Quantcast
Computer suggestion for music production (preferably Mac) - Page 2 - Gearspace.com
The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Computer suggestion for music production (preferably Mac)
Old 22nd January 2013 | Show parent
  #31
Lives for gear
 
skira's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by mickbenjamins ➡️
I would reccomend either an iMac or a Macbook Pro Retina.
Or a mini: according to MACWORLD's composite Speedmark score (15 individual tests boiled down to a single number, consisting of speed tests in the Finder, iMovie, Cinebench, Handbrake, VMware Fusion, Photoshop, Aperture, iPhoto, Mathermatica and Portal) the new build to order Mac mini/2.6GHz quad-core Core i7, 16GB RAM, 1TB Fusion Drive posted a Specmark that was around 15% faster than a 6-core Xeon Westmere 3.33Ghz build-to-order Mac Pro from 2010.
Old 22nd January 2013
  #32
Lives for gear
 
GJ999x's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 5 years
whats your experience with computer music production? sorry if i missed this above.

if not much you can go a long way with a basic imac.

what monitors are you planning to use and how much were they? u got acoustic treatment?

Sent from my GT-I9100P using Gearslutz App
Old 22nd January 2013
  #33
Gear Addict
 
jwleeman's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by mickbenjamins ➡️

iMac:
3.4GHz Quad-core Intel Core i7, Turbo Boost up to 3.9GHz
16GB 1600MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2X8GB (go to your local Apple Premium Reseller and ask them to make you a deal on the 32GB)
3TB Fusion Drive
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680MX 2GB GDDR5
yea this whole "Fusion Drive" makes me a little nervous. guess i just don't want to be the guinea pig.
Old 22nd January 2013 | Show parent
  #34
Lives for gear
 
skira's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by jwleeman ➡️
yea this whole "Fusion Drive" makes me a little nervous. guess i just don't want to be the guinea pig.
That's what I thought too, but a few months have passed and it's getting rave reviews, most recently on anandtech, a pc-oriented site, where the conclusion says, "For the first time since late 2008, I went back to using a machine where a hard drive was a part of my primary storage - and I didn’t hate it. Apple’s Fusion Drive is probably the best hybrid SSD/HDD solution I’ve ever used"

AnandTech - A Month with Apple's Fusion Drive

Also see:

Lab Tests: Pushing a Fusion Drive to its limits | Macworld
Old 22nd January 2013 | Show parent
  #35
Gear Addict
 
OolalavSuperfukk's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by GJ999x ➡️
whats your experience with computer music production? sorry if i missed this above.

if not much you can go a long way with a basic imac.

what monitors are you planning to use and how much were they? u got acoustic treatment?

Sent from my GT-I9100P using Gearslutz App
Well, in the scheme of things, I guess I'm still quite new to the recording world, seeing as I've only been recording for a little over a year now. I'm just a bedroom producer and write and record my own music at the moment. I've reached the point now that my gear is holding my back from both songwriting and production seeings as my songs have developed and become more complex taking up way more tracks and I tend to write and record simultaneously. So yeah, I'm a one man band at the moment. All I know is that I want to start making more professional sounding stuff. At the moment I've been recording vocals with a SM58 through a Line 6 UX2. I'm not sure if it's the SM58 that just doesn't suit my voice, or if the UX2 is a complete pile of crap, but they've been decent enough to get my ideas down. I plan to upgrade my audio interface to possibly a UA Apollo, my microphone to a RE-20 and then I'll probably get a UA 6176. Then I'll probably purchase a few nice plugins here and there. It's fairly pricey, but I think in the scheme of things it's still a relatively modest setup for trying to produce professional sounding music. I'm not going for your perfect clean pop hit sound. I'm a fan of a lot of 60s music and present "indie" music if you will... I have yet to figure what kind of studio monitors I'll be purchasing, but I still have time to sorta that out and do my research. I'm currently just mixing with my AKG K702 headphones. Anyways, right now my main focus is my computer. So to get back on track and properly answer your question, like I said, I've only been producing music for a year. Sure the quality of my music may still sound amateur, but I've progressed significantly in that time and now I've reached the point that my computer can hardly handle the amount of tracks and plugins I've got running. In fact, technically it can't, because I always have to bounce things down and sometimes turn of some plugins just to be able to mix things. Long story short, I always get to a point where I can't mix in a normal way. I don't want to mute tracks and turn off plugins do a little mixing and turn them back on and find out it didn't work out. I want to be able to hear everything all at so I can mix what is actually there. I hope I'm being clear enough, I sometimes have a hard time articulating myself in writing.
Old 22nd January 2013 | Show parent
  #36
Gear Addict
 
