mccreary@news.colorado.edu (MCCREARY SEAN) (06/12/91)
Well, I'm over a barrel. I finally have the cash to buy a computer, and I
can't decide between a Mac LC and an Amiga 3000. The Amiga is clearly a
faster computer, and has the multitasking OS to properly use that potential.
But the music world is heavily slanted towards the Macintosh. The only real
sequencer that properly takes advantage of the Amiga OS (sorry Music-X fans)
is Bars and Pipes Professional. On the other hand, the Mac has a half dozen
very good sequencing packages available for it, along with a lot of other
interesting software. Unfortunately, its strictly one-at-a-time, since
MIDI manager would cripple a Mac LC (too bad Mac II's are STILL so expensive).
Well, what should I do? Any Amiga users out there know something I'm
missing? How about you Mac users, any comments on compatibility issues
with the LC? I'm waiting to be enlightened by the collective wisdom of all
who peruse USENET (ok, so its 2:20 am, cut me some slack!).
Sean McCreary
mccreary@spot.Colorado.EDUnoriegam@athena.ecs.csus.edu (Michael Noreiga) (06/12/91)
In article <mccreary.676714127@spot.Colorado.EDU> mccreary@spot.Colorado.EDU writes: >Well, I'm over a barrel. I finally have the cash to buy a computer, and I >can't decide between a Mac LC and an Amiga 3000. The Amiga is clearly a >faster computer, and has the multitasking OS to properly use that potential. >But the music world is heavily slanted towards the Macintosh. The only real >sequencer that properly takes advantage of the Amiga OS (sorry Music-X fans) >is Bars and Pipes Professional. On the other hand, the Mac has a half dozen >very good sequencing packages available for it, along with a lot of other >interesting software. Unfortunately, its strictly one-at-a-time, since >MIDI manager would cripple a Mac LC (too bad Mac II's are STILL so expensive). >Well, what should I do? Any Amiga users out there know something I'm >missing? How about you Mac users, any comments on compatibility issues >with the LC? I'm waiting to be enlightened by the collective wisdom of all >who peruse USENET (ok, so its 2:20 am, cut me some slack!). > > Sean McCreary > mccreary@spot.Colorado.EDU Hello. I am currently using an Amiga 2000 with Dr. T's Level II sequencer. As far as music software for the Amiga goes Level II can't be beat as far as flexability and features. It comes with three other programs that make it the most professional music system in my opinion for any computer (there are versions by the way for the MAC). One program multitasks with Level II and lets you mix all 16 channels with a graphics display mixer. Another module allows you to draw any MIDI control messages such as volume,panning, etc. It also allows you to visually edit any track on a piano roll type display. The last module will score all of the tracks that are currently active. Level II has a built in program variations generator for the experimental. Hope that helps. - Mike
oovvoo@mixcom.COM (Mike Shawaluk) (06/12/91)
In <mccreary.676714127@spot.Colorado.EDU> mccreary@news.colorado.edu (MCCREARY SEAN) writes: >Well, I'm over a barrel. I finally have the cash to buy a computer, and I >can't decide between a Mac LC and an Amiga 3000. The Amiga is clearly a >faster computer, and has the multitasking OS to properly use that potential. >But the music world is heavily slanted towards the Macintosh. The only real >sequencer that properly takes advantage of the Amiga OS (sorry Music-X fans) >is Bars and Pipes Professional. On the other hand, the Mac has a half dozen >very good sequencing packages available for it, along with a lot of other >interesting software. Before I bought B&P Pro, I owned SoundScape 1.4 from Mimetics, which is (not coincidentally) from the same author, Todor Fay (and a coauthor on B&P Pro whose name I cannot remember). However, you don't mention any of the Dr T.'s stuff, which I don't personally own, but have heard that at least a couple of their programs (KCS and Tiger Cub, I believe) have gotten good reviews. Plus, their Copyist series remains one of the best music DTP packages for the Amiga. Granted, the Mac has had a strong base in the MIDI world for quite some time, but I feel that the Amiga OS and 3rd party software has pretty much caught up with the Mac, at least in the MIDI arena. And, as you mention, if multitasking is something that matters to you, then you are looking in the right direction when you are looking at the A3000. Another point to consider is that much of the other "interesting software" available for the Mac, at least in a MIDI vein, is available for the Amiga as either shareware or freeware stuff, or as add-on modules for B&P Pro (plus, they tell you how to add on your own stuff). I'm not an expert on it, but if you have any specific questions, I'll try to look for answers for you. -- - Mike Shawaluk (oovvoo@mixcom.com) "It is a good day to live."
