# Apple will use 12-core ARM processor in 2021 Macs



## gsilbers (Apr 23, 2020)

Apple will reportedly use 12-core 5nm ARM processor in a 2021 Mac


A song of Icestorm and Firestorm.




www.theverge.com






Apple will release its first Mac powered by an ARM processor in 2021, Bloomberg reports. The company is thought to have three Mac processors in development as part of its Kalamata project, which are all based on the A14 chip that’s due to be used in this year’s flagship iPhone lineup. According to Bloomberg, the first of these processors will include a 12-core CPU with eight high-performance “Firestorm” cores and at least four energy-efficient “Icestorm” cores.

Apple has long been rumored to be developing its own in-house ARM processors to replace the Intel chips it currently uses in its Macs. Rumors of the switch date back to at least 2012, and since then, we’ve heard multiple rumors that Apple could release its first ARM-powered Mac in 2020 or 2021. Although this latest report corroborates a recent report from analyst Ming-Chi Kuo that suggested an ARM Mac could come in 2021, there’s a chance the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic could force Apple to delay its plans.

The switch would give Apple much more control over its own hardware at a time when Intel has been struggling to offer significant performance increases with each new generation of hardware. Current ARM processors are also often more power-efficient, which helps with battery life. Switching to ARM is expected to let Apple reduce its processor costs by 40 to 60 percent.

Bloomberg’s report offers a lot of technical details on the form Apple’s chips could take:


Three Mac System-on-Chip (SoC) designs based on the A14 processor are currently in development, and work has also started on a Mac SoC based on next year’s iPhone processor. Bloomberg speculates that Apple is planning to keep both its laptop and mobile chips on the same development cycle.
The Mac chips will reportedly be manufactured by TSMC based on a 5nm fabrication process.
The first of these chips will feature eight high-performance CPU cores and at least four energy-efficient cores, for 12 cores in total. The A12Z chip used in the current iPad Pro has eight cores: four high performance and four energy efficient.
As well as a CPU, the SoC will also include a GPU.
ARM Mac computers will continue to run macOS rather than switching to iOS, similar to the approach taken with existing Windows laptops that use Qualcomm ARM processors.
Bloomberg speculates that Apple’s first ARM-based machines will be lower-powered MacBooks because its own chips won’t be able to match Intel’s performance in its higher-end MacBook Pros, iMacs, and Mac Pro computers.
Back in 2018, Apple reportedly developed a prototype Mac chip based on that year’s iPad Pro A12X processor. The success of this prototype is thought to have given the company the confidence to target a transition as early as 2020.
The big question is how well the first- and third-party macOS software will run on the new hardware architecture since software compatibility has been a pain point for Windows laptops running on ARM. Regardless, the shift will be the biggest change for the MacBook lineup since it announced a switch to Intel’s processors back in 2005.



Hopefully its not another of those Universal Binary days when we all had to loose software or hardware :/


----------



## ridgero (Apr 23, 2020)

Don't worry. The long awaited Mac Pro was released in December 2019.

The switch will take years to complete. Apple will likely start with the discontinued Macbook 12".


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Apr 23, 2020)

gsilbers said:


> Hopefully its not another of those Universal Binary days when we all had to loose software or hardware :/



The transition was over about eight years last time, and it's been practical to run multiple-machine setups for almost 20 years (meaning we can still keep our Intel software on a separate machine). I'm not worried.









Mac transition to Intel processors - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org





But of course Apple is going to provide compelling reasons to buy a new machine. That's how the computer industry works!


----------



## Wunderhorn (Apr 23, 2020)

12 cores and whatever firestorm to compete with Threadripper going up to 64 cores? Looks like Apple just can't ever keep up. First PPC, then Intel, now they're begging Heat Meiser and Cold Meiser for assistance... If I wasn't so invested already in the MacOS platform and Logic I'd so want to run!


----------



## Dewdman42 (Apr 23, 2020)

We shall see what happens, but in my view Apple is focused on consumer marketability which will have a negative effect on high performance requirements of pro audio. We are not the majority of their revenue stream. Simple as that. I think this will take a long time to play out and the new MacPros are intel, which means they are going to be supporting intel in some form for 10 years. So not to worry, but it is entirely possible that expensive MacPros may become the only machines worth consideration for audio work in years to come. We shall see though.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Apr 23, 2020)

Dewdman42 said:


> Apple is focused on consumer marketability which will have a negative effect on high performance requirements of pro audio



Well, they certainly take Logic seriously and have been doing so for years. And our 11-year-old machines do a pretty good job, if you ask me!



Wunderhorn said:


> 12 cores and whatever firestorm to compete with Threadripper going up to 64 cores?



Easy, easy. This is only a rumor about possible early machines.


----------



## gst98 (Apr 23, 2020)

Wunderhorn said:


> 12 cores and whatever firestorm to compete with Threadripper going up to 64 cores? Looks like Apple just can't ever keep up. First PPC, then Intel, now they're begging Heat Meiser and Cold Meiser for assistance... If I wasn't so invested already in the MacOS platform and Logic I'd so want to run!



Last time I checked there isn't a 12 inch notebook with 64 cores in it. The 12 cores is for a notebook designed for using pages and word


----------



## Technostica (Apr 23, 2020)

gsilbers said:


> The Mac chips will reportedly be manufactured by TSMC based on a 5nm fabrication process.
> The first of these chips will feature eight high-performance CPU cores and at least four energy-efficient cores, for 12 cores in total.


AMD already have 8 core CPUs in laptops with a 15W TDP on 7nm.
So at 5nm if they optimise for power efficiency Apple could even go fanless!


----------



## Dewdman42 (Apr 23, 2020)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> Well, they certainly take Logic seriously and have been doing so for years. And our 11-year-old machines do a pretty good job, if you ask me!



I'm sure they will continue to make Logic perform as well as possible but I"m also sure that quite a lot of the people they are selling LogicPro to are kiddies messing around in their bedroom that don't need a true pro audio machine after all....and that is where their revenue stream mostly comes from. Not high end users.

Anyway, sorry to say anything and I can already feel the emotional outbursts about to explode over the comment...but I am one that does not see a bright ARM future in terms of performance. Yet another reason to hang on to that 11 year old machine Nick! I think a lot of people, the vast majority of Apple users...by a large margin, do not need the kind of power that we have grown to rely on. Apple wants to sell smaller, cooler devices that look cool and deliver enough performance to play Fornite, surf the web and do homework assignments, connect with iPhones and iPads, to see family photos, and all that kind of stuff. They will continue to make logicPro work of course..its a good selling tool....but honestly...I am not that optimistic about this new ARM future... That's just me..nobody has a crystal ball, we just have to wait and see. But I'm a realist and I think ARM makes a lot of sense for Apple, for the reasons I just laid out. I do not think it makes sense for people like us...and it will be yet to be seen if they can make it perform like we are used to with Intel and AMD platforms.


----------



## David Kudell (Apr 23, 2020)

This is about laptops with super long battery - I think it will be a great option. Apple only makes 10-15% of their revenue from the Mac these days, so it’s not like they “need” to do this to make money. I just think there are benefits and the iPad is getting so powerful there’s no reason it can’t be turned into a great, super thin laptop with no fan and multi day battery life.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Apr 23, 2020)

Bear in mind that 10-15% of over $250 billion adds up pretty quickly.