1 Review written
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by OolalavSuperfukk ➡️
I sometimes have a hard time articulating myself in writing.
I think you might benefit from splitting large texts into multiple paragraphs.
Old 22nd January 2013 | Show parent
  #37
Lives for gear
 
1 Review written
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by skira ➡️
So you're saying that you periodically spend $3,000 on Mac Pros, presumably buy Applecare, but right after the 3 year warranty expires "they break down" -- irretrievably, apparently -- and you need to immediately buy a new one.

Color me skeptical, sorry.
You have a right to be skeptical. For that matter, everyone on the internet, including yourself could be a big fat liar!

I'm sure most people would fight a little harder to keep their Macs alive. I use Applecare as far as it'll get me (and I have used it), but I'm not into bringing my huge towers down to the Apple Store for examination after over 2 years (which incidentally was 4-5 blocks from where I lived at that time). I have been buying new Macs instead and basically have a collection of Macs that power on, but I can't trust that they'll black screen on me.

Once I have a internal problem with the Mac that involves replacing a major part, and I just want to get back to work.... I buy a fresh new one and get back to work. I make money with my computer so I recoup the losses. I don't know about your peers, but it isn't anything special for graphic designers to replace their Macs every few years. People that I know replace their Macs more than me, albeit I tend to spend a bit more on mine. However, like I said, I do not buy the other gadgets such as iPods, laptops and such, so it evens out.

My point is that I (personally), because of my own experiences, don't think it is any longer wise to keep refreshing Macs, not at this price point, not in this economy, and not this day in age where the focus certainly is not on hardcore desktop users like me. It really isn't that unbelievable actually.
Old 22nd January 2013
  #38
Eat
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
I just got me a mac mini with the stock hdd but I splurged on the fastest cpu, i7 quad 2.6ghz, then loaded it with 16gb ram. Plus I have separate external sample an recording hdd's

I got 19% on the cpu with Live's performance test file, which is pretty darn great. However, I'm always looking for most inexpensive bang for buck solution. If you want to spend 2-3k, then a top end Macbook Pro will get you there
Old 22nd January 2013 | Show parent
  #39
Lives for gear
 
mickbenjamins's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by jwleeman ➡️
yea this whole "Fusion Drive" makes me a little nervous. guess i just don't want to be the guinea pig.
It's nothing new really, these hybrid drives have been around for a while, Seagate has made a few for example.
And the Flash Memory itself has been around much longer.

What happens is that a controller (can either be done in the Operating System, or in the controller in the HD itself) checks which files get accessed the most and they get placed in the Flash Memory.

So dont be scared by thinking you are Apple's guinea pig I have been using a Macbook Air with a SSD for more then a year now, and just recently switched to a Macbook Pro Retina (16GB ram, 512GB disk, it's a beast!)

Oh, and the traditional harddrives are more vulnerable to damage, as they spin either 5400 or 7200 times per minute... That's a lot to take for a disk.
I am working in an Apple Premium Reseller for more then two years now, and most of the time when a machine comes in for repair its the harddrive (mechanical damage).
Old 22nd January 2013 | Show parent
  #40
Lives for gear
 
skira's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by mickbenjamins ➡️
It's nothing new really, these hybrid drives have been around for a while, Seagate has made a few for example.
Seagate Momentus simply has a small cache -- much less than SSD storage in Fusion. You don't gain any storage you just cache some data to the SSD with Seagate. Fusion is data tiering with a 1TB (or 3Tb) drive plus a separate 128GB SSD, and seen as a single volume. Performance is better than simply caching.