barrett@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU (Dan Barrett) (06/13/91)
<mccreary.676714127@spot.Colorado.EDU> writes: >[Amiga or Mac for sequencing?] Sean, you will probably be happy with either computer. Your choice depends on how much power you want, how much you want to spend, and what other uses you have in mind for the computer. These are the subjects I'll discuss below. NOTE that I am NOT going to claim one computer is generally better than the other -- that just starts flame wars. I will try to present objective information only, with maybe a little minor opinion or two. :-) Right now, there are a several really high-end sequencing environments for the Mac. Some of them even incorporate sampling (simultaneous MIDI and digital audio). The Amiga does not have this kind of hardware/software combination, although at least one company is building one now. So, if you need this kind of power, the Mac would be a better choice. But be prepared to pay $$$. For straight sequencing, both Mac and Amiga have excellent software. Performer on the Mac is particularly good if you have a large MIDI studio. In my opinion (Opinion! Opinion!), the sequencing software for the Mac is a *little* bit better and more mature, in general, than the Amiga's. But both computers have very usable sequencers. On the Amiga, I find Music-X to be very powerful and (especially) flexible. In your posting, you implied that you didn't like Music-X; that's fine, and I respect your opinion. I will say that Music-X has some capabilities I have yet to see on any other sequencer, and I've been a serious electronic and computer musician for almost 12 years. I have not tried Bars & Pipes, but I have read the entire manual, and it looks very impressive. One advantage of Amiga sequencing software (over the Mac's) is that much of it is not copy protected, making it easy to have a backup copy or install it on a hard disk. I know that it is possible to break the CP of most Mac programs, but it can be a hassle (judging by some of the discussions I have seen in this newsgroup). As you said, the Amiga 3000 is a faster machine than the Mac LC. This is true both for CPU power and I/O (input/output) speed. In addition, the Amiga has a coprocessor slot that allows you to put a new processor (such as the even-faster 68040 CPU) into the machine painlessly and fairly inexpensively. Speed isn't the only issue, though. What else do you plan to do with the computer, other than sequencing? If you need some programs that run on the Mac only, then you should get the Mac. Similarly for the Amiga. As a side note, there is a good Mac emulator that allows you to run most Mac application software (but not sequencers or some games) on the Amiga, and quickly too. The reverse is not true -- there is no Amiga emulator running on the Mac, to my knowledge. I will not discuss which machine's operating system or user interface is better/worse than the other. That is completely an opinion-based argument, even "religious" at times. All I will say is that both systems are powerful, and both have their proponents and opponents. Make sure that you get thorough demonstrations of both machines (preferably at a friend's house AND at a dealer) before you buy. If possible, try out the sequencing software yourself before you buy. I don't know the street price of a Mac LC, but I do know that you can buy an Amiga 3000 for under $2000 right now (until June 31) through the Commodore "Power Up" program. All you need to do is bring in the cover of the owner's manual of any Commodore computer, with the computer's serial number written on it, and you get a large discount. And both Commodore and Apple offer educational discounts if you are enrolled in college now. If you decide to seek further help, I recommend that you DO NOT "cross-post" questions to comp.sys.amiga.??? and and comp.sys.mac.??? newsgroups. Anything cross-posted between these 2 areas ALWAYS starts a big flame war, even if the questions are innocent and unbiased. There are a few (note: a few) really immature people in those groups that get things started, and the flames don't die down for weeks. I suggest sending one set of questions to comp.sys.amiga.audio, and then another set of questions (IN A SEPARATE POSTING!) to comp.sys.mac.apps or comp.sys.mac.misc. If you want people to rant and rave about the Amiga, post to comp.sys.amiga.advocacy. 1/2 :-) Good luck with your decision. Feel free to contact me via e-mail if you want to ask me anything else. Dan //////////////////////////////////////\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ | Dan Barrett - Systems Administrator, Computer Science Department | | The Johns Hopkins University, 34th and Charles Sts., Baltimore, MD 21218 | | INTERNET: barrett@cs.jhu.edu | | | COMPUSERVE: >internet:barrett@cs.jhu.edu | UUCP: barrett@jhunix.UUCP | \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/////////////////////////////////////
dam@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk (David Morning) (06/13/91)
<In article <mccreary.676714127@spot.Colorado.EDU> mccreary@spot.Colorado.EDU writes:
<>MIDI manager would cripple a Mac LC (too bad Mac II's are STILL so expensive).
I'm a bit confused by this. As far as I understand it a Mac LC IS a Mac II.
It's just been stripped down to make it cheaper and uses a 68020. As such it
should be capable of running Multifinder or maybe even AU/X (Apple Unix).
The Amiga (as far as I'm aware) still uses the creakey old 68000 (though
there might be a version in the US using a 68020 or even 68030)
Davenick@cs.ed.ac.uk (Nick Rothwell) (06/13/91)
In article <mccreary.676714127@spot.Colorado.EDU>, mccreary@news.colorado.edu (MCCREARY SEAN) writes: > Unfortunately, its strictly one-at-a-time, since > MIDI manager would cripple a Mac LC You reckon? I'm using an SE/30, I admit, but MIDI Manager 2.0.1, PatchBay, Performer, a large patch librarian and System 7.0 all run with acceptable performance. I won't get into the Amiga vs. Mac wars. That's best left to those who think that preemptive multitasking is more important than a powerful and consistent high-quality software environment. Nick. -- Nick Rothwell, Laboratory for Foundations of Computer Science, Edinburgh. nick@lfcs.ed.ac.uk <Atlantic Ocean>!mcsun!ukc!lfcs!nick ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ <-- WEST VIEWING ROOM EAST VIEWING ROOM -->
jmp@jaco.Frame.COM (Jeff Papineau) (06/13/91)
Buy a used IIcx. It is the most reliable/fastest mac made for any reasonable price. Then you get some slots; which is nice. Amigas are best as a second machine; they are used as dedicated video slaves(i.e., Toaster Box). In a situation where you are making music videos, this is the most powerful configuration for the money. Jeff-
kudla@aix01.aix.rpi.edu (Robert J. Kudla) (06/14/91)
nick@cs.ed.ac.uk (Nick Rothwell) writes: >You reckon? I'm using an SE/30, I admit, but MIDI Manager 2.0.1, PatchBay, >Performer, a large patch librarian and System 7.0 all run with acceptable >performance. Is the LC an 030 machine? I don't think so.... thought it was basically a Mac Classic with a color monitor. >I won't get into the Amiga vs. Mac wars. That's best left to those who >think that preemptive multitasking is more important than a powerful and >consistent high-quality software environment. You just got into them with that last comment..... I don't know why you're bitching. I have an Amiga, use Music-X when I'm MIDI-ing, and would probably have gone Mac except I can't afford the system I'd like (my only other gripe with the Mac besides the price is the lack of scripting capability which is coming soon anyway). You can get pre-emptive multitasking by running A/UX, though admittedly at the moment it's not too happy with System 7. (For those who say A/UX isn't "real" Mac multitasking: bullshit, you can run Finder as a task under A/UX and as far as I know that means you can run several Mac sessions at once. Not quite as elegant, but fine for most applications.) I suspect the Mac is gonna become a much more widely accepted platform when the forthcoming clones introduce competition into the market.... I can't imagine using anything else that's currently available for digital recording, for example (barring possibly the new Alesis DTR's which I haven't seen yet). System 7.0 wails, and I was one of the ones ragging on it the most up until I used it a few times in the last couple weeks. That said, the way things are right now, I'm keeping my Amiga..... maybe in the future I'll bag it in favor of a CDTV or something, but it's a fast, friendly, sleek and flexible little beast, and cheap too. There are some things I can do with my $1000 Amiga 500 system that I simply can't do with my friend's $15,000 Mac IIfx workstation, and that alone is enough to convince me there's no reason to bag either one. -- Robert Jude Kudla, <kudla@rpi.edu> for the moment.... "Oh, forgive me, Assembly'O'God! Oh Jaysus, I jest stuck the tip in, oh ma god...."
dcampbel@timshel.austin.ibm.com (David L. Campbell) (06/14/91)
In article <12411@skye.cs.ed.ac.uk> nick@lfcs.ed.ac.uk writes: > >I won't get into the Amiga vs. Mac wars. That's best left to those who >think that preemptive multitasking is more important than a powerful and >consistent high-quality software environment. > Yeah, that's a great way to stay out of the line of fire ;-) Dave. >Nick Rothwell, Laboratory for Foundations of Computer Science, Edinburgh. > nick@lfcs.ed.ac.uk <Atlantic Ocean>!mcsun!ukc!lfcs!nick >~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ > <-- WEST VIEWING ROOM EAST VIEWING ROOM --> -- _______ opinions expressed do not represent those of my employer _________ David L. Campbell Dev Env Tools IBM PSPA. Austin, TX phone: (512)823-3437 Internet addr: dcampbel@ajones.austin.ibm.com IBM TR addr: dcampbel@timshel.austin.ibm.com
scotth@rocco.labs.tek.com (Scott Herzinger) (06/14/91)
> I'm a bit confused by this. As far as I understand it a Mac LC IS a Mac II. > It's just been stripped down to make it cheaper and uses a 68020. As such it The LC is not a II. That's why it's called the LC and not a IILC. The si is a II and that's why it's called a IIsi. The LC can't have a NuBus slot, one of the features that distinguishes the IIs. Admittedly, the line is blurred, as the LC is modular which makes it the only non-II modular Mac. Although it uses a 68020, it doesn't permit the use of a PMMU, also a feature that currently distinguishes Mac IIs and so won't ever support VM or A/UX. -- Scott Herzinger scotth@crl.labs.tek.com Computer Research Lab, Tektronix, Inc. PO Box 500 MS 50-662, Beaverton, OR 97077
dce@smsc.sony.com (David Elliott) (06/14/91)
In article <qn8klp_@rpi.edu> kudla@aix01.aix.rpi.edu (Robert J. Kudla) writes: >nick@cs.ed.ac.uk (Nick Rothwell) writes: >>You reckon? I'm using an SE/30, I admit, but MIDI Manager 2.0.1, PatchBay, >>Performer, a large patch librarian and System 7.0 all run with acceptable >>performance. > >Is the LC an 030 machine? I don't think so.... thought it was basically a >Mac Classic with a color monitor. Hold on a second. I believe that the LC has a 16MHz 68020, just like the original Mac II. From what I understand, it's only a little slower than a stock Mac II, which is only a little slower than a IIcx, which is a little slower than a IIx. The SE/30 is supposedly faster with disk accesses, but not otherwise. In any case, I have run MIDI Manager on my Mac II for quite some time, and it works just fine (I currently have a cache card in it, which makes it slightly faster than a IIx for some things). The biggest slowdown you run into is color. As you might expect, it takes more system resources to draw on color screens. You can get faster response by switching to mono mode, though it isn't significant.
