Menu
What's new
By:
Filters

(**EDIT Reaper Test Added) Test #3: M2 Ultra + Logic Pro + Kontakt. Incredible performance & track count.

jemu999

jemu999

Active Member
EDIT ***** 8/8/22 Instead of creating a different thread for each DAW, I think its probably best to combine all of my tests to this one thread. Below are all of the tests I have done thus far with Mac Studio M2 Ultra & Kontakt with: Cubase, Studio One, Logic Pro, and now Reaper. (Pro Tools coming up)


8/8/23
Reaper Test:
​


7/23/23
Hey guys, so in my latest test of the Mac Studio M2 Ultra, I must admit (particularly as an exclusive Cubase user) and declare that Logic Pro is the "King of DAWS" on the M2 Ultra using Kontakt (<---at least in my tests!)

The results achieved on my screencast below were incredibly unexpected and surprising... especially since I had repeated the exact same test on Cubase and Studio One with vastly inferior results!

Might be of interest to those Logic Pro users considering the M2 Ultra!



​

7/16/23
Studio One Test:


​


7/5/23
Cubase Test:
​
Click to read more...
 
Last edited:
That was a crazy number of tracks, when it got a couple of pops at the CPU meter being so high when you were in the 900+ tracks I never thought it would go as high as it did.
 
That’s crazy! I think this is only possible if hardware, OS and software come from the same source and the code can be optimized to run ideally on a given system. Apple did a great job! Even as a Reaper user I am going to admit that I highly doubt any DAW, no matter how efficiently coded, can come even close to Logic’s performance on these new Apple Silicon machines.
 
I agree with @Phazma I know that Reaper is well known for being well coded and efficient but I doubt it could match that Logic performance, might be worth testing that though 😉
 
I'm more curious about the Max than the Ultra (considering price, the latter being twice the price of the former), for media use: music with orchestral libs, drawing, video and 3d work.
It needs to be the REAL deal (so no benchmarking tool tests, you mostly see on the net). But a real person working on projects in these niches for extended periods of time. With a realistic view on cons and pro's (.e.g. is 2 to 5 seconds longer waiting a deal breaker in reality for most people doing that work, on a process that takes minutes to complete anyway?).
Perhaps a mac mini or macbook air will suffice? (most "in depth", mind the quotes, reviews are about the top tier models, instead of the lower end)
 
Last edited:
I agree. The Ultra is probably overkill for most users. But most people who really need to stress the system also have the money to spend on the top end (especially if they’ve ben Mac Pro users previously). I am sure both machines, especially in Logic, can handle more tracks than anyone actually uses in a composition, unless one wants to load an entire big template with no disabled tracks.
In realworld situations I am more concerned about hitting single core limits and in that regard the Ultra has no advantage over the Max.

Regarding the Max I think it is pretty safe to assume that it will deliver the same performance but max out at half the track count of the Ultra (probably can do more than half of the Ultra but better to err on the side of caution).
 
Do you have Pro Tools license? Or maybe you could do the test with PT 2023.6 Ultimate demo? Wondering how would that go....
 
It’s impressive… but not realistic. How often do we create music by duplicating tracks and VIs? On most of these tracks it’s sending the same midi data to the same Kontakt patch. What caching is logic and/or Kontakt doing regarding playback and samples? I would expect a far, far lower track count if every track had unique midi data and different samples/VIs loaded.
 
holonology said:
I use standard M1. Sometimes I look at Logic with envy as we're currently in a strange spot with Ableton where it's brilliant for the wokflow, but man I wish it sipped resources like Logic does.
Click to expand...
I use both for this reason, (and have for about 15 years)... Live can be nice to sketch ideas and work on tracks that lean more toward sound design, but doesn't come anywhere close to the track count Logic does... Logic being ideal for orchestral, hybrid genres, etc... If you can afford to have a second DAW (and take the time to learn it with a fair level of proficiency) Logic's a great DAW to have on hand...
 
jcrosby said:
Logic being ideal for orchestral, hybrid genres, etc... If you can afford to have a second DAW (and take the time to learn it with a fair level of proficiency) Logic's a great DAW to have on hand...
Click to expand...
Yeah this is the thought process I have. I am getting quick with Ableton - so not to be sniffed at. But I could also sell the license, and get Logic with the funds from that. I guess my genre is a mashup of a few things, but it's predominantly electronic stuff (think Fred Again, Chemical Brothers, that sort of thing.) As I gain experience in writing I am adding more stuff to tracks and so now Ableton creaks slightly. I would miss the speed of the workflow and the audio editing, but to have a smoother experience of running sessions would be nice.
 
holonology said:
Yeah this is the thought process I have. I am getting quick with Ableton - so not to be sniffed at. But I could also sell the license, and get Logic with the funds from that. I guess my genre is a mashup of a few things, but it's predominantly electronic stuff (think Fred Again, Chemical Brothers, that sort of thing.) As I gain experience in writing I am adding more stuff to tracks and so now Ableton creaks slightly. I would miss the speed of the workflow and the audio editing, but to have a smoother experience of running sessions would be nice.
Click to expand...
Live definitely has its own strengths. I prefer to sound design, and make more sound design or electronic focused music in Live for a bunch of reasons...