Check out the 2 links I posted in an earlier post.
Old 22nd January 2013 | Show parent
  #41
Lives for gear
 
mickbenjamins's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by skira ➡️
Seagate Momentus simply has a small cache -- much less than SSD storage in Fusion. You don't gain any storage you just cache some data to the SSD with Seagate. Fusion is data tiering with a 1TB (or 3Tb) drive plus a separate 128GB SSD, and seen as a single volume. Performance is better than simply caching.

Check out the 2 links I posted in an earlier post.
Strange, I really thought there were already similar disks, cant seem to find anything about it, so I think I was wrong

Thanks for the links, good info!
Old 22nd January 2013 | Show parent
  #42
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by skira ➡️
Seagate Momentus simply has a small cache -- much less than SSD storage in Fusion.
There are others like the OCZ RevoDrive with 100GB flash memory and 1TB on spinning disks. That came out mid 2011.

As often is the case, Apple didn't invent this. They just have a heavy marketing punch.

Alistair
Old 22nd January 2013 | Show parent
  #43
Lives for gear
 
GJ999x's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 5 years
OK, i guess my advice, as an amateur with two, yes two whole years of experience, is consider spending on some decent monitors before spending >$2000 on a new computer... and if you're thinking of 5-8000, definitely start budgeting for monitors and acoustic treatment and deducting that off your computer spend... if making music that others will listen to is your goal.

CPU should not be the barrier to making good music, monitoring and acoustic treatment far more of an issue for the typical amateur.

Apols again if i've missed a relevant post making mine irrelevant.

G


Quote:
Originally Posted by OolalavSuperfukk ➡️
Well, in the scheme of things, I guess I'm still quite new to the recording world, seeing as I've only been recording for a little over a year now. I'm just a bedroom producer and write and record my own music at the moment. I've reached the point now that my gear is holding my back from both songwriting and production seeings as my songs have developed and become more complex taking up way more tracks and I tend to write and record simultaneously. So yeah, I'm a one man band at the moment. All I know is that I want to start making more professional sounding stuff. At the moment I've been recording vocals with a SM58 through a Line 6 UX2. I'm not sure if it's the SM58 that just doesn't suit my voice, or if the UX2 is a complete pile of crap, but they've been decent enough to get my ideas down. I plan to upgrade my audio interface to possibly a UA Apollo, my microphone to a RE-20 and then I'll probably get a UA 2-1176. Then I'll probably purchase a few nice plugins here and there. It's fairly pricey, but I think in the scheme of things it's still a relatively modest setup for trying to produce professional sounding music. I'm not going for your perfect clean pop hit sound. I'm a fan of a lot of 60s music and present "indie" music if you will... I have yet to figure what kind of studio monitors I'll be purchasing, but I still have time to sorta that out and do my research. I'm currently just mixing with my AKG K702 headphones. Anyways, right now my main focus is my computer. So to get back on track and properly answer your question, like I said, I've only been producing music for a year. Sure the quality of my music may still sound amateur, but I've progressed significantly in that time and now I've reached the point that my computer can hardly handle the amount of tracks and plugins I've got running. In fact, technically it can't, because I always have to bounce things down and sometimes turn of some plugins just to be able to mix things. Long story short, I always get to a point where I can't mix in a normal way. I don't want to mute tracks and turn off plugins do a little mixing and turn them back on and find out it didn't work out. I want to be able to hear everything all at so I can mix what is actually there. I hope I'm being clear enough, I sometimes have a hard time articulating myself in writing.
Old 23rd January 2013 | Show parent
  #44
Gear Addict
 
OolalavSuperfukk's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by GJ999x ➡️
OK, i guess my advice, as an amateur with two, yes two whole years of experience, is consider spending on some decent monitors before spending >$2000 on a new computer... and if you're thinking of 5-8000, definitely start budgeting for monitors and acoustic treatment and deducting that off your computer spend... if making music that others will listen to is your goal.

CPU should not be the barrier to making good music, monitoring and acoustic treatment far more of an issue for the typical amateur.