Plus "ecosystem."

And you do have to admire any company that doesn't use the words "gaming" or "extreme" to flog its wares.


----------



## gsilbers (Apr 23, 2020)

I feel that a MacBook Air with arm and iPadOS will be the next big thing for Apple.
It’s the perfect combination of a ton of apps and a mac like os.
It might only have to be powerful enough for the random YouTuber that uses basic video editing and transcoding.

The audio units v3 has this thing of loading on iPads so maybe some basic GarageBand in ipados?

My guess is a slow transition. Everything labels PRo will stay w intel for 10 years maybe?

I just don’t see Mac OS running on arm chips yet. I think it’ll be more like those chrome books but have iPadOS.
The article says Mac OS but who knows.

not only for power and battery but in general Mac OS is kinda obviously being phased out.... or least seen as a past it’s lifecycle and now beingmore and more Integrated with other solutions... there are still updated and new things but it’s slower than other if their apps and ecosystems. And iPadOS slowly turning into its somewhat replacement. Like a lighter easier and efficient Mac OS. 
Of course it’ll be a while but it’s heading there.


----------



## gsilbers (Apr 23, 2020)

David Kudell said:


> This is about laptops with super long battery - I think it will be a great option. Apple only makes 10-15% of their revenue from the Mac these days, so it’s not like they “need” to do this to make money. I just think there are benefits and the iPad is getting so powerful there’s no reason it can’t be turned into a great, super thin laptop with no fan and multi day battery life.



my guess the iPad Pro and MacBook Air will live on the same realm With both being used for office light duties and iPadOS that’s easier to find coders to make custom business apps.

Maybe the MacBooks and air will both have an options to be used as Mac OS or iPad os.


----------



## AlexRuger (Apr 23, 2020)

“The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated.” - Apple pro machines

Every single time Apple does...anything...music pros come out of the woodwork to tell us all that the sky is falling. The Mac Pro is dead, Logic is vaporware, Apple doesn't care about pros, whatever. It's been always turned out to be nonsense, every time.

The fact is: on single core performance, Apple's ARM chips are absurdly great. Super fast, super efficient. Taking an objective, birds'-eye view of their changes over the past decade or so, they're slowly blurring the lines between iOS/iPadOS/macOS and the machines they run on. First it was making the iPad more powerful by upping its specs, giving it its own OS, introducing proper mouse and keyboard support, a proper filesystem, etc. There's Catalyst for bringing iPad apps to the Mac and Sidecar to make the two machines work closer together. These are all baby steps, but if you think that Apple does anything else, you haven't been paying attention.

To go out on a limb and stare into my own crystal ball for a moment, we're going to see a MacBook-like device, probably a repurposed 12" chassis, as the first ARM Mac (much in the same way the iPhone 8 chassis is being repurposed for the new SE with the super badass A13 chip). Over time, the MacBok Air will become ARM'd. Perhaps after that the iMac. Only once the platform is super secure will we see ARM hit the Pro devices. By that point, the iPad will have evolved in who knows what ways.

Apple and Microsoft are finding their ways to the same endpoint, but through vastly different paths. Microsoft began by simply making Windows touch-friendly -- rather awkwardly -- and then refining from there. They started from a point of being somewhat messy and clunky about it and smoothed and refined the design as real world users put it through its growing pains. Android did something similar in terms of designing a mobile OS -- clunky and messy at first, slowly refining into something elegant. 

Apple always follows the same playbook: they let their competition make mistakes publicly, and they develop something refined in private, only releasing steps towards a goal in tiny chunks, and only when it's ready. They did this with iOS -- elegant and simple first, adding features as needed, culling the fat or outright starting over a la iOS 7 when that process resulted in more clunkiness than they're comfortable with -- and they're doing the macOS/iPadOS/iOS merge the same way. 

Their goal is, simply, seamlessness in all respects. Seamless file transfer and charging and listening to music by removing cables. Seamless integration between platforms. Seamless codebases for different platforms for their developers. Seamless everything. Just look at an Apple store, it's obvious.

This approach clearly has drawbacks and irks a lot of people, but that's beside the point. The point is, they're doing their thing, and if you pay attention, it's pretty clear how and why they're going to generally go about the transition to ARM. 

macOS for music pros isn't going away. Neither is focus on Logic. Neither is anything else. If anything, we're going to eventually have incredibly quiet, incredibly powerful, incredibly power efficient machines to do pro music work on -- with Logic, if you so choose. It will take a while, it will seem as if they've given up on us for some reason or another, and then lo and behold they'll do ____, whether it's dropping a new modular Mac Pro or upgrading from Logic 9 to Logic X.

It's gonna be fine.


----------



## Vik (Apr 23, 2020)

ridgero said:


> The long awaited Mac Pro was released in December 2019.


Yes, and they are based on a modular concept. What if they are designed from the ground up to also be usable with the new ARM processors - without a lot of hassle/redesign (disclaimer: I know nothing about processors!).


----------



## MGdepp (Apr 23, 2020)

I am not _worried_, but this information makes me question the idea of investing in a new Mac Pro. It will probably be a tough call for most people thinking about buying one, unless money is of no concern to them!  

The current Mac Pro with Xeons might work for a long time, but it is not out of this world that the new macOS in about 5 years may not support it any more! And a computer in that price range would have to last for at least 10 years to make sense to me ...

I was thinking about the Mac Pro, but this is important news, which makes it questionable ... Thanks for the info!


----------



## vitocorleone123 (Apr 23, 2020)

Apple will save $$ with the switch. That by no means whatsoever translates into savings for buyers (other than a token savings so they can maybe market how their switch from Intel is benefiting consumers). Maybe they'll surprise me, but....


----------



## dgburns (Apr 23, 2020)

MGdepp said:


> I am not _worried_, but this information makes me question the idea of investing in a new Mac Pro. It will probably be a tough call for most people thinking about buying one, unless money is of no concern to them!
> 
> The current Mac Pro with Xeons might work for a long time, but it is not out of this world that the new macOS in about 5 years may not support it any more! And a computer in that price range would have to last for at least 10 years to make sense to me ...
> 
> I was thinking about the Mac Pro, but this is important news, which makes it questionable ... Thanks for the info!



In the same boat, do I bail or do I buy new mac pro? I love LPX. No, actually I don’t, sometimes I despise it. But it’s my comfort blanket. Made a living with it.
But I really take pause in this Arm direction. What to do, what to do. New Mac Pro is so expensive, you can feel you are buying the ecosystem, not the hardware. Keep wanting to just go Cubase and Protools. Admire those who went that way, you appear to have chosen better.


----------



## gst98 (Apr 23, 2020)

MGdepp said:


> I am not _worried_, but this information makes me question the idea of investing in a new Mac Pro. It will probably be a tough call for most people thinking about buying one, unless money is of no concern to them!
> 
> The current Mac Pro with Xeons might work for a long time, but it is not out of this world that the new macOS in about 5 years may not support it any more! And a computer in that price range would have to last for at least 10 years to make sense to me ...
> 
> I was thinking about the Mac Pro, but this is important news, which makes it questionable ... Thanks for the info!



