@Jamzone said:

Well, that's your opinion. Seems like this fella is going for the most cost effective solution...

@Jamzone said:

When it comes to cars, that's a different matter. I drive a BMW 540i. Worth every gallon... :)

@PaulR said:

If it's any consolation to you for the future - and your future transportation - I also attended The Royal College of Music - but sadly didn't win any awards. Come to think of it, you're first Mondeo Man that has a concert pianist sister, I've communicated with this year, I believe :))))


Be careful with Logic 8 and the Mac Pro 8 core is my advice. There are still a legion of problems and this technology will be good one day when they sort it out. Therefore, by all means get Mac Pro 3.0 litre or 3.2 litre with extra fuel jets - but as I said - get an extra hard drive or two - stick Logic 7.2.3 and Tiger 10.4.11 on it just to be on the safe side. It's all bollocks at the end of the day - it's all about making music on a system that works and is tested - and 7.2 and Tiger works pretty well.

Now if you'll excuse me - I need to oversee the cleaning of my cars! :))

@dreamthemes said:

youre assuming to much sir...

@dreamthemes said:

youre assuming to much sir...

@PaulR said:

Very well. You've been given an incredible amount of advice on this thread. Hopefully, you'll be able to make a buying decision quite soon.

 Robert:

To fix problems with Safari and paragraph formatting on this forum, simply download FireFox (which is free) and use it for this forum. It works - - no codes to remember. You just type. 

In reference to your original question, I’m in the process of purchasing Mac Pro equipment for the upgrade of my present system and wanted to share my opinion on the matter.

Back in 2004 when I first purchased a G5 and VSL I got the top of the line G5 – at time a dual 2GHz. It seemed plenty powerful at the time and for the times. It seems necessary to look at the purposes of the machine(s) of which you will be the proud owner for some time to come. The main reason is that the process of upgrading a composition rig is time consuming, project-endangering, mind numbing and least importantly more expensive. I’ve been putting it off for some time.

There seem to be two main technical purposes which we all have to address: sample playback resources and processing speed.

VSL (mainly speaking of VE3 here since that will be the place where most of us will be living in the foreseeable future) doesn’t use a lot of processing power – according to Herb and cm. It’s main needs are RAM, adequate disks (a separate conversation) and, if applicable, communication of MIDI and audio between Master and Slave(s). On the other hand, the Master (or only computer in your stated case) will need processing because of reverb and other audio plugin processing and most likely other virtual instruments used simultaneously in conjunction with VSL to complete the sound of your compositions.

Given these considerations, I’ve chosen to use two computers. Without going into great detail, the Master will be a 3.2 Ghz Mac Pro with 16GB of RAM. It will house Logic, VSL Percussion & WW, Kontakt and other virtual instruments. The 3.2 is going to have to be my main computer for several years and a lot of work, and software will come and go in that time. There will incredible, unforeseen advances in software that will be looking for processing resources. I’m sure it will run out of processing resources long before I want it to – and long before I get around to changing it out.

My G5 has lasted since 2004. And not because I was short on cash but because of what a great pain it will be to change it all out. Buying every last GHz possible puts off the inevitable a bit longer. My second computer will be a 2.8 GHz four-core. It will have 24GB of RAM and will (only) house VSL Strings, Brass and when available, Choir. It’ll be connected to the Master via VE3’s ethernet. It does not need a lot of processing resources – only adequate RAM and hard drives.

So basically, buy processing for processing and get only what is needed for sample playback.

Best regards,

Jack

I've done this various ways over the years and have just gone 2.8 this past week (its fabulous). We all have our own way of doing this - my thinking as follows: if the fastest mac costs 50% more than the 'lowest' high-end mac (which I think it s good rule of thumb over the years) then a 3.2 equivilent replaced every three years costs the same as a 2.8 equivilent replaced every 2 years. In the first year you get a marginal performance advantage with the 3.2. But in the third year you have a HUGE performance disadvantage using what has now become an OLD 3.2 which by that stage will be massively outperformed by a lowly imac. Whereas on the two-year plan you now have a NEW computer. Unless, of course, your cash flow just eases you through this whole game...in which case, enjoy the 3.2! 

Steve, thanks for the firefox paragraph tip...I'm about to find out if it works.

Robert

Robert_1811,

Perhaps, but then again if I had jumped into a something incremental like a Quad G5 in the intervening time between now and when I first purchased my original G5 dual 2Gig then I'd still be stuck with this massive paradigm shift that's going on now.

After all, we are talking about Apple, Inc. here. I've had Macs since 1990 and when they change - they really change.

However, what you say has some merit - especically if you wish to spend more time than I personally like to in changing out systems.

@Albert S said:

I I reckon Vienna SE is worth twice as much as my car.