Apols again if i've missed a relevant post making mine irrelevant.

G
I do see your point about treating my room and getting some good monitors, but I just feel like a computer would still do me better at this moment, simply due to the fact that I can't even finish producing a song without my computer crapping out. I've got a bunch of song ideas that I want to finish up and record more; however, I it's impossible to mix my songs properly. I've only go 1 song 100% finished and recorded; however, the recording turned out really bad to to the fact i was always having to mute tracks and turn of certain plugins to mix. So I never actually got to mix to all the instruments playing simultaneously. So even if I treat my room and get monitors, this will still be an issue holding me back. Sure a better treated room will help me to probably use less plugins, especially on vocals, such as gating or expanders etc. But those plugins are the least of my worries. What I find seems to eat up my CPU like crazy is midi instruments, reverb, and compression.

Anyways, I do plan to get an RE-20 mic, and I hear those sound great in many situation whether the room is treated or not. Plus you don't need to worry about any proximity effect with it. I personally don't like to have a proximity effect. Anyways, that's my reasoning.

If you think I'm being naive in my thinking, just let me know and explain why so that I can understand a little better.
Old 23rd January 2013 | Show parent
  #45
Lives for gear
 
skira's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderTow ➡️
There are others like the OCZ RevoDrive with 100GB flash memory and 1TB on spinning disks. That came out mid 2011. As often is the case, Apple didn't invent this. They just have a heavy marketing punch.
Nope. A hybrid drive like the bulky $200-$500 RevoDrive uses its flash storage as cache only. Fusion is automated tiered storage built into the OS which transparently uses both drives as a single drive seen by the OS and prioritizes the use of flash storage to apps, files and data most frequently used or otherwise likely to boost performance (while infrequently used items are moved by OS X to the hard drive) — and the user never needs to worry about managing anything. No other technology does this in personal computers, and Apple got a patent for it in 2011. It's not simply marketing.

LINK

And Apple's Fusion patent came at the beginning of 2010.
Old 23rd January 2013 | Show parent
  #46
XI-MACHINES
 
DAW PLUS's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by skira ➡️
Nope. A hybrid drive like the bulky $200-$500 RevoDrive uses its flash storage as cache only. Fusion is automated tiered storage built into the OS which transparently uses both drives as a single drive seen by the OS and prioritizes the use of flash storage to apps, files and data most frequently used or otherwise likely to boost performance (while infrequently used items are moved by OS X to the hard drive) — and the user never needs to worry about managing anything. No other technology does this in personal computers, and Apple got a patent for it in 2011. It's not simply marketing.

LINK
Correct, and I think it is a good concept. However, I am sceptic about the OS deciding what files are where. Popularity does not mean they require to be loaded fast. I rather have the files on the SSD which tend to be the bottleneck (orchestral multis for example) than files used often, which might not be a problem to stream from the drive.
The concept behind it is not workstation performance, but private use/office workflow optimization, adding to the user experience.
That does not mean it is a bad thing for workstations - I have heard mostly positive things baout it from users so far, but it has a potential workflow downside for some users. But what hasn't...
Old 23rd January 2013 | Show parent
  #47
Lives for gear
 
skira's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAW PLUS ➡️
Popularity does not mean they require to be loaded fast.
It does for the vast majority of users.

Quote:
I rather have the files on the SSD which tend to be the bottleneck (orchestral multis for example) than files used often
For a specialized use like that put your orchestral files on a separate SSD. Real-world speeds with a USB 3.0 case are about 50-65% the speed of internal drives or Thunderbolt, but should be fast enough for most purposes including yours.