I don't think it's an issue at all. Firstly, Apple's high end pro products hold their money pretty well. The iMac pros really surprised me in the this respect. There is no need to own a Mac Pro for 10 years to make it economically viable. If its on a business, you can change Mac every three years and lose less money owning one for a decade. (exact same thing with iphones - they lose very little in the first year, lose lots over 3 years. So I change phones every year and it cost me less that if I were to keep it for 3 or 4)


Then, compare it to a similar windows workstation which can go from 5 grand to 500 quid in a few years. I've got a PC for a VEP server on eBay that lost 90% of its value in 3 years.
Second, the Mac pro isn't gonna change to ARM any time soon.

also apple historically keep their products running for many years after they stop updating. Even when they can't run the latest OS they still update the old version. I don't think any other company does this.


----------



## Alex Fraser (Apr 23, 2020)

It will be fine. 
If Apple wanted to stop pro app development, they would have done it already. 

Worth pointing out too that most music makers (pro or otherwise) don’t need huge, snarling macs to get work done.


----------



## MGdepp (Apr 23, 2020)

dgburns said:


> In the same boat, do I bail or do I buy new mac pro? I love LPX. No, actually I don’t, sometimes I despise it. But it’s my comfort blanket. Made a living with it.
> But I really take pause in this Arm direction. What to do, what to do. New Mac Pro is so expensive, you can feel you are buying the ecosystem, not the hardware. Keep wanting to just go Cubase and Protools. Admire those who went that way, you appear to have chosen better.


Actually, I already switched to Cubase a long time ago! Mainly, because I wanted further development like expression maps happen and at that time, really nothing happened with Logic. But the other thought was also, that back then around the trash can Mac Pro release, there already was that feeling of being stuck with Apple hardware. 

For two decades, I tried to switch the main machine to Windows, but I hated it. I don't mind running pure VEpro machines on Windows, but I much prefer macOS for handling audio and the usual computer needs. Right now, I am on a hackintosh and I have no problem at all with it (it runs as smooth as a Mac)! 

But With the new Mac Pros arrival, I had considered it, thinking, it could last very long to me and its high price wasn't such a problem, when the machine would actually be in use for a decade or longer. And now, the ARM story ...


----------



## MGdepp (Apr 23, 2020)

gst98 said:


> I don't think it's an issue at all. Firstly, Apple's high end pro products hold their money pretty well. The iMac pros really surprised me in the this respect. There is no need to own a Mac Pro for 10 years to make it economically viable. If its on a business, you can change Mac every three years and lose less money owning one for a decade. (exact same thing with iphones - they lose very little in the first year, lose lots over 3 years. So I change phones every year and it cost me less that if I were to keep it for 3 or 4)
> 
> 
> Then, compare it to a similar windows workstation which can go from 5 grand to 500 quid in a few years. I've got a PC for a VEP server on eBay that lost 90% of its value in 3 years.
> ...


It may work for you that way, but I actually hate switching my main PC - especially an Apple machine! I like to keep a working system the way it is as long as it is possible. And today, the actual improvements of computers have become less significant than one or two decades ago. So, it is actually not necessary to switch the machine so quickly. Even if you could loose less money that way, I would prefer to stay on a system for longer.

With every switch, I have to redo parts of my studio cabling, switch some devices from PCIe to thunderbolt or later the other way around ... there is more to it than installing the software when your studio is not just a computer with speakers in your bedroom.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Apr 23, 2020)

MGdepp said:


> this information makes me question the idea of investing in a new Mac Pro



What makes me question the idea of investing in a new Mac Pro is that it's a silly amount of money to spend on a professional studio computer.

That they're coming out with new processors means absolutely nothing to me.


----------



## AlexRuger (Apr 23, 2020)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> What makes me question the idea of investing in a new Mac Pro is that it's a silly amount of money to spend on a professional studio computer.
> 
> That they're coming out with new processors means absolutely nothing to me.


Honestly a couple of Mac Mini slaves and whatever main machine you'd like (iMac Pro, MacBook Pro, or Mac Mini with an eGPU) is a better way to go for people considering the Mac Pro. Like you said, the Mac Pro is stupidly overpriced, and as is always the case, a Xeon isn't necessarily the best CPU choice for musicians.

If you buy three Mac Minis with minimal RAM and replace it with a 64GB kit from OWC yourself, and buy an eGPU for the main machine, you'll come out to a little under $5k. That's three great CPU's and a total of 192GB of RAM for $1000 less than the (hilariously terribly spec'd) lowest tier Mac Pro, all connected via 10Gb ethernet cards.

I literally don't care if I'm on Windows or macOS -- I'm equally experienced and knowledgable with both -- but I'm kind of thinking of going that direction rather than building a monster PC, precisely because of the resale angle.


----------



## Technostica (Apr 23, 2020)

We are getting close to the point where Silicon based CPUs will no longer be able to be shrunk any further due to the Physics; electron tunnelling I think.
So the big issue in the 5 to 10 year period more than ever is fabrication.
This will be even more important than which ISA you use.
Along with 3D stacking and new interconnects which are important for multi-chip designs.
Even if Intel dominate again in that area as they have done for most of the century until recently, Apple could ask them to fabricate ARM chips for them.
At that point in the price negotiation Intel would be firmly in the driving seat so any financial advantage could be lost.
Then you look at global politics and distribution of fabrication facilities around the world, which in a post Trump and that other virus world, makes risk management much more complex.
I imagine Apple would do this for control and integration purposes with the financial gains a decent bonus.
So if we never go beyond 256 cores at 3nm, maybe software designers can focus more on optimisation than relying on new hardware to save them.
Interesting times.

Added. With all other things being equal you are better off with a more efficient ISA such as ARM’s. Plus they have a choice of where to fabricate it with Samsung also investing heavily in new fabrication nodes.
I think it would be difficult for Apple not to be very tempted to make the jump.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Apr 23, 2020)

AlexRuger said:


> Like you said, the Mac Pro is stupidly overpriced



Subtle tweak: I'm saying it's stupidly more money than we need to spend for a computer. Whether it's overpriced is a different question that I can't really answer (because I haven't added up the components, and I don't know whether they themselves are overpriced).


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Apr 23, 2020)

AlexRuger said:


> I literally don't care if I'm on Windows or macOS



I do, because I really like Logic. It also doesn't hurt that I've been working on Macs literally all day long for 34 years.


----------



## jcrosby (Apr 23, 2020)

MGdepp said:


> It may work for you that way, but I actually hate switching my main PC - especially an Apple machine! I like to keep a working system the way it is as long as it is possible. And today, the actual improvements of computers have become less significant than one or two decades ago. So, it is actually not necessary to switch the machine so quickly. Even if you could loose less money that way, I would prefer to stay on a system for longer.
> 
> With every switch, I have to redo parts of my studio cabling, switch some devices from PCIe to thunderbolt or later the other way around ... there is more to it than installing the software when your studio is not just a computer with speakers in your bedroom.


People with the attitude you quoted have never had to deal with the lost time involved with deuathorizing and reuathorizing software, migrating, data, etc... I have somewhere in the neighborhood of 1000 plugins and instruments, not to mention multiple daws, various editors, graphics and other misc software.... Days of lost time, not to mention its just not fun.

As far as the initial post - Based on my experience with the 2018 MBP I personally have no optimism for ARM and Apple. My personal experience is that Apple has been in decline, (from a creative enduser perspective) since Cook took the helm. People will disagree and that's fine, but nothing's going to change my perception of the trainwreck of mac issues I've seen in macOS since Apple started ****ing around with the T1 and T2 chip. Not to mention the lack of support that comes bundled with every T2 chip.


----------



## gst98 (Apr 24, 2020)

jcrosby said:


> People with the attitude you quoted have never had to deal with the lost time involved with deuathorizing and reuathorizing software, migrating, data, etc...



How are you migrating? Apple makes this the easiest thing ever. You literally open you new computer next to the old one and it copies it for you.
I have loads of plugins but all you have to do is sign in to ilok(which Apple copies your passwords over) and then sign in to every other Plugin that needs online authentication. (Most of them auto sign in as well). If you do a direct copy plugins don’t even know you changed machine. 

And yeah unplugging PCI stuff might take a while but I use laptops. Changing from a 2016 MacBook to a 2019 MacBook is hard labour intensive. It’s only every three years, that’s not frequent. Even then, surely it’s no more than half a days work to do that. If it saves you money in the long run you’re essentially paying for that lost time - supposing you never have a day off in three years.


----------



## jbuhler (Apr 24, 2020)

AlexRuger said:


> Their goal is, simply, seamlessness in all respects. Seamless file transfer and charging and listening to music by removing cables. Seamless integration between platforms. Seamless codebases for different platforms for their developers. Seamless everything. Just look at an Apple store, it's obvious.


So seamless that my devices are less and less able to communicate with each other. I mean I do have older devices at this point, but they once sort of communicated with each other. These days I'm lucky if my iPad will sync to my iMac with a cable in under an hour.


----------



## jcrosby (Apr 24, 2020)

gst98 said:


> How are you migrating? Apple makes this the easiest thing ever. You literally open you new computer next to the old one and it copies it for you.
> I have loads of plugins but all you have to do is sign in to ilok(which Apple copies your passwords over) and then sign in to every other Plugin that needs online authentication. (Most of them auto sign in as well). If you do a direct copy plugins don’t even know you changed machine.
> 
> And yeah unplugging PCI stuff might take a while but I use laptops. Changing from a 2016 MacBook to a 2019 MacBook is hard labour intensive. It’s only every three years, that’s not frequent. Even then, surely it’s no more than half a days work to do that. If it saves you money in the long run you’re essentially paying for that lost time - supposing you never have a day off in three years.


I do use migration assistant. However on my last two machines I opted for a clean install as I would have carried over data that was 7-8 years old. This meant manually running at least a few hundred different installers.

Authorization-wise not everything I have is iLok. In fact a fair amount of what I have isn't. This means manual deauthriozation and reauthorization for a number of different plugins, audio editors, a bunch of NFRs I've received from testing, etc. Than plugin authorization. This alone takes me at least 15-20 minutes per DAW, (plus inevitable troubleshooting), plus VEP, various sample editors, rinse and repeat...

It also means you can run into activation issues if you've reactivated some software more than a few times or within a few months of a previous authorization. (I built a hackintosh not too far after getting my 2018 MBP.) This means I ran into authorization issues, off the top of my head Ableton and Spectrasonics both required me to contact support, but there are at least a few others I'm not recalling OTTOMH.

With Ableton it's typically an email to support, which can mean a waiting game of a day or more.
With Acustica Audio forget about it, you have to manually deauthorize every plugin one at a time. The same goes for authorization as they do not have an authorize/deauthorize all feature... If you run into a plugin that's out of _seats_ Acustica's support is also notoriously slow and difficult when it comes to getting them open up a new authorization, 3-4 days minimum before you get it resolved. Than there's various audio editing and graphics programs I use. A lot of software still uses outdated machine-based authorization schemes.


----------



## Loïc D (Apr 24, 2020)

gst98 said:


> It’s only every three years, that’s not frequent. Even then, surely it’s no more than half a days work to do that.


Interesting... Is it as simple as this ? What method did you use ? Did you have to reauthorize a lot of stuff ? 
I'm thinking about switching to a more recent MBP next year (I've got a late 2013 model).


----------



## gst98 (Apr 24, 2020)

LowweeK said:


> Interesting... Is it as simple as this ? What method did you use ? Did you have to reauthorize a lot of stuff ?
> I'm thinking about switching to a more recent MBP next year (I've got a late 2013 model).



If it's a direct transfer yes this is possible. 
I had problems with my MBP since 2016, so I've had 3x2016s, 1x2018 and 1x 16-inch. Each time I did a direct transfer it work pretty seemlessly. I think it depends on what change you are making - changing from MBP to MBP it obviously didn't think I'd changed computer and so nothing went wrong. Going from MBP to Mac Pro, or changing from an Intel Mac to a new ARM Mac might cause a bit of a problem.

But even then, most things should be very smooth. Some things like I lok need to be deactivated, then you sign in on the new computer and the reactivate on that one. You'll only run into problems with software who's authorization is either antiquated or badly written. Some music software is both. 

Regardless, most things shouldn't be more than signing in. For instsnce plugin alliance got unauthed, but it asked me to re auth it and autofilled my user and pass. 

The only question then is if you want to reinstall from scratch if you were changing from a 2013 to a new mac. It can be good to get rid of junk on your system. In that case Apple give you the option to copy over certain parts to the new system, and wipe others. Icloud is a massive hepl with this too.


----------



## GtrString (Apr 24, 2020)

Interesting information. I changed to mac from windows about 10 years ago, and have had a hassle free system ever since. With windows I sometimes could have whole weeks of problem solving before the system could come up and running again. Very happy that Apple will keep a seperate os for the macs.

There might be some compatibility issues with the new processors and motherboards, and Im not much of a first mover, so I think I'll plunge for a mac mini and ipad pro later this year, and let the problems solve themselves while I run my system for 8 years, like I have been doing with my last mini.


----------



## Alex Fraser (Apr 24, 2020)

If you're fully iCloud-ed up, moving to a new Mac is almost trivial, even with a fresh install. Take it from someone who's done it twice this month (don't ask.)

Installing music software is the harder part and still unnecessarily complex. During this particular install round, I've actually ditched a couple of plugins as I simply couldn't be bothered with the convoluted install process.


----------



## gsilbers (Apr 24, 2020)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> What makes me question the idea of investing in a new Mac Pro is that it's a silly amount of money to spend on a professional studio computer.
> 
> That they're coming out with new processors means absolutely nothing to me.



In all the chatter for mac pro what gets diluted is that HP and Dell also have similar priced (even higher) than the new mac pro and no one cared. To me its just for a different market because ive seenc ompanies buy dozen of these types of 40-70k computers in one swoop for things related to post prodcution and distribution.
But others see it as they saw the mac pro 10 years ago and as a "pro" computer to run DAW and final cut editing. with apple getting into more of tv and movie production and pro res being the king of distribution files, that mac pro is more relevant to that ecosystem. and also give the re recording mixers and composers with 1000 tracks and 1000 synth a new computer.
On the other hand... getting 4 wheels at $600 is just wierd.


----------



## Technostica (Apr 24, 2020)

gsilbers said:


> In all the chatter for mac pro what gets diluted is that HP and Dell also have similar priced (even higher) than the new mac pro and no one cared.


Hardly anyone cares because they aren't in the market for a workstation that can be configured up to that level.
A lot of people were hoping for a high end desktop in a tower case which is not what the Mac Pro is.

If you dance with the devil he chooses the tunes.
If you dance with Apple they choose the very limited range of form factors and design types.
Hardly a surprise at this stage of the party.
If the DJ has been playing techno and trance all night and you are still expecting punk and reggae, you might want to re-calibrate your level of denial.


----------



## AlexRuger (Apr 24, 2020)

gsilbers said:


> In all the chatter for mac pro what gets diluted is that HP and Dell also have similar priced (even higher) than the new mac pro and no one cared. To me its just for a different market because ive seenc ompanies buy dozen of these types of 40-70k computers in one swoop for things related to post prodcution and distribution.
> But others see it as they saw the mac pro 10 years ago and as a "pro" computer to run DAW and final cut editing. with apple getting into more of tv and movie production and pro res being the king of distribution files, that mac pro is more relevant to that ecosystem. and also give the re recording mixers and composers with 1000 tracks and 1000 synth a new computer.
> On the other hand... getting 4 wheels at $600 is just wierd.


To Technostica's point, the problem is that Apple isn't meeting a certain form factor need. Not everyone (myself included) wants to work on a computer with a built-in display like an iMac or on a laptop. I want to choose my own display, have separate drives in the chassis, etc. I want a tower.

The Mac Pro is certainly a tower but it's just stupidly overpriced in the lower tiers. Once you get to TB's of RAM and two dozen cores, sure, six figures makes sense (it's still too much though). I'd wager that most of us want something like an 8 core i9 and no more than 128 GB of RAM, which the Mac Mini can kind of approach (only 64 GB of RAM though) with a good deal of other form factor drawbacks (no internal drives, limited cooling, etc). I still like Mac Mini's, hence why I suggested them above, but ideally I could get an iMac-spec'd Mac Pro. Apple refuses to cater to this demographic, which I've never quite understood. It's a slam dunk for them.


----------



## gst98 (Apr 24, 2020)

AlexRuger said:


> To Technostica's point, the problem is that Apple isn't meeting a certain form factor need. Not everyone (myself included) wants to work on a computer with a built-in display like an iMac or on a laptop. I want to choose my own display, have separate drives in the chassis, etc. I want a tower.
> 
> The Mac Pro is certainly a tower but it's just stupidly overpriced in the lower tiers. Once you get to TB's of RAM and two dozen cores, sure, six figures makes sense (it's still too much though). I'd wager that most of us want something like an 8 core i9 and no more than 128 GB of RAM, which the Mac Mini can kind of approach (only 64 GB of RAM though) with a good deal of other form factor drawbacks (no internal drives, limited cooling, etc). I still like Mac Mini's, hence why I suggested them above, but ideally I could get an iMac-spec'd Mac Pro. Apple refuses to cater to this demographic, which I've never quite understood. It's a slam dunk for them.



The way I alwasy viewed the iMac is you buy the computer and it happens to come with a screen that can't really be rivaled for less than a grand. Even then, the colour accuracy on the 5k iMacs really is just insane. 

So if you really didn't want the iMac screen couldn't you just hide the whole iMac out of the way and treat it like a tower? Also with the new iMac rumoured to be a 30 inch I can't think of any other display I'd rather have.


----------



## AlexRuger (Apr 24, 2020)

gst98 said:


> The way I alwasy viewed the iMac is you buy the computer and it happens to come with a screen that can't really be rivaled for less than a grand. Even then, the colour accuracy on the 5k iMacs really is just insane.
> 
> So if you really didn't want the iMac screen couldn't you just hide the whole iMac out of the way and treat it like a tower? Also with the new iMac rumoured to be a 30 inch I can't think of any other display I'd rather have.



I...don’t want that display. I prefer a massive 4K. Bigger than 30”. If the display dies, my computer dies. I’ve been in this game long enough and seen enough tech craziness to not want to de-modularize my setup that much, as those sorts of issues tend to happen when you really can’t afford them. 

Beyond that, the other issues remain — not expandable being the big one. And I hate the idea of not being able to swap the internal drive. That’s irked me about all Macs aside from the Pro for a while now. A computer should not be thrown away because a drive died.


----------



## gst98 (Apr 24, 2020)

AlexRuger said:


> I...don’t want that display. I prefer a massive 4K. Bigger than 30”. If the display dies, my computer dies. I’ve been in this game long enough and seen enough tech craziness to not want to de-modularize my setup that much, as those sorts of issues tend to happen when you really can’t afford them.
> 
> Beyond that, the other issues remain — not expandable being the big one. And I hate the idea of not being able to swap the internal drive. That’s irked me about all Macs aside from the Pro for a while now. A computer should not be thrown away because a drive died.



okay thats fine if thats your personal preference. In the UK we have a six year guarentee for "saleable quality". So if a drive or the screen breaks in 6 years of manurfactur they must fix/replace at no expense. So I never really worry about any major things like that happening.

The expandability does suck.


----------



## Michael Antrum (Apr 24, 2020)

I bought a 2009 Mac Pro Tower back when they came out. It cost £ 2.5k, and like many of us, I have upgraded it so its now got dual 3.46 Xeons, 12 Cores, 128 Gb Ram and is stuffed full of PCI cards with two SSD's on each. It has been the best computer I have ever owned. I also have a 5k iMac 2015, which has also been a top bit if kit.

The new Mac Pro, I would argue, is 'Too Pro'. It's such a high end machine, that only the most high end applications really require it.

If they wanted a mac that would fly off the shelves, a i9 in a 'Mac Pro format' with slots for RAM, SSD's and PCI a discrete video card at around 3-4k would sell well.

Apple, however, seem to be want to sell an art installation as much a a computer.

I recently left the Apple eco system for a new laptop. I still use Apple for all my desktop stuff, but I bought a Razer Blade 15", upgraded it to 2tb and 64gb ram and it was around £2k. Whilst the 16" is a better machine the older MacBook Pros, the non upgradability and lack of ports really irks me. Their current idea of having everything hanging off dongles in my view completely demolishes all the elegance of their designs.

Now eveytime I boot up the Razer, I kind of regret not waiting for the 16" to come out, or I do for about 5 minutes. After that, I forget I'm on a PC at all. It's very, quick, totally stable, and has a screaming GPU in it. Cubase runs really well, and I have lots of lovely ports. My Apollo Twin works beautifully with TB3 to TB adapter. I'd buy it again tomorrow. The only downside is the battery life - but thats not an issue for me.

I'm excited to hear about the ARM CPU, but i'm slowly moving to all my composition work being on StaffPad for the iPad. I have an original iPad Pro 9.7" and after using Staffpad for a month or so, I've ordered a new 12.9" one. I've only just realised iPad is becoming a seriously interesting tool, and I'm also using ForScore for managing scores, and GoodNotes for study.