Live's time stretching/pitch warping is miles beyond Logic's. (Logic's time stretching is kind of dreadful by comparison if being honest). Live is also quicker to edit audio in (in some ways... Logic is quicker in other ways...), plus Live's ability to resample anything to audio simply by setting the default audio track configuration to 'resample' and adding a new audio track is unique to Live. This is one of those things I miss about Live if I'm working on a project in Logic...

Basically if you like Live and are quick when working in it I wouldn't suggest selling your Live license. Every DAW has its perks, and its quirks... This is exactly why I use both, not one or the other... Some project scenarios appeal to Live, others to Logic... TLDR if you're generally happy in Live don't switch DAWs. Adding an additional one can be a good idea, but switching completely is no fun, and for the average person winds up eating more time than you might think....
 
Markrs said:
That was a crazy number of tracks, when it got a couple of pops at the CPU meter being so high when you were in the 900+ tracks I never thought it would go as high as it did.
Click to expand...
LOL, I was completely ready for the thing to crap out similar to Cubase & S1 after about 900 tracks! Which is why I started adding only 27 tracks at a time. I thought I could add maybe another 100 tracks or so... Little did I know it would add an additional 1400 tracks!
 
Last edited:
Saxer said:
Main result (at least for me) is:

Get enough RAM and SSD storage and never think about computer specs any more.
Click to expand...
I agree, for the type of specific work outlined in my video, RAM and SSD space are important.

But, I think Logic in particular had one amazing feature that stands out more than anything else to me: While the track count was incredibly surprising, the extremely low CPU usage with all of the tracks loaded is what impressed me most.

At about 53:50 in the video, I had 2268 Tracks loaded and ready to play at will. I then arm and play 27 tracks at the same time, absolutely no issue at all. This is the key in my opinion.

In a way, it opens up the possibility of negating the need for VE-Pro or Disable/Enable template. Of course there is more to it, (Groups, Eqs, Compressors, Bussing, Fx, etc), but it is none the less impressive to me.
 
Phazma said:
That’s crazy! I think this is only possible if hardware, OS and software come from the same source and the code can be optimized to run ideally on a given system. Apple did a great job! Even as a Reaper user I am going to admit that I highly doubt any DAW, no matter how efficiently coded, can come even close to Logic’s performance on these new Apple Silicon machines.
Click to expand...
I can tell you, at least on my computer with this exact same test, that Reaper did not perform well at all. Which is surprising since Reaper has always been very CPU friendly. I even posted a thread asking for help on Reaper forum in case I was missing some type of setting. Sadly, no one replied in the thread.

Reaper and Kontakt LARGE template issues... - Cockos Incorporated Forums

Reaper and Kontakt LARGE template issues... REAPER for macOS
forum.cockos.com
 
Duplicating tracks is a waste of time. You will never know until each track is original.
You'll see the difference then and it won't be close to that count.
 
jemu999 said:
I can tell you, at least on my computer with this exact same test, that Reaper did not perform well at all. Which is surprising since Reaper has always been very CPU friendly. I even posted a thread asking for help on Reaper forum in case I was missing some type of setting. Sadly, no one replied in the thread.

Reaper and Kontakt LARGE template issues... - Cockos Incorporated Forums

Reaper and Kontakt LARGE template issues... REAPER for macOS
forum.cockos.com
Click to expand...
wow that is a shame. There are a few Reaper power users on here as well. The difficulty with Reaper is that there is plenty you can change and alter, so there could be a reason for low performance that can be altered but finding it is difficult.

I think it would be worth posting the Reaper video, tag it up so it comes up in Reaper searches on YouTube and post it on the forums. I think you will get comments about potential improvements you can make.
 
jemu999 said:
I can tell you, at least on my computer with this exact same test, that Reaper did not perform well at all. Which is surprising since Reaper has always been very CPU friendly. I even posted a thread asking for help on Reaper forum in case I was missing some type of setting. Sadly, no one replied in the thread.

Reaper and Kontakt LARGE template issues... - Cockos Incorporated Forums

Reaper and Kontakt LARGE template issues... REAPER for macOS
forum.cockos.com
Click to expand...
That’s disappointing but thanks for letting us know. I am also a forum member there and will bump your post. But first I will check the Reaper prefs and see if something comes to my mind which could cause this, I am quite well versed in Reaper settings and where what is.

Is the problem that the audio drops out at much lower track count?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom