will be a closed computer, it will be assembled and you cant remove or separate the pieces. Much money. Please Apple, solve this problem.


----------



## byzantium (Jun 6, 2017)

Yes a lot of people are really really not going to like the non-user-upgradeable RAM.
I wonder can cores be upgraded also.

However having said all that, and I am in no way being apologetic for Apple here, but I think a bit of perspective is good in relation to what you need to shell out to run a business. If you were a carpenter you wouldn't be long spending 20,000 or more on a van, set of power tools, insurance etc. Now you could argue there is a lot more return as a carpenter! but if you can equip yourself with a single powerful machine to run your business on for that money for a good number of years trouble-free - and yes it will be cheaper to build a PC, and I don't want to dig up that old PC/Mac argument - then I think it's actually not that totally crazy.

As another example of relativity and context, one could quite easily spend more than $5000 on sample libraries over a few years. You could easily spend more than $5000 on studio monitors and mics (which have an infinitesimal fraction of the functionality and performance of a modern computer). And studio chairs, and room treatments, and guitars, and basses, RAID storage, backups, the list goes on. A vacation.

Think of the costs when studios were hardware. Hundreds of thousands, even millions. We're spoiled. It's still a golden age where so much can be done with - relatively - little money.


----------



## Musicam (Jun 6, 2017)

I trust in the new Mac mini and the new Mac pro. The problem is the next question. I f you buy now the new Imac pro, whats happen with the new mac system updates 5 years after? Another I mac pro? Laugh!


----------



## Musicam (Jun 6, 2017)

I need a powefull and cheap computer! China.


----------



## Symfoniq (Jun 6, 2017)

No user-upgradeable memory. And I'm skeptical these machines won't throttle under heavy, prolonged load. My company's iMacs and MacBook Pros all do it, using CPUs with much lower TDP.


----------



## macmac (Jun 6, 2017)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> ... and I haven't heard anything to say the $30 Thunderbolt-FW adapter won't still work on the iMac Pro - not that I'm planning on buying one.



It probably will work, I use one in my setup to go from thunderbolt to my RME Fireface firewire, but I've heard not all will work well. I use the Apple one, and have no problem with my RME.

I also use a connector to go from thunderbolt>eSata for an external backup eSata drive. 

DATOptic Inc USB 3.0 to Esata Adapter Support Port Multiplier - U3esata


----------



## macmac (Jun 6, 2017)

Don't know what to make of the Mac situation, really. I had a Mac Pro tower maxed out, loved it. It died. I got another used Mac Pro tower. It lasted 1 month then it died. 

I didn't want an iMac, I didn't want to buy the Vader since it was already old, so my strategy was to get a customized new mini as an interim, until seeing what Apple comes out with next. I figured the mini could then be passed down to good use either as a slave or second internet computer. I bought a thunderbolt enclosure to hold my 4 drives that were in the Pro.

Now I know this solution wouldn't work for a lot of you using huge orchestral templates, but much to my surprise, I am yet to find anything this little mini won't do well. It's not even the 2012 4-core. It seems faster than my Mac Pro was, it handles Logic and Studio One beautifully with no lag whatsoever with a lot of VIs and tracks, I am yet to see the beachball, and it also handles my Photoshop duties admirably. So this experience has kind of changed my thoughts here on getting a $$ longevity machine. With the way new OS's can break things and/or slow down the computer, I'm almost leaning toward getting minis every few years and keeping the old one as is, to boot back into that system if needed. I also toy with the idea of getting a Vader. Also seeing what the new MP will be. 

But like I said, the mini wouldn't work for a lot of you, but just am throwing it out there.

I am wondering though if the new iMac Pro is $5000, what will be for the new MP?


----------



## Soundhound (Jun 6, 2017)

$5k for the entry model. Fuck off, Apple. I've been waiting to see how to move up to Xeons from my current 2012 i7 iMac. But now I'm tempted to get the new iMac w/64 gigs of RAM and a 40" 4k monitor and be done with it for now.


----------



## byzantium (Jun 6, 2017)

Very interesting macmac. Isn't there a very small RAM limit in the mac mini though, how do you get around that? Oh maybe that's what you mean by it won't do large orchestral templates, sorry. 



macmac said:


> Don't know what to make of the Mac situation, really. I had a Mac Pro tower maxed out, loved it. It died. I got another used Mac Pro tower. It lasted 1 month then it died.
> 
> I didn't want an iMac, I didn't want to buy the Vader since it was already old, so my strategy was to get a customized new mini as an interim, until seeing what Apple comes out with next. I figured the mini could then be passed down to good use either as a slave or second internet computer. I bought a thunderbolt enclosure to hold my 4 drives that were in the Pro.
> 
> ...


----------



## FriFlo (Jun 6, 2017)

I think this is the time for Microsoft to really dedicate to multimedia giving some of the ease of use from Mac OS to Windows. Then Apple will loose even more of their so called pro customers.
There are many reasons why I am not thrilled with this Mac Pro, but the biggest one is price! I am not buying any machine where I pay 4 times of the market price for Ram and more SSD space. With the last Mac Pro at least you could easily change the RAM and swap the SSD, but with this one you probably have to configure everything at the Apple price. $5000 for the basic model, then you will have add something like 4000 bucks for 128 gb of Ram and 4tb of internal Flash Memory ... sorry ... I can build something as powerful for half the price ...


----------



## byzantium (Jun 6, 2017)

I don't think there is an enormous price difference between what you're proposing to get (the new iMac) and the iMac Pro in the basic configuration? (Yes granted for sure the lack of user configurability and the resulting price difference/hike is an issue):

* New iMac (today): Kaby Lake i7 (4-core) 4.2GHz, 32GB RAM, 1TB SSD, 5K screen - €4,379

* Upcoming iMac Pro (Dec): 8-core Xeon, 32GB RAM, 1TB SSD, 5K screen - €4,999

* Current Mac Pro (2013): 3.5GHz 6-core (Xeon), 32GB RAM, 1TB SSD, no screen - €4,699



Soundhound said:


> $5k for the entry model. Fuck off, Apple. I've been waiting to see how to move up to Xeons from my current 2012 i7 iMac. But now I'm tempted to get the new iMac w/64 gigs of RAM and a 40" 4k monitor and be done with it for now.


----------



## macmac (Jun 6, 2017)

byzantium said:


> Very interesting macmac. Isn't there a very small RAM limit in the mac mini though, how do you get around that? Oh maybe that's what you mean by it won't do large orchestral templates, sorry.



Yeah, the RAM is only 16GB, so not for everybody. Though my templates are not huge, they are not a mere 10 tracks either (I usually have 40–80 or more) and this mini handles them all, running a 30" Apple Cinema Display HD. I intended the mini purchase to have a very short interim use, because I only expected it to get me by for the time being until I decided what to do since the need to replace the broken one arose so suddenly. But after having it, I'm not in any hurry to get a new machine. I didn't want to get another used one, because the service place said Apple will no longer supply parts, and I was already 2 for 2 dead. The other thing is this mini does not get hot, is quiet, and has brought down the electric bill by about $40 or so a month.