I didn't realise it took Apple 8 years to move from Power PC to Intel - it seemed to be much more rapid than that. I also remember that it was relatively painless for many - in fact I was amazed at how smooth the transition actually was.

So this Arm thing - well I'm looking forward to see how that happens, but Apple have released a lot of seriously flawed products (MacBook Pro Keyboard anyone ?) and I wonder if thats going to change....


----------



## gst98 (Apr 24, 2020)

Michael Antrum said:


> I bought a 2009 Mac Pro Tower back when they came out. It cost £ 2.5k, and like many of us, I have upgraded it so its now got dual 3.46 Xeons, 12 Cores, 128 Gb Ram and is stuffed full of PCI cards with two SSD's on each. It has been the best computer I have ever owned. I also have a 5k iMac 2015, which has also been a top bit if kit.
> 
> The new Mac Pro, I would argue, is 'Too Pro'. It's such a high end machine, that only the most high end applications really require it.



I know 2.5k is close to about 4k in todays money, but that is still an amazingly powerful machine 11 years later.

yeah I had that impression from the start that the Mac pro is just too much for most musicians. Composers are a small section of musicians that actually need this much power, and even then no musician needs 1.5tb of RAM. It really is geared to video guys.

If I had to use PC I think I'd get a Razer. They seem to be the only PCs I've seen that are not plastic-y and cheap feeling. But they are pretty much as expenive as Apple when I looked.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Apr 24, 2020)

AlexRuger said:


> I...don’t want that display. I prefer a massive 4K. Bigger than 30”



That's my issue with iMacs - although they're great computers for the vast majority of people, my wife included. My computers are in the garage on the other side of my room, so I don't want a built-in monitor.

Some of the older iMacs had a video in so you could use their monitors as monitors for other machines. I don't think that's true anymore.

And I *do* want a 30" monitor - the Cinema Display I've been using for 14 years this month and am still in love with.

As I've posted before, I tried a 40" 4K TV and didn't like it. Too big. I didn't like having to turn my head a little farther to see the edges of the screen.


----------



## Michael Antrum (Apr 24, 2020)

gst98 said:


> If I had to use PC I think I'd get a Razer. They seem to be the only PCs I've seen that are not plastic-y and cheap feeling. But they are pretty much as expenive as Apple when I looked.



I bought a new one from eBay - boxed and sealed. I paid £ 1400 for it after a bit of haggling. Then I got a 2tb NVME from amazon for £175 during an amazon flash sale that came along the day after I bought it, and I got the RAM from crucial for about £ 300. The Razer would have cost me £ 1900 from someone like PC World.

But I bought this before the MacPro 2016 came out, an there was no way I was going to spend £ 3.5k on a machine with a keyboard renown for failing and problems with thermal throttling.

My son has an Oculus Rift headset he no longer uses, so I pinched and I put it on the Razer - and it does a terrific job with VR. Mind you it has a RTX 2070 GPU......


----------



## AlexRuger (Apr 24, 2020)

gst98 said:


> okay thats fine if thats your personal preference. In the UK we have a six year guarentee for "saleable quality". So if a drive or the screen breaks in 6 years of manurfactur they must fix/replace at no expense. So I never really worry about any major things like that happening.
> 
> The expandability does suck.


I don't think you understand. It is literally physically impossible to replace a drive in an iMac (or MacBook Pro, or Mac Mini), as it's soldered onto the motherboard. Are you saying that in the UK Apple will replace your entire computer if the drive dies? That sounds extremely unlikely.


----------



## Dewdman42 (Apr 24, 2020)

gst98 said:


> Also with the new iMac rumoured to be a 30 inch I can't think of any other display I'd rather have.



Where did you hear that rumor?


----------



## Michael Antrum (Apr 24, 2020)

AlexRuger said:


> I don't think you understand. It is literally physically impossible to replace a drive in an iMac (or MacBook Pro, or Mac Mini), as it's soldered onto the motherboard. Are you saying that in the UK Apple will replace your entire computer if the drive dies? That sounds extremely unlikely.




I'm pretty sure you can replace the SSD on a 2019 iMac.

As regards the 6 year thing - I'm pretty sure you'll be good for 2-3 years - I reckon Apple will fold if you pushed them on that - but 6 years - they'd likely fight you all the way....


----------



## gst98 (Apr 24, 2020)

AlexRuger said:


> I don't think you understand. It is literally physically impossible to replace a drive in an iMac (or MacBook Pro, or Mac Mini), as it's soldered onto the motherboard. Are you saying that in the UK Apple will replace your entire computer if the drive dies? That sounds extremely unlikely.



Yeah I understand. And yes, the UK has incredibly powerful consumer rights. Its one of the reasons that apple products are more expensive in £ than $. It costs companies a lot. Just google UK 6 year consumer law. 

Basically the vendor must have a fair chance to replace or repair the product. If they fail to this you are entitlted for a full refund. (Apple ask you that you give them 3 attempts ot repair the same issue, after that they would refund if you ask)


----------



## Dewdman42 (Apr 24, 2020)

The reality is that most consumers do not need the computing power that even matches my 2010 macPro. What consumers want is smaller, lighter, longer battery life, quieter, cooler, looks nice on the desk, Super nice computer screen with Retina quality, nice built in speakers, pairs with their air buds and iPad effortlessly, etc.. They do not need an i9 or a Xeon monster. Apple knows this. Their custom ARM processors are going to be for selling to that crowd.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Apr 24, 2020)

Dewdman42 said:


> Their custom ARM processors are going to be for selling to that crowd.



Sounds like that's definitely true of the models in this rumor, which is why I'm not hyperventilating about how Apple doesn't care about me and my problems and on and on.


----------



## Dewdman42 (Apr 24, 2020)

The only concern i have about it Nick, not that I'm hyperventilating or anything, is that in the future this could put us into a situation where we have one of two options, either buy a severely underpowered ARM consumer paperweight...or spend buko bucks for an overpriced MacPro. I think Apple has been neglecting the mid tier users like us for literally decades. They usually have offered one very high priced solution for those with deep pockets..and then underpowered, under-featured consumer stuff that some have made do with ok, fine, but in my view do not represent true mid tier solution for slightly more serious audio pros.

The only reason I could finally get my MacPro is because it was finally available on the used market for a reasonable price 5 years after it came out. And like you I will continue using it a few more years....so not worried at all in the near term.

But I see this new ARM strategy as being even more of a widening gap between consumer devices...and the top end pro gear...with a big empty space in the middle, which is the area that many of us need. I do not expect them to fill that gap. They haven't in the past, and I don't expect they will in the future. With any luck, we'll be able to pickup a used 2019 MacPro for $3-5k at some point...maybe around 2025. Until then I personally think that I, and some others, perhaps you as well...will be cranking along with our 2010 MacPros...

For what we do here, I do not view this ARM announcement as anything good for us, other then the possibility of having a super powerful iPadPro to run staff-pad and Lemur on. It just widens that gap even more, IMHO.