Once cheap SSDs come out the advantage of Fusion drives will diminish. Maybe in 2 years. Micron/Crucial just announced a 1Tb SSD for $600 so the death of mainstream use of HDDs is right around the corner. Now we just need affordable Thunderbolt cases....
Old 23rd January 2013
  #48
XI-MACHINES
 
DAW PLUS's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by skira ➡️
For a specialized use like that put your orchestral files on a separate SSD. Real-world speeds with a USB 3.0 case are about 50-65% the speed of internal drives or Thunderbolt, but should be fast enough for most purposes including yours.
65%? USB3 manages a lot more, depending of the SSD model. Current SATA3 SSDs are limited to 520MB/s, while the fastest USB3 SSD real world figure is 460 MB/s. 89%.
Old 23rd January 2013
  #49
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by skira ➡️
Nope. A hybrid drive like the bulky $200-$500 RevoDrive uses its flash storage as cache only.
It might only be caching but it is intelligent caching. It won't just cache the last 100GB read as some simple FIFO qeue. It looks at actual usage and will usually only cache things on the SSD after the 3rd read operation. This means that in every day use it can be very effective and why some badly designed tests where they only tested 3 read operations (like rebooting 3 times to see how much it accelerates OS load times) completely failed to show the real life gains this system can give.



Quote:
Fusion is automated tiered storage built into the OS which transparently uses both drives as a single drive seen by the OS and prioritizes the use of flash storage to apps, files and data most frequently used or otherwise likely to boost performance (while infrequently used items are moved by OS X to the hard drive) — and the user never needs to worry about managing anything. No other technology does this in personal computers, and Apple got a patent for it in 2011. It's not simply marketing.
Automated Tiered Storage is nothing new at all: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hierarc...age_management

Even your Wiki link says it isn't anything new (ignoring the marketing Bla about Fusion in there...)

The Fusion Drive method has its disadvantages too. For instance the data only gets moved to the SSD (or back) during I/O downtime. On a busy system that is never left idle this could mean never. Also moving the actual data (rather than just copying the frequently used data) adds disk wear and can increase the risk of data loss.

Also the RevoDrive operated fully transparently for the user. That in itself is not so special.

So no, nothing new. Just repackaged and remarqueted. IMO Apple's biggest strength.

Anyway, in the end it doesn't really matter too much to me personally. I have 768GB of SSD (over 2 drives) for OS and sample libraries and 8 GB of RAMdisk for active projects. (And about 10TB of spinning disk storage) That is more than fast enough. (And probably costs the same as that Fusion Drive ).

Alistair
Old 23rd January 2013 | Show parent
  #50
Lives for gear
 
skira's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAW PLUS ➡️
65%? USB3 manages a lot more, depending of the SSD model. Current SATA3 SSDs are limited to 520MB/s, while the fastest USB3 SSD real world figure is 460 MB/s. 89%.
Real world results (with speedtest screenshots) on forums.macrumors.com have most people around 250 with a few up to around 450. Bottleneck could be the case or the SSD, I dunno'. But USB3 is currently the most affordable way to go for the case of a file which would otherwise be punted off to the HDD.
Old 23rd January 2013 | Show parent
  #51
Lives for gear
 
skira's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderTow ➡️
It might only be caching but it is intelligent caching.
But it's not the same, it's not as good, it's a bulky card and it's not built into the OS (unlike Fusion where people who know what they're doing can implement it themselves with any HDD and SDD.)

Quote:
So no, nothing new. Just repackaged and remarqueted.
Nope. Unique for PCs, built into OS X, and patented.
Old 23rd January 2013
  #52
Gear Nut
 
🎧 10 years


But seriously... at a fraction of the price, you get better performance, FW800 Thunderbolt and functioning USB 3.

Not sure why you would buy a real mac these days. They are a bit dated.
Old 23rd January 2013
  #53
XI-MACHINES
 
DAW PLUS's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by skira ➡️
Real world results (with speedtest screenshots) on forums.macrumors.com have most people around 250 with a few up to around 450. Bottleneck could be the case or the SSD, I dunno'. But USB3 is currently the most affordable way to go for the case of a file which would otherwise be punted off to the HDD.
I agree USB3 is pretty good, even though the backward compatibility is not 100% and the Renesas drivers (as implemented by Intel) are worrysome.
The performance in your link is either due to OSX, the drives or the Macbook Air, since the 460MB/s are real world figures.
Old 24th January 2013
  #54
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by skira ➡️
But it's not the same, it's not as good, it's a bulky card and it's not built into the OS (unlike Fusion where people who know what they're doing can implement it themselves with any HDD and SDD.)
I don't know if it is not the same performance wise (which is what really counts). I haven't seen the two properly compared.