I've had a lot of high-end Macs over the years, upgraded mother boards, kept them a long time, spent a lot of money on them. It's just made me think a little differently now, because I think with Apple, there is no real longevity these days unless you just freeze yourself in time, don't do upgrades, and don't use it for the internet.


----------



## Soundhound (Jun 6, 2017)

Maybe I'm just a penny pincher. No maybe about that.  I generally get refurbished macs except when buying a new model which I have done in a while.

On the Apple site I'm seeing:

*https://www.apple.com/shop/product/G0P80LL/A/refurbished-mac-pro-35ghz-6-core-intel-xeon-e5 (Refurbished Mac Pro 3.5GHz 6-Core Intel Xeon E5)*
3.5GHz 6-Core Intel Xeon E5
16GB memory
512GB PCIe-based flash storage
Dual AMD FirePro D500 graphics processors with 3GB of GDDR5 VRAM each
$2,719.00

*https://www.apple.com/shop/product/G0PK4LL/A/refurbished-mac-pro-30ghz-8-core-intel-xeon-e5 (Refurbished Mac Pro 3.0GHz 8-Core Intel Xeon E5)*
3.0GHz 8-Core Intel Xeon E5
16GB memory
512GB PCIe-based flash storage
Dual AMD FirePro D300 graphics processors with 2GB of GDDR5 VRAM each
$3,229.00

And the new iMac

4.2GHz quad-core Intel Core i7, Turbo Boost up to 4.5GHz
8GB 2400MHz DDR4
1TB SSD
$3,099.00
or with 2tb fusion drive (not sure if that's a good idea) $2,499

As you say, I could get the 2013 6 or 8 core, and be done with it that way...





byzantium said:


> I don't think there is an enormous price difference between what you're proposing to get (the new iMac) and the iMac Pro in the basic configuration? (Yes granted for sure the lack of user configurability and the resulting price difference/hike is an issue):
> 
> * New iMac (today): Kaby Lake i7 (4-core) 4.2GHz, 32GB RAM, 1TB SSD, 5K screen - €4,379
> 
> ...


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jun 6, 2017)

Good lord, I have loved using Mac for the past few years, but I now totally get the whole Apple greed thing. I can't get my head around their philosophy, let around the insane costs. Granted, I feel a MacBook Pro is worth every penny, but the iMac Pro is ridiculous....especially since that price is only for the base model. I also just priced the regular 27" i7 model iMac, and it still exceeds $4000 when you factor in a SSD, RAM, and Apple Care.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jun 6, 2017)

This is an exact twin to the machine I bought in January. It's just awesome.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Apple-MacPro-Tower-5-1-intel-12-Core-3-46GHz-1Tb-64gb-1-Year-Warranty-/222534092248?hash=item33d010c5d8:g:EagAAOSwLEtYgnQi


----------



## Musicam (Jun 6, 2017)

Appple, please, think a new price! Its expensive! :.-) Thank you!


----------



## synergy543 (Jun 6, 2017)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> This is an exact twin to the machine I bought in January. It's just awesome.
> 
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/Apple-MacPro-Tower-5-1-intel-12-Core-3-46GHz-1Tb-64gb-1-Year-Warranty-/222534092248?hash=item33d010c5d8:g:EagAAOSwLEtYgnQi (http://www.ebay.com/itm/Apple-MacPr...092248?hash=item33d010c5d8:g:EagAAOSwLEtYgnQi)



Except you're investing in a 6-8 yr old machine that Apple will no longer service. That's really old in computer years, especially if you're planning to use it for the next 5 years or so. You might want to buy two for redundancy or parts. You're entering MadMax steampunk territory planning to keep such old machines running.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jun 6, 2017)

> Except you're investing in a 6-8 yr old machine that Apple will no longer service



That's what Apple would like you to say, and as a stockholder with our gambling money in AAPL I'm happy you feel that way.

As a user, I say you're posting a lot of very silly stuff.


----------



## FriFlo (Jun 6, 2017)

synergy543 said:


> Except you're investing in a 6-8 yr old machine that Apple will no longer service. That's really old in computer years, especially if you're planning to use it for the next 5 years or so. You might want to buy two for redundancy or parts. You're entering MadMax steampunk territory planning to keep such old machines running.


That is only true if you jump for every new OS as soon as it is coming out. I bought pretty much the same machine with 128gb of ram for a little bit more money about a year ago. There is nothing I am missing vs Vader helmet and it cost me a third of the price I would have payed for the base 2013 Mac Pro model. I bought a 4xnvme raid card I can reuse for the next windows PC I buy. I did not have to invest in any thunderbolt 2 chassis or new soundcard. Using additional PC slaves (which would be necessary with a 2013 model as well) I can load gigantic templates. So many of these are sold for a cheap price, there is no danger of running out of spare parts ... and it is not really necessary anyway! Up to now, the only thing that broke on cheese grater Mac pros was a graphic card. Those were built to last! The contrary is true for Vader helmet ... many reports of damage due to temperature. And now I am supposed to believe that an iMac Pro is the solution to all this? No, sorry, it is very expensive and this design is even more flawed than the 2013 Mac Pro. Buying older Mac models seems like the only reasonable choice beyond going for windows at the moment. Maybe for big companies that don't mind buying a new PC every two years for 10k for each of their desktops, this is peanuts. To me it is not.


----------



## Musicam (Jun 6, 2017)

Come to Linux!


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jun 6, 2017)

synergy543 said:


> Except you're investing in a 6-8 yr old machine that Apple will no longer service. That's really old in computer years, especially if you're planning to use it for the next 5 years or so. You might want to buy two for redundancy or parts. You're entering MadMax steampunk territory planning to keep such old machines running.



Lol! That is a great analogy. I totally get why people still use the older systems, but to shell out for one is IMO not the best idea, especially if you work professionally. The technology is "old", and who knows when a component will crap out; let's say the mobo fries, then you're in a panic to try and have it repaired at some little shop. You simply can't compare the newer processors with machines that age.


----------



## MarcelM (Jun 6, 2017)

Wolfie2112 said:


> Lol! That is a great analogy. I totally get why people still use the older systems, but to shell out for one is IMO not the best idea, especially if you work professionally. The technology is "old", and who knows when a component will crap out; let's say the mobo fries, then you're in a panic to try and have it repaired at some little shop. You simply can't compare the newer processors with machines that age.



well, there is always another option for those who think apple prices are way too high (yes, me included).



though its a bit of fiddling around to have it running smooth, but in the end it just works


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jun 6, 2017)

What Friflo says - and note that the 5,1 does run the latest Sierra and will run High Sierra too!

Wolfie, when you're done bragging about being a professional who - unlike pathetic amateurs like Friflo and me, relies on his computers  - please point me to all the posts on the internet about 5,1s with fried motherboards. Or 3,1s for that matter.

When you do, I'll find some links to drop-in processor tray replacements that take seconds to install. Then I'll show you some ads from people who make a living selling upgraded 2009 machines.

