jlc@atux01.UUCP (J. Collymore) (01/21/87)
I am seriously looking to add a computer to my electronic music system. I have investigated the Macintosh+ (along with an Imagewriter II printer) and software and MIDI interfaces need to go with it. I have also started to hear talk about the speed, graphics and power of the AMIGA for MIDI. What I'd like to know is, what is the cost of the AMIGA (and a printer) versus the MAC+? Are they both equally easy to use? Is one more versatile than the other? How's the support for them? Is there as much music sotware available for the AMIGA as there seem to be for the MAC+? Please send me e-mail if you have ANY knowledge about the above. I would really appreciate it. Thanks. Jim Collymore
ins_adjb@jhunix.UUCP (Daniel Jay Barrett) (01/22/87)
I am in the exact same position as you are: considering both the Amiga and the Mac+. Here is what I have discovered. COST: The same. I can get a Mac+ and Imagewriter for $1695, and a 512K Amiga with printer for the same price. GRAPHICS: The Amiga wins. 4096 colors, the Deluxe Paint program, and ease of animation are much better than the Mac+ features. EASE OF USE: Mac+ wins, with a qualification. The Mac interface is trivial to learn. The Amiga's, with its 2-button mouse, is slightly more complicated. However, the Amiga gives you a second user interface (a command-line interface, like the [yecch] IBM does), so you have a choice unavailable on the Mac. I am sure that with practice, all these computer interfaces are fine to use. MUSIC SOFTWARE: The Mac+ has better software available, including: Notation: PROFESSIONAL COMPOSER Sequencer: PERFORMER Sample editing: SOUND DESIGNER Additive Synthesis: SOFTSYNTH Realize that these packages all cost between $200-$500. For the Amiga, there are a few sequencers (SOUNDSCAPE, TEXTURE), a few sampler packages, notation (DELUXE MUSIC CONSTRUCTION SET), and so on, but the software is not as polished as the Mac software is (in my opinion). No wonder -- the Amiga is a newer machine! If you plan to "roll your own" software (as I do), I suspect you will find the Amiga easier to program. (No flames about this, please!! I based that sentence on numerous talks with both Mac and Amiga programmers. If you want more justification than that, send me e-mail.) COMPUTER ITSELF: The Amiga is multi-tasking, and the Mac is not. For me, this feature is all the difference in the world. This means you can run several programs simultaneously. (For more details, send me e-mail.) CONCLUSION: If you are a relative computer novice, the Mac is for you. If you want lots of great software right now, the Mac is for you. If you plan to write your own software, the Amiga is for you. If you plan to do graphics-intensive work, the Amiga is for you. Realize that these are just my opinions! I don't want to start a Mac-Amiga war. Both computers are fantastic machines (I use a Mac+ and an IBM PC regularly at the Peabody Computer Music Studio), and I would be happy to own either one. That's why I am having such a tough choice between these 2 machines. -- -- Dan Barrett ins_adjb@jhunix.UUCP barrett@hopkins-eecs-bravo.arpa
shebanow@ji.Berkeley.EDU (Mike Shebanow) (01/23/87)
I think that the Macintosh is definately the better computer for MIDI applications at this time. There is really very little music software available for the Amiga at this time. In fact, the only programs for the Amiga that I know of are Yamaha DX and Casio CZ synth patch editor/ librarians, and a sequencer program. The Mac, on the other hand, has many different types of MIDI applications: Patch Librarians/Editors for many (20 or more) different synths Sound Editors for most digital samplers Additive Synthesis software for Samplers Sequencers (both pattern and track oriented) Notational software SMPTE support "Artifically Intelligent" Music Composition and Improvisation Tools As you can see, this is a pretty comprehensive list. The amiga doesn't even come close. One machine that you may be interested in is the Atari ST. Although I am not a big fan of the machine, it does have a great deal of potential in the MIDI area. A great deal of software is available for it already (more than the Amiga), and more products are being introduced every day. What makes this a good MIDI box is its low cost, speed, and built in MIDI interface. There is at least one area in which the ST is way ahead of the Mac: digital sampling and recording. Hybrid Arts is making a very interesting hardware device for the ST that turns it into a sophisticated digital sampler. If you add a hard disk, it can turn the ST into a multi- track digital recorder that rivals the most expensive Sony PCM units. Unfortunately, this type of hardware will still cost a relatively large amount of money, when compared to the price of the computer itself. Despite all this, I still think the Mac is the best machine on the market. No other machine has such a broad range of music software available. I could give you specific product recommendations, but this thing is getting pretty long.... Andrew G. Shebanow (Just visiting...)
6111231@PUCC.BITNET (Peter Wisnovsky) (01/24/87)
In article <17012@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>, shebanow@ji.Berkeley.EDU (Mike Shebanow) writes:
<
<I think that the Macintosh is definately the better computer for MIDI
<applications at this time. There is really very little music software
<available for the Amiga at this time. In fact, the only programs for
<the Amiga that I know of are Yamaha DX and Casio CZ synth patch editor/
<librarians, and a sequencer program.
<
<The Mac, on the other hand, has many different types of MIDI applications:
<
< Patch Librarians/Editors for many (20 or more) different synths
< Sound Editors for most digital samplers
< Additive Synthesis software for Samplers
< Sequencers (both pattern and track oriented)
< Notational software
< SMPTE support
< "Artifically Intelligent" Music Composition and Improvisation Tools
One other mac goodie: a mac can be easily connected to a LaserWriter or
even a typesetter and produce publication quality sheet music using the
(Adobe, I think) Sonata font: I know you will all hate me for saying this,
but Sonata brings Desktop Publishing (there! I said the DP word! so sue me!) to
music publishing, which in some ways is more revolutionary than what
programs like PageMaker are doing with word processing.
Peter Wisnovsky
Virtual Address: UUCP: ...ihnp4!psuvax1!6111231@pucc.bitnetkorn@eris.BERKELEY.EDU (Peter "Arrgh" Korn) (01/24/87)
In article <327@atux01.UUCP> jlc@atux01.UUCP (J. Collymore) writes: >... >What I'd like to know is, what is the cost of the AMIGA (and a printer) versus >the MAC+? Are they both equally easy to use? Is one more versatile than the >other? How's the support for them? Is there as much music sotware >available for the AMIGA as there seem to be for the MAC+? (posted 'cause I think there's probably a fair amount of interest in this area) From talking with friends who own Amigas and use them for MIDI work, I'd wait a little while longer before getting an Amiga for studio MIDI work. The complaints were mostly that the software out there was still pretty buggy (SoundScape's stuff), or just wasn't powerful enough (Instant Music, Delux Music Construction Set). Mac music software is currently a cut above (and a lot more expensive), though it's not without it's problems. Professional Composer has been known to do wierd things when working in 512K of RAM...it also doesn't handle lyrics as well as one would like. Also worth checking out are the PC-type machines. They've been around for a lot longer, and there actually is a fair amount of MIDI software available for them (if you can find a computer store that has ever heard MIDI and PC in the same sentence). While I haven't worked with MIDI sofware on the PC personally, I have talked with musicians who have--their feeling was that the best stuff currently available was to be found on PC's, though as soon as some of the bugs in Pro. Composer are fixed the Mac would become top dog. I'm not familiar with Atari ST MIDI software. Is there anyone out there whos actually used an Atari ST for such? (as opposed to reprinting marketing crap and wasting our time with hype). Peter ----- Peter "Arrgh" Korn Hacker? Me? A hacker? No, actually korn@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU I'm a mac-er. All's we do is {decvax,dual,hplabs,sdcsvax,ulysses}!ucbvax!korn make library calls.