Yes Apple make very nice sleek computers. No contest there. But guess what, when I am sitting in my studio, I can't see my PC! (Which btw looks pretty nice in its full aluminium Lian-Li casing). I much prefer having a large case with plenty of expansion options than some sleek designer computer toy. Different strokes for different folks...

The fact that users can implement it themselves is also nice but in the end, buy a PC and (a) larger SSD drive(s) and you will not only get more performance but also more control! And it will be cheaper! Remember this is an audio forum. Not a lifestyle gadget forum. (Where you would win the argument hands down).

Quote:
Nope. Unique for PCs, built into OS X, and patented.
It is nice that it is built into OSX but HSM has been available for PCs for years (in Linux and Solaris x86) so no it is not unique really and I sincerely doubt the patent would hold if it gets contested.

In the end it doesn't matter one iota: If you want performance for audio you use Windows and SSD drives.

Alistair
Old 24th January 2013
  #55
Lives for gear
 
skira's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderTow ➡️
I sincerely doubt the patent would hold if it gets contested.
And this is part of where your ignorance on the subject arises. It's more than a single patent from 2010.

Disagree. Fusion is not just marketing, it is unique, it works better than the expensive RevoDrive and Apple controls patents other cannot use to implement it. Check out patent (20110238887) for the Fusion Drive. Also check out Uncorrectable Error Handling Schemes for Non-Volatile Memories (20110238629); Systems and Methods for Refreshing Non-Volatile Memory (20110235434); Non-Regular Parity Distribution Detection via Metadata Tag (20110239088) and others (20110238886, 20110239064 and 20110239065).

HSM software ($800) does not do the same thing as Fusion, your initial claims about that caching drive are not anything like Fusion either, but if you want to pay $800 and depend on IBM software support for your Windows box you go ahead.
Old 24th January 2013
  #56
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by skira ➡️
Disagree. Fusion is not just marketing, it is unique, it works better than the expensive RevoDrive and Apple controls patents other cannot use to implement it. Check out patent (20110238887) for the Fusion Drive. Also check out Uncorrectable Error Handling Schemes for Non-Volatile Memories (20110238629); Systems and Methods for Refreshing Non-Volatile Memory (20110235434); Non-Regular Parity Distribution Detection via Metadata Tag (20110239088) and others (20110238886, 20110239064 and 20110239065).
Patents mean nothing. In the end Samsung were allowed to continue selling their phones despite all the Apple patents. Patents these days are a bit of a joke really because the patent offices do close to zero research on prior technology.

You might not see the link with existing technologies, probably because you have never worked with them, but in my previous function in IT I was working with HSM over a decade ago (and it was nothing new then). So from my point of view it really is just repackaged and remarqueted technology.

Alistair
Old 24th January 2013 | Show parent
  #57
Lives for gear
 
skira's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderTow ➡️
Patents mean nothing. ... from my point of view it really is just repackaged and remarqueted technology.
You're entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts. To date, we've seen nothing like what Fusion has in terms of design or performance in the PC market with existing technology. If it's repackaged something it's innovated down very expensive enterprise SAN tech (like like EMC's Fully Automated Storage Tiering) to the mass market. It's not marketing or repackaging when anyone with a Mac, a HDD and an SSD can make a Fusion drive for free (as opposed to the bulky, inferior, expensive RevoDrive). It is a dynamic hardware/OS relationship invisibly managing most used apps and things onto the SSD; it's a cost-efficient means to achieve 80% (maybe even 90%) of the performance of an SSD solution and really is a unique innovation (which is why it legitimately got patents for it).

HSM doesn't work on the block level and costs $800. Fail.

No one is saying this is magical, revolutionary technology that came out of nowhere. But it is unique, its innovations are patented, and it is baked into the OS and being used by millions of Macs right now, with no direct equivalent in PCs.
Old 24th January 2013 | Show parent
  #58
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
I think the Fusion Drive is cool but here are some real facts:

Quote:
Originally Posted by skira ➡️
You're entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.
Show me which of my comments are factually incorrect.