Now, they are charging too much for me to bite, but that's the part of the equation that's missing. The ad I linked is about $1350 for a 12-core powerhouse with 64GB of RAM. These things are built to last.


----------



## synergy543 (Jun 6, 2017)

Heroix said:


> though its a bit of fiddling around to have it running smooth, but in the end it just works


My Dell 8900 Hackintosh, i7, 64G RAM cost $1200 and its been working beautifully without any issues for six months so far! Way faster than than my 2008 MacPro!


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jun 6, 2017)

By the way, I have a PowerMac 9600 in my room from 1997 that runs just like new (I use it to run a patch librarian for my Yamaha VL1).

Okay, I'm not 100% sure about the Mac Plus buried somewhere in the computer graveyard in my garage (that's 1986). But I know the 1989 Mac IIci I used for Lexicon NuVerb cards does work. There's a IIcx in there too somewhere.

Also, I have four Windows XP machines from 2003 that start, and the 2009 VisionDAW I bought from a forum member is pretty nice. It runs Windows 7.

Until about ten years ago computers were 2-1/2 year investments. Not any more.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jun 6, 2017)

One more point: I agree that Apple's current lineup still isn't ideal.

However, people are talking about $5K being the entry level. That's not quite the right choice of words, because Apple has other iMacs starting at $1100.

My hunch is that the Mac Pro they release is also going to be too much money for a computer. That's not saying it's overpriced, it's saying you don't need to spend that much for a professional studio machine.

Man. I repeat myself so much I'm boring myself - and that takes some doing.


----------



## FriFlo (Jun 6, 2017)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> However, people are talking about $5K being the entry level. That's not quite the right choice of words, because Apple has other iMacs starting at $1100.


I find the term "not ideal" way to weak ... yes, you can buy some computers from Apple for less then 5k. But there is not a single one that meets my needs: I want plenty of SSDs and a lot of ram. Shouldn't be that complicated, but with Apple, I have to spend that kind of money, to get 64gb of RAM and about 4 tb of SSD space. Including those specs, I will be always above 5k! I can build a comparable PC for less then half the money. I could just let it go, but I keep telling these things in the slight hope, it will prevent people from buying those latest Macs, just because missing sales are the last hope that Apple will finally learn it and offer upgradable and customizable systems for their "pros", as they used to. I am holding out with my machine until they present the next Mac Pro in 2018 or later ... if this will not be user upgradable, including RAM, HDs, PCIe (or whatever will have replaced PCIe by that time - I actually think PCIe will still be valid by then ...), I am done with Apple. I am simply not willing to have to spend 10k an a computer or 5k on a computer that still doesn't give me anywhere near enough of ram and space ...
Currently, I would say the Apple lineup is underwhelming and highly overpriced (beyond any reasonable point)! That is from the standpoint of a composer who wants to run huge templates ... maybe, it is ok for graphical application or somebody with a recording studio ... From my POW it totally sucks!


----------



## FriFlo (Jun 6, 2017)

byzantium said:


> I don't think there is an enormous price difference between what you're proposing to get (the new iMac) and the iMac Pro in the basic configuration? (Yes granted for sure the lack of user configurability and the resulting price difference/hike is an issue):
> 
> * New iMac (today): Kaby Lake i7 (4-core) 4.2GHz, 32GB RAM, 1TB SSD, 5K screen - €4,379
> 
> ...


Dude, you are literally comparing Apples to Apples ...


----------



## Mike Connelly (Jun 6, 2017)

And don't forget in this case entry level includes 8 core xeon, 1TB pcie SSD, and a 27 inch 5k monitor. Sounds like a pretty powerful video card too. It's very expensive, and it forces you to buy all those things even if you don't want them. But it's really only an entry level model in name.

I'm surprised Apple didn't just add higher end options to the existing iMac line instead of making it a completely separate model. Instead of calling it "entry level" I think people would have a different attitude if it were an optional upgrade from the other iMac models at $5k. Currently they top out at $3699 with the best cpu and 1TB/32 gigs, that would make going to the eight core and other upgrades an extra $1300.


----------



## byzantium (Jun 6, 2017)

FriFlo said:


> Dude, you are literally comparing Apples to Apples ...



Indeed I am (nice analogy/pun btw), but that was exactly the point.


----------



## jonnybutter (Jun 6, 2017)

Pat Human said:


> And it seems that at least RAM will not be upgradeable by the users themselves.
> https://9to5mac.com/2017/06/05/imac-pro-ram-and-space-gray-accessories/
> 
> We all know Apple pricing in terms of RAM. Unfortunately, another pass for me on Apple Hardware...




Nick is right - the graters are built like tanks, and the older MBPs were/are too. If you can repair them forever, Apple has a harder time selling you a new one. I have a 2012 MBP that I bought refurbished that will do OK on music, and is pretty good for everything else (even Motion) and I expect it to run for many many years, with some replaced parts probably. I have a 2009 MBP on which I've replaced keyboard, battery, ram, drives - still runs fine.



FriFlo said:


> I keep telling these things in the slight hope, it will prevent people from buying those latest Macs, just because missing sales are the last hope that Apple will finally learn it and offer upgradable and customizable systems for their "pros", as they used to.



Macs are a small part of their business now. It's almost a hobby for them.


----------



## CT (Jun 6, 2017)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> Now, they are charging too much for me to bite, but that's the part of the equation that's missing. The ad I linked is about $1350 for a 12-core powerhouse with 64GB of RAM. These things are built to last.



Cheers for bringing this to the attention of someone who is pretty computer-illiterate like myself. Would you say you can regularly find deals like this on eBay, and that they're reliable investments? I've been getting great milage out of my fairly slim iMac setup for about five years now, but I know I'm going to need more power, and probably soon.


----------



## Soundhound (Jun 6, 2017)

If I could get a 2012 Mac Pro to work with Thunderbolt (I have my SSDs in two Blackmagic Thunderbolt bays) I would buy one. But apparently it's not doable. So I'm where I was before the iMac Pro was announced. Only more cranky.


----------



## SillyMidOn (Jun 7, 2017)

Wolfie2112 said:


> Lol! That is a great analogy. I totally get why people still use the older systems, but to shell out for one is IMO not the best idea, especially if you work professionally. The technology is "old", and who knows when a component will crap out; let's say the mobo fries, then you're in a panic to try and have it repaired at some little shop. You simply can't compare the newer processors with machines that age.


I had two motherboards/logic boards fry on me on the old Mac Pro in a 6 year time span. That was not great.


----------



## Musicam (Jun 7, 2017)

I have one dollar.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jun 7, 2017)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> Wolfie, when you're done bragging about being a professional who - unlike pathetic amateurs like Friflo and me, relies on his computers  - please point me to all the posts on the internet about 5,1s with fried motherboards. Or 3,1s for that matter.



I'm not trying to offend anyone, nor am I bragging (not sure where that came from)......and who said I'm a professional? Perhaps I'm a pathetic amateur  . Regardless, I enjoy composing and rely on my systems and personally prefer more horsepower and reliability (yes, I'm a sucker for Apple Care and warranties). I'm glad you have good luck with your old MP's, really, but a few fellow composers have had fried mobo's over the years and that's a huge workflow killer; especially when you can't find parts locally.