----------



## Alex Fraser (Apr 24, 2020)

Dewdman42 said:


> The reality is that most consumers do not need the computing power that even matches my 2010 macPro. What consumers want is smaller, lighter, longer battery life, quieter, cooler, looks nice on the desk, Super nice computer screen with Retina quality, nice built in speakers, pairs with their air buds and iPad effortlessly, etc.. They do not need an i9 or a Xeon monster. Apple knows this. Their custom ARM processors are going to be for selling to that crowd.


Exactly.
I don't buy the argument that there's a huge gap in the market for a "mid priced" Apple tower. Such a machine is right up the alleyway of the average VIC user, granted...but we're a small drop in the ocean. Take a music production cruise on YouTube. You'll see laptop after laptop. Maybe an iMac. 

I've had Mac towers etc. I'm not fussed about returning to them now we have Thunderbolt, SSD etc.

Considering the power of the iPad Pro, I can't wait to see what Apple come up with.


----------



## Alex Fraser (Apr 24, 2020)

Dewdman42 said:


> The only concern i have about it Nick, not that I'm hyperventilating or anything, is that in the future this could put us into a situation where we have one of two options, either buy a severely underpowered ARM consumer paperweight...or spend buko bucks for an overpriced MacPro. I think Apple has been neglecting the mid tier users like us for literally decades. They usually have offered one very high priced solution for those with deep pockets..and then underpowered, under-featured consumer stuff that some have made do with ok, fine, but in my view do not represent true mid tier solution for slightly more serious audio pros.
> 
> The only reason I could finally get my MacPro is because it was finally available on the used market for a reasonable price 5 years after it came out. And like you I will continue using it a few more years....so not worried at all in the near term.
> 
> ...


I shouldn't worry, Dewd. There's an entire army of semi-pro video editors, photographers and music makers who *do* require that space between low powered ARM rigs and beastly Mac Pros. 

Apple will provide as they always have - they just probably won't be towers.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Apr 24, 2020)

Dewdman42 said:


> The only concern i have about it Nick, not that I'm hyperventilating or anything, is that in the future this could put us into a situation where we have one of two options, either buy a severely underpowered ARM consumer paperweight...or spend buko bucks for an overpriced MacPro. I think Apple has been neglecting the mid tier users like us for literally decades.



I won't be worried until there's mandatory software that breaks everything that's not a ridiculous price.


----------



## Dewdman42 (Apr 24, 2020)

Alex Fraser said:


> Exactly.
> 
> I shouldn't worry, Dewd. There's an entire army of semi-pro video editors, photographers and music makers who *do* require that space between low powered ARM rigs and beastly Mac Pros.
> 
> Apple will provide as they always have - they just probably won't be towers.



I disagree, as previously stated. They have not. there is a gap. always has been. It will probably be wider in the future.


----------



## Alex Fraser (Apr 24, 2020)

Dewdman42 said:


> I disagree, as previously stated. They have not. there is a gap. always has been. It will probably be wider in the future.


Then we'll have to agree to disagree I guess. The "gap" is MBP, Minis and iMacs. All capable machines to get work done on.


----------



## Dewdman42 (Apr 24, 2020)

yes we disagree.


----------



## gst98 (Apr 24, 2020)

Apple hasn't changed the segmentation of their line up in a _long_ time. I don't think you become the first trillion dollar company by not understanding your market. If there were gaps to fill they would fill them.


----------



## jcrosby (Apr 24, 2020)

gst98 said:


> So if you really didn't want the iMac screen couldn't you just hide the whole iMac out of the way and treat it like a tower? Also with the new iMac rumoured to be a 30 inch I can't think of any other display I'd rather have.


But you pay for the extra cost of the screen. Not to mention many prefer the screen be separated.

Look at any commercial studio or any legitimate mastering studio. They all lean toward a wall mounted display, or display tilted back below their ears for common sense reasons. A screen between your speakers interferes with your perception of depth of field. It causes the phantom center image to appear closer to you, creating a shallower soundstage. For commercial facilities with a console you can't exactly put an imac on a mixing desk without it being ridiculous.

So basically you pay more for a machine with a built-in display that you're going to just stick under a desk, in a corner, or can't fit into a reasonably sized quiet box? That's silly, but so is Apple.


----------



## Dewdman42 (Apr 24, 2020)

gst98 said:


> Apple hasn't changed the segmentation of their line up in a _long_ time. I don't think you become the first trillion dollar company by not understanding your market. If there were gaps to fill they would fill them.



No they will not fill this gap, just like they haven't in the past for the reasons I have already outlined, it does not represent a significant market share and its not worth their time and effort.


----------



## gst98 (Apr 24, 2020)

jcrosby said:


> But you pay for the extra cost of the screen. Not to mention many prefer the screen be separated.



The 5k iMac is 1750. A competing monitor is 1000. that leaves you with £750. A mac mini with the same specs is 1299. So mac mini+monitor is 2299. So in the world of what you can buy from apple the 5k imac is the best value they offer. For guys in video and photography is a no brainer.

A lot of mastering engineers have the computers behind them for that reason anyway so its completely out of the way. 

Well I would never treat an iMac like a tower but if you didn't want it as your main dsplay, and you couldn't bare to have it as a secondary display, then in that specific situation you could hide it away.


----------



## gst98 (Apr 24, 2020)

Dewdman42 said:


> No they will not fill this gap, just like they haven't in the past for the reasons I have already outlined, it does not represent a significant market share and its not worth their time and effort.



So... if there isn't a significant market share and its not worth their time an effort, is there really a gap?


----------



## Dewdman42 (Apr 24, 2020)

for the people that need or want it. Yes. its not a gap for Apple. its a potential gap for us. it certainly has been for me for decades. Really this is becoming a stupid conversation. use whatever works for you eh.


----------



## Alex Fraser (Apr 24, 2020)

gst98 said:


> The 5k iMac is 1750. A competing monitor is 1000. that leaves you with £750. A mac mini with the same specs is 1299. So mac mini+monitor is 2299. So in the world of what you can buy from apple the 5k imac is the best value they offer. For guys in video and photography is a no brainer.
> 
> A lot of mastering engineers have the computers behind them for that reason anyway so its completely out of the way.
> 
> Well I would never treat an iMac like a tower but if you didn't want it as your main dsplay, and you couldn't bare to have it as a secondary display, then in that specific situation you could hide it away.


Yeah, the iMac is a great machine.

I've just said a sorrowful goodbye to a 2011 model. Nearly a decade of abuse, hundreds of hours of music and paid the bills.

The internal drive died and on a whim, I re-installed the OS onto an external SSD. Worked really well. The broken internal drive was causing fan issues though, so I decided to open the machine...

My wife found me in the studio, holding the baby bath mat that I'd used to prise the screen away. She read me the riot act (something about bath mats and broken computers not paying the bills), demanded I buy a new machine and stood over my shoulder whilst I chose one on the Apple store.

A forum first?


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Apr 24, 2020)

jcrosby said:


> A screen between your speakers interferes with your perception of depth of field. It causes the phantom center image to appear closer to you, creating a shallower soundstage.



I definitely agree with you about the extra cost of the screen, but actually what you wrote above isn't how it's working in my room. The soundstage is every bit as deep as when I switch to my big speakers, which are farther back, hanging from the ceiling in the corners (a suboptimal place, but you make tradeoffs).