nick@cs.ed.ac.uk (Nick Rothwell) (06/14/91)
In article <qn8klp_@rpi.edu>, kudla@aix01.aix.rpi.edu (Robert J. Kudla) writes: > nick@cs.ed.ac.uk (Nick Rothwell) writes: > Is the LC an 030 machine? I don't think so.... thought it was basically a > Mac Classic with a color monitor. No, the LC has a 68020. It's missing the MMU and FPU, but that shouldn't matter. > >I won't get into the Amiga vs. Mac wars. That's best left to those who > >think that preemptive multitasking is more important than a powerful and > >consistent high-quality software environment. > > You just got into them with that last comment..... That was meant as a joke, guys. > I suspect the Mac is gonna become a much more widely accepted platform when > the forthcoming clones introduce competition into the market.... We'll see. It's certainly interesting how Macs have taken off here in the UK now we have the cheaper prices and the Classic. All the big London music stores are forgetting the ST and offering Mac Classic and LC packages, saying things like "at last, the Macintosh at a sensible price." They're also offering Classic + Performer packages, and I somehow don't see Performer being too happy on a Classic. The only thing I have against the Amigas I've seen, to be honest, is the display. I'm used to fine-resolution multi-font text and graphics in my user interfaces (for things like Performer, for instance). And I do like the whole concept of the MIDI Management tools and patchbay interfacing. It's stupid that that MM is still unavailable to the general public. Nick. -- Nick Rothwell, Laboratory for Foundations of Computer Science, Edinburgh. nick@lfcs.ed.ac.uk <Atlantic Ocean>!mcsun!ukc!lfcs!nick ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ <-- WEST VIEWING ROOM EAST VIEWING ROOM -->
peters@mips2.ma30.bull.com (Dan Peters) (06/14/91)
In article <1991Jun13.090956.29044@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk> dam@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk (David Morning) writes: > ><In article <mccreary.676714127@spot.Colorado.EDU> mccreary@spot.Colorado.EDU writes: > ><>MIDI manager would cripple a Mac LC (too bad Mac II's are STILL so expensive). > >I'm a bit confused by this. As far as I understand it a Mac LC IS a Mac II. [STUFF DELETED] >Dave Just to add to the confusion with a question for Mac users: I (mis-?)understand the following: Mac Classic 8 MHZ 68000 (16 bit mpu, no floating point, no mmu, 1 mem slot) Mac LC 16MHZ? 68020 (32 bit mpu, no floating point, no mmu, 1 68020 processor direct slot) (late)Mac SE ??Mhz 68000 (16 bit mpu, no floating point, no mmu, one expansion(?) slot) Mac SE/30 ??Mhz 68030 (32 bit mpu, 68882 floating point(?), mmu, 1 68030 processor direct slot) Mac SI 16?MHZ 68030 (32 bit mpu, 68882 floating point(?), mmu, 1 NuBus slot) Questions: What can you do musically (sequencing, Sample editing (dsp), etc) with each? How does a Mac SE become an SE/30? How much? Which is the music configuration of choice? Thanks, Dan -- == Dan Peters Bull HN Information Systems Inc. == (508) 294-3325 (294-3020) 300 Concord Road MS 826a == peters@mips2.ma30.bull.com Billerica, MA 01821
five@sys6626.bison.mb.ca (skinny puppy) (06/19/91)
mccreary@news.colorado.edu (MCCREARY SEAN) writes: > Well, I'm over a barrel. I finally have the cash to buy a computer, and I Hi Sean. Two suggestions: You're looking for a powerful computer for music? Look no farther than the IBM world. With Cakewalk 4.0 and your choice of MIDI card, you've got endless power. And 386sx's (16 bit) and 386's (32 bit) are falling in price so quickly, that pretty soon, noone will be able to match them, price for power wise. If you want something that has a little bit more power to it, but not the price tag, look at the Atari Mega II Ste. 16 bit, 16 Mhz. Built in MIDI ports, and more software than you can shake a stick at, with software prices down around reality levels (unlike the Mac world). Five > can't decide between a Mac LC and an Amiga 3000. The Amiga is clearly a --- (skinny puppy) a user of sys6626, running waffle 1.64 E-mail: five@sys6626.bison.mb.ca system 6626: 63 point west drive, winnipeg manitoba canada R3T 5G8