Again, not trying to offend anyone, just telling you my opinion


----------



## ontracktuts (Jun 7, 2017)

So the RAM upgrade isn't user replaceable. C'mon Apple! Why!


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jun 7, 2017)

Yeah, that blows. I suspect if you want to go to 64GB, it's going to be like another $800....or even worse, probably $2000 for the full 128GB.


----------



## stonzthro (Jun 7, 2017)

ontracktuts said:


> So the RAM upgrade isn't user replaceable. C'mon Apple! Why!


Reference?


----------



## Musicam (Jun 7, 2017)

I want apple


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jun 7, 2017)

stonzthro said:


> Reference?



https://9to5mac.com/2017/06/05/imac-pro-ram-and-space-gray-accessories/


----------



## Mike Connelly (Jun 7, 2017)

Nothing internal is user upgradeable.


----------



## Soundhound (Jun 7, 2017)

So they can afford to build their giant new circular office. 



ontracktuts said:


> So the RAM upgrade isn't user replaceable. C'mon Apple! Why!


----------



## stonzthro (Jun 7, 2017)

Wow - pass.


----------



## JPQ (Jun 7, 2017)

macmac said:


> Yeah, the RAM is only 16GB, so not for everybody. Though my templates are not huge, they are not a mere 10 tracks either (I usually have 40–80 or more) and this mini handles them all, running a 30" Apple Cinema Display HD. I intended the mini purchase to have a very short interim use, because I only expected it to get me by for the time being until I decided what to do since the need to replace the broken one arose so suddenly. But after having it, I'm not in any hurry to get a new machine. I didn't want to get another used one, because the service place said Apple will no longer supply parts, and I was already 2 for 2 dead. The other thing is this mini does not get hot, is quiet, and has brought down the electric bill by about $40 or so a month.
> 
> I've had a lot of high-end Macs over the years, upgraded mother boards, kept them a long time, spent a lot of money on them. It's just made me think a little differently now, because I think with Apple, there is no real longevity these days unless you just freeze yourself in time, don't do upgrades, and don't use it for the internet.



What mini you mean mac mini and if which model ? and which libraries?


----------



## macmac (Jun 7, 2017)

Back in 1995 spent $5000 on the Mac 4500. Later upgraded it to become a G3, and it lasted me about 7 years until I needed more power. Then I bought a G4, but went mid-tier spending 1/3 the price of the 4500, and kept it 7 years also. That's why I'm feeling there is a moral to the story regarding money and model...same amount of time that I kept both machines, but different price/model. As for now, I know speed and power is great, but...(Apple c'mon).

Then there was the Mac II that later became an FX, or the LaserWriter and upgrade. But that G4 that's still in the closet, and the 4500 that I gave to Goodwill was still working. There was really good built-like-a-tank with Apple, and with the MP towers. My G5 still works too. I wouldn't be surprised if my SE30 still worked if I had it. I was really sad when my MP (both of them) had the issues, with the board, power to the board, that were tricky to diagnose and the hourly cost to troubleshoot eventually wasn't worth it, plus Apple wouldn't supply the parts anymore so it became futile to diagnose or buy another machine for parts. (also I think it's appalling that they won't supply parts; parts are a huge part of a company). I made 4 trips to the Apple service, because the problem temporarily seemed fixed, but then something else went wrong and then later just didn't work at all. Both Mac Pros had been bought used as I found ones that seemed well-taken care of, but they broke regardless; whereas the other ones that still work were bought new, and I always wondered if that had something to do with it. At least I saved money there and did get many years out of the first Mac Pro.


----------



## dtonthept (Jun 7, 2017)

I really agree with everyone's comments about the inevitable gouging for memory and storage, on top of the already not insignificant base line price. While, yes, if you're running a business you sometimes do need to make a big investment in critical gear, you also need to consider the Return On Investment, and what those funds could do if they weren't paying a crazy premium.


----------



## mc_deli (Jun 7, 2017)

dtonthept said:


> consider the Return On Investment, and what those funds could do if they weren't paying a crazy premium.


Your blinding me with mumbo jumbo here. Do you mean like blow and hookers/gigolos?


----------



## macmac (Jun 7, 2017)

JPQ said:


> What mini you mean mac mini and if which model ? and which libraries?



Yes, a Mac Mini. I intended for the mini to be a low-cost temporary solution that could later be an internet computer when I bought a new one. Because of this, I didn't want to go crazy with price so I bought the mid-tier upgraded with 16GB RAM and SSD. But after having it now, I'm surprised that I'm loving this little thing, because I only expected it to just get me through for a while to finish some jobs.

I own Logic and Studio One, with a lot of Kontakt libraries such as Albion, other Spitfire stuff, Sonokinetic, Komplete Ultimate and a whole host of others (it's a full folder); synths like Serum, Iris, Omnisphere, Trilian, Octopus, (it even runs the Diva demo along with everything else); FX like Slate, Waves, Izotope, FabFilter. My setup is a 30" Apple Cinema HD Display and an RME Fireface with a thunderbolt to Firewire adapter, and a thunderbolt 4-bay HD chassis. I'm really impressed with it. If I had known I'd like it so much (and that I'd want to keep it longer), I might have gotten the i7 but since the reviews said it wasn't that much faster and I was not wanting to pile cash onto what I thought would end up as an internet machine, I didn't at the time. But turns out I really didn't need to because I'm yet to find anything this doesn't handle.

I do have the old Mac Pro sitting unhooked in another room and I wouldn't be surprised if one day if I tried to turn it on, it may work for a while, but honestly I'm over it now and I don't want it back. (I can't believe I'm saying this but it's true). If I hadn't had two MP malfunction in a span of 4 months, I might have considered another eBay one because I loved the tower, but I was done with the potential problems. This experience had so many twists and dragged on to the point I was almost afraid to run the thing. In contrast, the mini is so quiet, cool, portable!!! not like sitting next to a space heater, room stays cooler, and our electric bill is at least $40 less per month now.

Now I know it doesn't have the power of the current Mac Pro or iMac, and I'm not trying to imply that it does. But it works so very well with everything I'm using it for. I have not yet seen a beach ball, and my biggest projects don't even come close to 50%–60% CPU. For me, I feel it's really an impressive little machine, and I never expected that. I'm not a casual computer user—I do demand from it—but it may not be enough for others. Just my experience, that's all.


----------



## fixxer49 (Jun 7, 2017)

i have two mac minis (one 2012 quad i7 and one 2014 i7,both SSD and maxed out on RAM), connected via VEP6. my only gripe is that i have a tough time making mac minis work properly with 3rd party displays, so i had to shell out for two Apple displays. but these little bastards have yet to crap out on me.


----------



## macmac (Jun 7, 2017)

Interesting about the 3rd party displays. About a month ago I though my 30" was failing (mind you this whole ordeal has spooked me now for these issues), I hooked up an old Samsung to see if that worked, and it did. Turns out somehow my 30" connector had become a little loose so all was OK after all.