But my small speakers (the ones straddling the monitor) are angled in with absorbent stuff behind them, so that could explain it.


----------



## jcrosby (Apr 24, 2020)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> I definitely agree with you about the extra cost of the screen, but actually what you wrote above isn't how it's working in my room. The soundstage is every bit as deep as when I switch to my big speakers, which are farther back, hanging from the ceiling in the corners (a suboptimal place, but you make tradeoffs).
> 
> But my small speakers (the ones straddling the monitor) are angled in with absorbent stuff behind them, so that could explain it.


YM can definitely vary, speakers and acoustics make a big difference... When I moved my screen to my front wall I had a deeper more 3-D stereo image, but my speakers are DSP aligned and the treatment in my room is pretty heavy. The added display cost and real estate is probably a much bigger concern for most for sure though.

I just wish Apple would take a hint and realize that computer users and mobile users have different needs, (the ios-ification of macos), and _pro_ machine users have a completely different set of priorities than _home office_ users. It'll never happen, but what Apple should do is create something like _Pro-OS, _a paid version of mac os where you can bump down/up, or at least enable/disable compatibility at the cost of security features.


----------



## Dewdman42 (Apr 24, 2020)

how far behind the speaker cones do you feel it needs to be optimally? I am going to be putting my 32" on a swivel arm that I can move around...so when I'm sequencing and doing detailed work I can pull it forward so it will just be over my keyboard pretty close (but probably with lousy acoustics) and then move it back for mixing. I don't think it will be all the way back against the wall because it will be too far to use realistically...but I'm sure I can move it back so that the speaker cones at least are in front of the face of the monitor. Do you think for mixing ideally it should be back further than that?


----------



## jcrosby (Apr 24, 2020)

I've got mine about 3 1/2 to 4 feet back but if your using an arm you'll probably be pretty limited. Even you can only get a foot or so you should hear a difference. Basically your screen becomes your first reflection point when its between your monitors. (It doesn't have the same affect as your sidewall 1st reflections but it does make the image feel more flat.)

The best way to describe it is that before moving my screen back it was kind of like mostly hearing just the width. Now the center appears a foot and half maybe two feet behind the speakers, the image sounds taller, and some things appear to come from above or beyond the speakers. When I collapsing to mono it's really noticeable. The mix or reference obviously has a huge impact though...

Btw this is one of my favorite reference tracks for imaging. The phase tricks they accomplished with the drum mix messes with your head. With a good setup they should sound like they're above and almost behind your head.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Apr 24, 2020)

Dewdman42 said:


> how far behind the speaker cones do you feel it needs to be optimally?



Mine's in front of the speaker cones.

I'm not taking a picture right now, because my desk is a horrible mess, but rough dimensions:

- tweeters 6' apart

- tweeters about 42" from my face, speakers angled in

- screen 2' from my face, about 10" in front of imaginary line between speakers; there's a rack and equipment creating a "wall" on the same plane as that line, blocking sound from the rear.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Apr 24, 2020)

My monitor is on an arm too, but I never move it.


----------



## gsilbers (Apr 24, 2020)

AlexRuger said:


> To Technostica's point, the problem is that Apple isn't meeting a certain form factor need. Not everyone (myself included) wants to work on a computer with a built-in display like an iMac or on a laptop. I want to choose my own display, have separate drives in the chassis, etc. I want a tower.
> 
> The Mac Pro is certainly a tower but it's just stupidly overpriced in the lower tiers. Once you get to TB's of RAM and two dozen cores, sure, six figures makes sense (it's still too much though). I'd wager that most of us want something like an 8 core i9 and no more than 128 GB of RAM, which the Mac Mini can kind of approach (only 64 GB of RAM though) with a good deal of other form factor drawbacks (no internal drives, limited cooling, etc). I still like Mac Mini's, hence why I suggested them above, but ideally I could get an iMac-spec'd Mac Pro. Apple refuses to cater to this demographic, which I've never quite understood. It's a slam dunk for them.



that is true and mentioned repetitive by many in the same boat.
We need some sort of Mac mini pro or ye old cube to come back w i9 and 64/128gb ram and not super high end video card. 
But on the other hand.... folks here right now would rather pay for the Mac Pro than Mac mini or iMac so that’s more $$$ for Apple.


----------



## gsilbers (Apr 24, 2020)

Technostica said:


> Hardly anyone cares because they aren't in the market for a workstation that can be configured up to that level.
> A lot of people were hoping for a high end desktop in a tower case which is not what the Mac Pro is.
> 
> If you dance with the devil he chooses the tunes.
> ...



Well that’s the point. Getting a 25k computer is about 12 (?) or so gaming like PCs/daw for music guys ... so that gives Apple more one time $$$ that trying to compete with intel i9 quad cores that gaming guys and going after low common denominator that ar every vocal online. Or the other hand get every famous director and video editor showing off their new film w the mac too on the back ground.
So Apple knows folks w Mac mini or iMac are more than happy w the specs. Heck... u saw the last Grammy producer w a iMac in a highland park 1 bedroom. But yes, Apple made this hole on purpose where u either go iMac Pro or Mac Pro if u want more power.


----------



## chris massa (May 1, 2020)

I can hardly wait for Avid to sort ProTools out when this happens.


----------



## IFM (May 1, 2020)

AlexRuger said:


> I don't think you understand. It is literally physically impossible to replace a drive in an iMac (or MacBook Pro, or Mac Mini), as it's soldered onto the motherboard. Are you saying that in the UK Apple will replace your entire computer if the drive dies? That sounds extremely unlikely.


Incorrect. I just replaced my drive and ram on the smaller iMac. OWC sells the kit. Mac Mini is possible too but they don’t have 3rd party drives out yet. Nothing for the MBP though.


----------



## AlexRuger (May 1, 2020)

IFM said:


> Incorrect. I just replaced my drive and ram on the smaller iMac. OWC sells the kit. Mac Mini is possible too but they don’t have 3rd party drives out yet. Nothing for the MBP though.


Was it a giant pain in the ass?


----------



## IFM (May 2, 2020)

AlexRuger said:


> Was it a giant pain in the ass?


That depends. The right tools make all the difference. yes you have to use a tiny plastic roller blade to cut the sticky tape that hold the screen but I found this part to be rather easy. As long as you are careful it’s no problem. The rest is like any other PC. I put in a 1tb SSD and 32gb or ram.


----------



## onebitboy (May 2, 2020)

IFM said:


> Mac Mini is possible too but they don’t have 3rd party drives out yet.


The 2018 Mac mini does not have a replaceable drive. The SSD is soldered onto the logic board.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 2, 2020)

onebitboy said:


> The 2018 Mac mini does not have a replaceable drive. The SSD is soldered onto the logic board.



I'm not quite sure what advantage Mac Minis have over small cases that hold stuff anyway, unless for some reason you need to move your whole machine between two fixed setups with monitors, e.g. home and office. They're cheaper than laptops, so I guess that's an application.

But really?

Laptops make obvious sense. And until they catch up, desktop machines with cases that hold drives and bigger components that heat up make sense.

But little boxes with stuff hanging off them... why?


----------