----------



## JPQ (Jun 7, 2017)

macmac said:


> Yes, a Mac Mini. I intended for the mini to be a low-cost temporary solution that could later be an internet computer when I bought a new one. Because of this, I didn't want to go crazy with price so I bought the mid-tier upgraded with 16GB RAM and SSD. But after having it now, I'm surprised that I'm loving this little thing, because I only expected it to just get me through for a while to finish some jobs.
> 
> I own Logic and Studio One, with a lot of Kontakt libraries such as Albion, other Spitfire stuff, Sonokinetic, Komplete Ultimate and a whole host of others (it's a full folder); synths like Serum, Iris, Omnisphere, Trilian, Octopus, (it even runs the Diva demo along with everything else); FX like Slate, Waves, Izotope, FabFilter. My setup is a 30" Apple Cinema HD Display and an RME Fireface with a thunderbolt to Firewire adapter, and a thunderbolt 4-bay HD chassis. I'm really impressed with it. If I had known I'd like it so much (and that I'd want to keep it longer), I might have gotten the i7 but since the reviews said it wasn't that much faster and I was not wanting to pile cash onto what I thought would end up as an internet machine, I didn't at the time. But turns out I really didn't need to because I'm yet to find anything this doesn't handle.
> 
> ...



Is this quad core Mac Mini? make me think you can run such libs is amazing hear. even manufacrurers often talk quadcore etc. sounds so good.


----------



## macmac (Jun 7, 2017)

No, it's just a 2-core, but there's no sluggishness whatsoever. But I don't use huge huge orchestral templates like some of you do, and I don't run slaves (though I could). I've just changed my mindset, especially since you need a new computer more often now with these yearly OS updates (unless you just freeze yourself in time which is not a bad idea). With the mini, it seems to me a person can update more often because of the lower cash outlay and not feel like you have to get your money's worth (keep it longer) to justify spending $5000. But that is only if a mini will fit one's needs. 

Apple unfortunately killed the 4-core on the newer mini's. I wish they would bring that back and then some.


----------



## JPQ (Jun 7, 2017)

macmac said:


> No, it's just a 2-core, but there's no sluggishness whatsoever. But I don't use huge huge orchestral templates like some of you do, and I don't run slaves (though I could). I've just changed my mindset, especially since you need a new computer more often now with these yearly OS updates (unless you just freeze yourself in time which is not a bad idea). With the mini, it seems to me a person can update more often because of the lower cash outlay and not feel like you have to get your money's worth (keep it longer) to justify spending $5000. But that is only if a mini will fit one's needs.
> 
> Apple unfortunately killed the 4-core on the newer mini's. I wish they would bring that back and then some.



So good know. makes me think what exact libraries you use? becouse i want know what is their requiments when asked manufacturer. if some libs which say need quad core work still in this computer....


----------



## fixxer49 (Jun 7, 2017)

macmac said:


> Interesting about the 3rd party displays. About a month ago I though my 30" was failing (mind you this whole ordeal has spooked me now for these issues), I hooked up an old Samsung to see if that worked, and it did. Turns out somehow my 30" connector had become a little loose so all was OK after all.


yeah - older Samsungs seem to work ok. i actually had a 50" Samsung connected to one of the minis, and it worked really nicely [and obviously _looked_ impressive], but only if you renamed the HDMI input to "PC". I've now got two 27" thunderbolt displays, and they just feel a million times better, not to mention the extra ports for drives, dongles, etc.


----------



## macmac (Jun 7, 2017)

JPQ said:


> So good know. makes me think what exact libraries you use? becouse i want know what is their requiments when asked manufacturer. if some libs which say need quad core work still in this computer....



Well it's not to say there might be some thing that wouldn't run but, if there is, I haven't found it yet—and I've got a lot of plugins and libraries. My SSD also started its life with fresh installs of everything, which I do think makes a difference with any computer.

Slate plugins say they require quad core but they work fine here, with low CPU just like they did when on my Pro.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jun 7, 2017)

miket said:


> Cheers for bringing this to the attention of someone who is pretty computer-illiterate like myself. Would you say you can regularly find deals like this on eBay, and that they're reliable investments? I've been getting great milage out of my fairly slim iMac setup for about five years now, but I know I'm going to need more power, and probably soon.



You can find deals like that on eBay sometimes, but certainly not all the time. I paid the same for mine in January, and I posted an eBay link to another machine comparably priced a couple of months ago.

My original plan was to find a dual-processor 4,1, figure out how to flash it myself to a 5,1, then install two 3.46GHz processors and raise it to 64GB of RAM if necessary. That would have been just a little less expensive, and then Synthetic (a friend on this forum who knows what he's doing) said he paid someone to do the upgrade... so this was a better way to go.


----------



## Musicam (Jun 7, 2017)

Hi Friends, then alternatives to IMac Pro? The Mac Pro?


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jun 7, 2017)

Wolfie2112 said:


> I'm not trying to offend anyone, nor am I bragging (not sure where that came from)......and who said I'm a professional? Perhaps I'm a pathetic amateur  . Regardless, I enjoy composing and rely on my systems and personally prefer more horsepower and reliability (yes, I'm a sucker for Apple Care and warranties). I'm glad you have good luck with your old MP's, really, but a few fellow composers have had fried mobo's over the years and that's a huge workflow killer; especially when you can't find parts locally.
> 
> Again, not trying to offend anyone, just telling you my opinion



Oh, I'm not offended, just bemused. 

It came from here:



> I totally get why people still use the older systems, but to shell out for one is IMO not the best idea, *especially if you work professionally*. The technology is "old", and who knows when a component will crap out; let's say the mobo fries, then you're in a panic to try and have it repaired at some little shop. You simply can't compare the newer processors with machines that age.



Shelling out for them is a matter of *how much* you're shelling out.

And I think you'd be surprised at the power. Remember, these are upgraded processors, not the original ones. They're still from the same family, and of course the top-line new ones are more powerful, but two 6-core 3.46 GHz X5690 processors isn't chopped liver.

As to reliability, well, breakdowns do happen, but I've never had a desktop Mac break in over 30 years of using them all day long. If there's an issue I can't fix with a replacement motherboard (not expensive on eBay), in Los Angeles we have Les Mannus. He's not just some little repair shop, and I'd certainly go to him before Apple.

And I warned you not to let me get started ranting about how *all* extended warranties are a waste of money over time even if you get lucky/unlucky and one pays off!


----------



## dcoscina (Jun 7, 2017)

5K for this? I'm looking to pick up a used MP trashcan when the new Pros debut. I've never owned a brand new Mac aside from my laptops so this will be in keeping with that. Unless they introduce a tiered system where one can step into a new MP for a modest price (ie under 3k CAD). Doubt it.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jun 7, 2017)

> I've never had a desktop Mac break in over 30 years of using them all day long



Actually I lied. There was a G4 with leaking coolant that I had to have repaired under warranty. But that was a well-known defect, and it was while the computer was new.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jun 7, 2017)

I must admit, I always liked the cheese grater look of those Mac Pro's....wish they still made them like that.

I buy the warranties because I have had major failures with purchases, including computers, cars, a 60" LCD TV and an iPhone (all of which paid for themselves in spades). With my luck, Murphy's Law would kick in right after the one year warranty on a new MacBook and I'd have to pay a zillion dollars for a new mobo or something. Highly unlikely, but I sleep better (I know, seems like a waste, but I do it).


----------



## clisma (Jun 7, 2017)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> If there's an issue I can't fix with a replacement motherboard (not expensive on eBay), in Los Angeles we have Les Mannus. He's not just some little repair shop, and I'd certainly go to him before Apple.



Care to elaborate on this? It would be nice to be prepared if my beloved and flashed 2009 MP would decide to crap out...


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jun 7, 2017)

dcoscina said:


> 5K for this? I'm looking to pick up a used MP trashcan when the new Pros debut. I've never owned a brand new Mac aside from my laptops so this will be in keeping with that. Unless they introduce a tiered system where one can step into a new MP for a modest price (ie under 3k CAD). Doubt it.



3K CDN? I'm a Canuck too, and you could get a good MacBook Pro for that...double or triple that for a MP.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jun 7, 2017)

clisma said:


> Care to elaborate on this? It would be nice to be prepared if my beloved and flashed 2009 MP would decide to crap out...



Here he is:

http://mancomacs.com

After the '94 earthquake, my Mac at Recording magazine wouldn't start (because it and everything else above waist level was piled on the floor).

He opened it, smiled, tapped the hard drive with a hammer, and sent me off.


----------



## JPQ (Jun 7, 2017)

macmac said:


> Well it's not to say there might be some thing that wouldn't run but, if there is, I haven't found it yet—and I've got a lot of plugins and libraries. My SSD also started its life with fresh installs of everything, which I do think makes a difference with any computer.
> 
> Slate plugins say they require quad core but they work fine here, with low CPU just like they did when on my Pro.



Makes me think Cinematic Strings 2 someone sayed earlier Diva is much heavier in him/her/they old computer.


----------



## macmac (Jun 7, 2017)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> Here he is:
> 
> http://mancomacs.com
> 
> ...



See, that's a place I wish I had around here. We have Apple stores, which I don't go to for repair, but mine is a good certified Apple little repair shop which is good. Apple parts, no, unless they track a used one somewhere because Apple drew the line. In my case it wasn't worth continuing with it, but I think the towers were and are great robust machines.


----------



## galactic orange (Jun 7, 2017)

macmac said:


> No, it's just a 2-core, but there's no sluggishness whatsoever. But I don't use huge huge orchestral templates like some of you do, and I don't run slaves (though I could). I've just changed my mindset, especially since you need a new computer more often now with these yearly OS updates (unless you just freeze yourself in time which is not a bad idea). With the mini, it seems to me a person can update more often because of the lower cash outlay and not feel like you have to get your money's worth (keep it longer) to justify spending $5000. But that is only if a mini will fit one's needs.
> 
> Apple unfortunately killed the 4-core on the newer mini's. I wish they would bring that back and then some.



I use a 2012 quad-core i7 Mac Mini maxed out with 16GB RAM and 2 internal SSDs: a 500GB for OS, synths, and small sample libraries and a 1TB for large libraries (Orchestral Tools, Spitfire, Cinematic Studio, etc.). I honestly haven't tried pushing it enough to know the limits of the processor. For me the main limitation is the 16GB cap. For the next Mini, I need at least 32GB minimum, preferably 64GB to load up orchestral templates (looking at you, Orchestral Tools). I've been ready to get a new desktop and laptop for a while now, but 16GB max... at THOSE prices? Honestly, the most appealing Mac to me right now is still the 2015 MBP quad-core and the best thing I can say about it is that it has the older keyboard. Even so, it's basically a portable version of my current Mini.

The power of the announced iMac Pro is impressive. I think would be able to get by with the base model, but the fact is that I don't need the display. If I wanted another display I would get another 2.5k Dell to match the one I've got (pluses include the fact that it can be rotated vertically and adjusted in height). And the other thing is that for audio that thing is OVERKILL unless you are a pro or work in a pro studio and having the most powerful machine out there is a given. The newly upgraded iMacs are a pretty good bargain I suppose. 

Apple, give me a modest 4-6 core Mini with high RAM options (I can use external storage so I don't care much about that). I don't need hyper flaming graphics and a billion color display. Throw a bone to the audio peeps. You sell a DAW for crying out loud.


----------



## Soundhound (Jun 7, 2017)

It's true, with Apple it's always about creating graphics, creating audio is always an afterthought. Jobs audited calligraphy classes after he dropped out, not recording classes, he was obsessed with design.


----------



## mc_deli (Jun 7, 2017)

NYC Composer said:


> Pretty OT, but-
> 
> I can understand people refusing to invest in the corrupt and manipulated stock markets. I am the steward of our little family retirement portfolio, and I can tell you from some years of investing that there really is no such thing as an ethical corporation. Corporations are in business to make money for shareholders and to provide huge salaries for top management and board members. That's pretty much it.
> 
> ...



OT But quick reply.
I totally agree with this. As entrepreneurs a lot of people on here know that you have to save somehow for a pension. If you can invest in e.g. property that's something, or then bonds and stocks are unfortunately one of the few realistic choices when saving rates are negligible. I realise that any dealings with banks means you are tacitly supporting their broad range of investments (in any and every company around the world).

But I had do something to get myself to sleep. In the end I made a compromise and left all US funds out of my investments because of various tech, pharma and military companies that appear in every fund offered by my bank. It's all window dressing of course as, by investing in local bonds and the local stock market and funds, I am investing in some other similar companies I don't like. It also doesn't make sense for me to become my own fund manager and spend time trading individual stocks.

At least I did something. Whatever gets you through the night. I thought it was worth pointing out here. Sometimes the relationship with corporations looks like fantasy football when someone says they have it both ways... "I'd like better value but I have shares so I am happy if the customer loses." It's a win-win! Is it? I think it's a massive lose. Unfortunately it's gonna take time for me to become the leader of the free world and undo 70 years of rapacious greed, inequality and government sanctioned corruption.

SORRY FOR THE MASSIVE OT but Apple, Alphabet and Amazon are a big deal and you decide their fate with every click.


----------



## Michael Antrum (Jun 7, 2017)

I mainly use an i7 5k iMac with 1tb SSd as my main daw, but I have just decided to use my old MacPro 4,1 from 2009 as a VE Pro Slave.

I Stuck 64gb Ram into it - which cost me £ 160 from eBay, and upgraded it to the 5,1 via firmware.

I have bought a couple of Dual SATA PCIe Cards which will allow me to put mount SSDs directly on the cards (no wires) and get SATA3 speeds for my libraries.

I am eyeing up a processor upgrade for less than £ 200 that will give me 12 Cores at over 3Ghz rather that 8, and will also bump my Ram speed from 1066 to 1333.

This machine was originally £ 2.5k when I bought it. Everyone thought I was crazy to spend that on a computer. But it's still a really usable machine.

It's 8 years old. 

What a terrific bit of kit.


----------



## NameOfBand (Jun 8, 2017)

Not read through the whole thread, but seems like there are many here who wish for certain things. Let Apple know! http://vi-control.net/community/thr...ke-your-voice-heard.62254/page-2#post-4092920

There's a link in the thread to give feedback. Fill in the poll also


----------



## fixxer49 (Jun 8, 2017)

macmac said:


> Interesting about the 3rd party displays. About a month ago I though my 30" was failing (mind you this whole ordeal has spooked me now for these issues), I hooked up an old Samsung to see if that worked, and it did. Turns out somehow my 30" connector had become a little loose so all was OK after all.



I guess I should point out - for the purposes of this particular discussion - that my relatively modest system (basically 6 cores i7, 2TB SSD, 32GB RAM total + Apple displays) costs well over $5K in total when all is said and done. Which makes the iMac Pro price not as incredibly off-the-charts as some are making it out to be.


----------



## rlw (Jun 8, 2017)

artomatic said:


> Couldn't wait for the Pro in December.
> Just ordered the new 27-inch iMac with Retina 5K display
> 
> 4.2GHz quad-core Intel Core i7, Turbo Boost up to 4.5GHz
> ...


Please let us know how this works. I currently have a Mac book pro 2013 with 16gb memory to an i7 6700k windows slave with 64gb that supports 100 plus VEP instances but with the buffer delay I can't play in parts real time. Need to be able to run buffer of 128 . Looking at the new iMac maxed out ($5300). Will watch your progress closely and your courage to just set in now. Best of luck and success to you.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jun 8, 2017)

Rod, I have the same setup, except my slave is an i7 2700k. I run a 256 buffer without any lag or delay. Are you really running 100+ instances of VEPro? If so, What is the reason for that?


----------



## ghobii (Jun 8, 2017)

Here's an article on PCGamer where they tried to make a PC equivalent to the iMac Pro. They ended up spending $4686.71.
http://www.pcgamer.com/apples-new-i...source=facebook&utm_campaign=buffer_pcgamerfb


----------



## byzantium (Jun 8, 2017)

Interesting comparison above re the PC. Also interesting suggestion further above that a multi-core mac mini with e.g. 64GB RAM would be the business. We don't need the expensive displays.


----------



## Soundhound (Jun 8, 2017)

Yes please. 8 core, up to 128 gig, support a couple of displays mac mini. Preferably less than the cost of a Tesla.



byzantium said:


> Interesting comparison above re the PC. Also interesting suggestion further above that a multi-core mac mini with e.g. 64GB RAM would be the business. We don't need the expensive displays.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jun 8, 2017)

I created a new thread in the OT section to comment on what Larry wrote:



> Time to put your money under your bed, hope it doesn't get stolen and watch as inflation eats it at an average on 2% a year. Have fun!



http://vi-control.net/community/thr...rns-etc-continued-from-imac-pro-thread.62622/


----------



## amnesiasound (Jun 8, 2017)

*_Still waiting for the new Trashcan update*_


----------



## FriFlo (Jun 9, 2017)

ghobii said:


> Here's an article on PCGamer where they tried to make a PC equivalent to the MacMini Pro. They ended up spending $4686.71.
> http://www.pcgamer.com/apples-new-i...source=facebook&utm_campaign=buffer_pcgamerfb


The problem ist not that all of this hardware is overpriced in the base model. But take a look at upgrade prices for ram and storage. That is a total rip off ...


----------



## Musicam (Jun 9, 2017)

HP is a great alternative.


----------



## IFM (Jun 9, 2017)

Well top shelf PC components do cost quite a bit so a $5k starting price point isn't that bad IMO. I was also one that went the way of a previous gen 12 core (CPU speed maxed out) with 64 gigs of ram, all SSD, added USB3 and with another card I could add SATAIII. My entire large template runs on it (LPX and VEP). I still run dual 23" Cinema displays so my graphics requirements are not needy. 

I have one PC Slave that currently I don't use because of the power of the Mac Pro. Looking forward to a MP update so when it comes time I'll move that direction.


----------



## rlw (Jun 9, 2017)

IFM said:


> Well top shelf PC components do cost quite a bit so a $5k starting price point isn't that bad IMO. I was also one that went the way of a previous gen 12 core (CPU speed maxed out) with 64 gigs of ram, all SSD, added USB3 and with another card I could add SATAIII. My entire large template runs on it (LPX and VEP). I still run dual 23" Cinema displays so my graphics requirements are not needy.
> 
> I have one PC Slave that currently I don't use because of the power of the Mac Pro. Looking forward to a MP update so when it comes time I'll move that direction.



I was also consider a Mac Pro Vader with 10 cores plus 128 gb ram (4tb ssd). For the price trade off, do you have an opinion that 12cores 64gb of ram is preferred over 10 cores and 128gb ram is the better option ?


----------



## IFM (Jun 9, 2017)

rlw said:


> I was also consider a Mac Pro Vader with 10 cores plus 128 gb ram (4tb sad). For the price trade off, do you have an opinion that 12cores 64gb of ram is preferred over 10 cores and 128gb ram is the better option ?


The MB is also faster on the Vader so so if you have the funds get the more current model. You can go to 128 on the 5,1 too.


----------



## byzantium (Jun 9, 2017)

I presume you mean the iMac Pro below (Sorry just being a bit pedantic, it does say this once you click into the article). 
Thanks for posting it, it's useful. 
I guess the thing is the iMac Pro is being targeted at big-time video users, and a lot of that graphics capability is not needed for us audio folk.



ghobii said:


> Here's an article on PCGamer where they tried to make a PC equivalent to the MacMini Pro. They ended up spending $4686.71.
> http://www.pcgamer.com/apples-new-i...source=facebook&utm_campaign=buffer_pcgamerfb


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jun 9, 2017)

> For the price trade off, do you have an opinion that 12cores 64gb of ram is preferred over 10 cores and 128gb ram is the better option ?



I'm not IFM, but my suggestion is to break down your choice. RAM and # cores are separate issues, before you get to the practical questions - such as whether you want to buy another monitor as part of your machine, the ports, etc.

Also, a friend raised the question of noise. A machine that powerful is going to generate some heat, so does it require fans?


----------



## NYC Composer (Jun 10, 2017)

galactic orange said:


> I use a 2012 quad-core i7 Mac Mini maxed out with 16GB RAM and 2 internal SSDs:
> 
> Apple, give me a modest 4-6 core Mini with high RAM options (I can use external storage so I don't care much about that). I don't need hyper flaming graphics and a billion color display. Throw a bone to the audio peeps. You sell a DAW for crying out loud.



I have (I think) the same machine as you. Mine runs at 2.6 ghz, overclocks to 3.2. I use it as a slave for my 2008 cheesegrater.

It's awesome-and no, that bargain is not coming around again.


----------



## paulmatthew (Jun 10, 2017)

Too bad the high end standard Imac doesn't have a six core option. Looks like I'll have to build a PC now.


----------



## galactic orange (Jun 10, 2017)

paulmatthew said:


> Too bad the high end standard Imac doesn't have a six core option. Looks like I'll have to build a PC now.


I'm still hoping for a six core Mini.


----------



## IFM (Jun 11, 2017)

galactic orange said:


> I'm still hoping for a six core Mini.


You are bettering off building a Hackintosh but yes that would be nice. Although if you are running LPX and a PC slave you can do a lot with a loaded quad core i5.


----------



## galactic orange (Jun 11, 2017)

IFM said:


> You are bettering off building a Hackintosh but yes that would be nice. Although if you are running LPX and a PC slave you can do a lot with a loaded quad core i5.


I've considered both options. The slave route is more appealing to me for the pure power for the money factor.


----------



## paulmatthew (Jun 11, 2017)

Maybe we can get a screaming deal on the trash cans when the IMAC pro is released . Wishful thinking


----------



## FriFlo (Jun 11, 2017)

paulmatthew said:


> Wishful thinking


Very much so, I am afraid ... the Mac Pro could actually be the best option for composers. But the price and also the already dated thunderbolt 2 I/Os make it another option far from ideal IMO ... if you buy one now, not only will you pay quite substantially to much for aged hardware, but you will most likely face further costs for your next machine, when thunderbolt 2 will probably be today's FireWire ...


----------



## colony nofi (Jun 12, 2017)

I still have 2 of the quad core mini servers - they were great when upgraded. (I put in 2xSSD's and 16gb ram - which at the time was a higher cost than the mini's themselves!) They always promised so much, but I never got them working incredibly smoothly. Perhaps it was user error. About 2 years later the nMP came out and I jumped on that with a lot of ram, and have been using one computer ever since. 
It will be very interesting to see what the "modular" mac pro's look like next year. They will almost certainly be xeons / ECC setup - which is OTT for most audio guys, but I still find the machines more powerful than the standard imacs. I can't use the new imac pro personally, as the screen doesn't suit my workflow.
I can imagine a LOT of graphics / grading guys salivating at the thought of the imac pro's....


----------



## Puzzlefactory (Jun 12, 2017)

As much as I like OSX and Logic, Apples prices are getting crazier and crazier. 

Can't see myself buying anything other than refurbished macs for the foreseeable future.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jun 12, 2017)

Puzzlefactory said:


> As much as I like OSX and Logic, Apples prices are getting crazier and crazier.
> 
> Can't see myself buying anything other than refurbished macs for the foreseeable future.



The funny thing is, after realizing a new iMac Pro will cost well over $5K, the regular iMac's suddenly seemed inexpensive. And then after I priced out a new Windows slave the other day (custom build, loaded), I realized it was still $2000 less than a current iMac LOL! For some sick reason though, I am still loving Mac and Logic Pro.


----------



## Puzzlefactory (Jun 12, 2017)

Well I just bought a refurbished 5'1 3.4ghz 6 core with 64gig ram for £1500. That'll do me for the time being.


----------



## NYC Composer (Jun 13, 2017)

colony nofi said:


> I still have 2 of the quad core mini servers - they were great when upgraded. (I put in 2xSSD's and 16gb ram - which at the time was a higher cost than the mini's themselves!) They always promised so much, but I never got them working incredibly smoothly. Perhaps it was user error. About 2 years later the nMP came out and I jumped on that with a lot of ram, and have been using one computer ever since.
> It will be very interesting to see what the "modular" mac pro's look like next year. They will almost certainly be xeons / ECC setup - which is OTT for most audio guys, but I still find the machines more powerful than the standard imacs. I can't use the new imac pro personally, as the screen doesn't suit my workflow.
> I can imagine a LOT of graphics / grading guys salivating at the thought of the imac pro's....


I never had a moments problem with my Mini 2.6 Quad. Is that your model? Want to sell one?


----------



## Musicam (Jun 13, 2017)

NYC Composer said:


> I never had a moments problem with my Mini 2.6 Quad. Is that your model? Want to sell one?


HI, do you recommend me mac mini quad? Good for daw? SSD? And graphics?


----------



## Musicam (Jun 13, 2017)

People travel from imac to other computers.


----------



## NYC Composer (Jun 13, 2017)

Musicam-I use mine as a sample streaming slave via VEP, with two Thunderbolt and one USB 3.0 SSD drives. For that it's excellent. Sorry, can't comment on graphics as I use screen sharing, and I run my DAW on my Mac Pro.

Biggest limitation is 16 Gb of RAM.


----------



## wbacer (Jun 14, 2017)

Anyone see this, $17,000. Pure speculation but I'm sure whatever a fully maxed out iMac Pro is going to cost, it's going to be expensive. https://9to5mac.com/2017/06/13/maxed-out-imac-pro-cost/ 
I would hate to even venture a guess at what a next generation fully Maxed out Mac Pro is going to cost.


----------



## byzantium (Jun 14, 2017)

Ah yeah, but you don't need 18 cores, the top-of-range graphics card and 4TB internal SSD. If the basic model is $5000 which is 8-core, 32GB RAM and 1TB internal SSD, then you're probably gonna need around $7000 at a guess for a 8-core and 128GB machine, which should be able to handle most audio / VI work...

Will be interesting to see what may be announced re the Mac Pro, hopefully they will again pre-announce well in advance again like they did with the iMac Pro.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Jun 14, 2017)

Yikes, I wonder what the AppleCare will cost? Probably like $2000 or something.


----------



## fastlanephil (Jun 17, 2017)

paulmatthew said:


> Too bad the high end standard Imac doesn't have a six core option. Looks like I'll have to build a PC now.



There still might be a six-core iMac someday. 

There was some speculation and reported employee grumblings that Apple was going to drop the Mac Pro line and that the iMac Pro was going to fill that market or much of it. Apple later changed it's mind and decided to develop a new generation of the Mac Pro. The meeting with the Apple press folks came soon after. So the iMac Pro is now going to be mainly a stop gap measure until the next Mac Pro is released despite Apple's story that pro users were clamoring for a super powerful and really expensive iMac. So guess what? We decided to build that also!

I'd think the standard iMac is going to benefit from the technology that is being developed for the iMac Pro. Substitute Xeon processors for multi-core 17 processors, standard memory and less beefy GPUs and there you have the future iMac. 

If things go as planned then the new modular Mac Pro, the standard iMac and maybe the Mac Mini will once again compose the Mac desktop line as the iMac Pro eventually rides off into the sunset. 


Night, night.


----------



## bjderganc (Jun 18, 2017)

Aside for slightly newer hardware (with limited speed increases) how is the iMac Pro any better than the current Mac Pro for audio? 
The components are pretty clearly biased in favor of video work (like the Mac Pro), but unlike the Mac Pro, it has limited upgradability and you can't put it in a machine room.

I can't think of any reason to favor the Xeon machine over the new 7700k iMac that is now for sale. Unless you must have 128GB of RAM in one single machine.


----------



## Mike Connelly (Jul 3, 2017)

Or you really need up to 18 core.


----------



## Musicam (Jul 3, 2017)

Money.


----------