Quote:
To date, we've seen nothing like what Fusion has in terms of design or performance in the PC market with existing technology.
There are many available Tiered Storage Solutions (or however you want to call it) available and the concept has been around for at least 15 years. Maybe more. There are even free solutions. See below.

There are also various flash based cache systems like Microsoft's ReadyBoost This is included in Windows Vista and Windows 7/8. (Unfortunately limited to 32GB of storage per disk but the max capacity can be increased to 256GB by stacking devices. Due to data compression it effectively is close to a max capacity of 512GB).

There is also Intel's Smart Response Technology included with any Z68 based Motherboard.

I know that you will respond that caching is not the same as Tiered Storage and you are right but for actual real world usage, these caching technologies can sometimes even outperform SSD drives. (And in the Intel SRT testing linked above they used a very small and very slow cache drive. (Slow in SSD terms)). Real world performance is what counts to the end user.

Quote:
If it's repackaged something it's innovated down very expensive enterprise SAN tech (like like EMC's Fully Automated Storage Tiering) to the mass market.
Here is an example of a free fully automated Tiered Storage System for Linux: Introducing TIER | lessfs It is OS based (It is a Kernel Module). It will probably outperform a Fusion Drive because it also includes RAM caching besides the SSD caching. (Btw, it was released before Apple announced the Fusion Drive).

Quote:
It's not marketing or repackaging when anyone with a Mac, a HDD and an SSD can make a Fusion drive for free (as opposed to the bulky, inferior, expensive RevoDrive).
Bulk is irrelevant in a studio computer. IMO you are grasping at straws. Anyway, I am not advocating the RevoDrive Hybrid which is discontinued. It was just one example of prior technology that includes hardware. For something that is much closer to the Fusion Drive concept, which is essentially software, see the free TIER software linked above.

Quote:
It is a dynamic hardware/OS relationship invisibly managing most used apps and things onto the SSD;
Yes, that is cool but it isn't unique or essentially new which has been my main point all the time.

Quote:
it's a cost-efficient means to achieve 80% (maybe even 90%) of the performance of an SSD solution
It most certainly is not cost efficient. For less than the price of the Fusion Drive you can get a 460GB SSD. For slightly more you can get a Samsung 840 SSD at 500GB.

Quote:
and really is a unique innovation (which is why it legitimately got patents for it).
It is not unique as TIER and other solutions prove. And again, patents are meaningless as far as a gauge of innovation is concerned. Many years ago CompuServe were granted a patent for a frigging blinking cursor even though blinking cursors had been around for decades. (In such examples these patents say more about how evil some corporate lawyers are and how incompetent the patent offices can be than how innovative the actual technology is).

Quote:
HSM doesn't work on the block level and costs $800. Fail.
I was using the term Hierarchical Storage Management generically. Again, some solutions are free and will likely outperform the Fusion Drive solution (thanks to RAM caching). Other (caching) technologies are included in Windows or in the basic motherboard chipset.

Quote:
No one is saying this is magical, revolutionary technology that came out of nowhere.
That seems to be what you are implying all along.

As for fact checking:

Quote:
And Apple's Fusion patent came at the beginning of 2010.
You wrote that right after a link stating the date as September 29th, 2011. Come on!

Quote:
But it is unique, its innovations are patented, and it is baked into the OS and being used by millions of Macs right now, with no direct equivalent in PCs.
Macs are PCs. It stands for Personal Computer.

But yeah, it would be really nice if Microsoft extended their ReadyBoost technology and Intel Their SRT technology to allow any drive size.

In conclusion: The Fusion drive is cool and I think it is excellent that Apple have included it standard in the OS. Thumbs up from me! As often when playing catch-up (In this case to Microsoft amongst many others) they managed to leap-frog the existing implementation. That is often what happens when implementing (similar) technology many years after other people. That said, however cool it might be, it is not fundamentally new. It is existing technology repackaged albeit done very well.

In practical use it isn't the most cost effective solution for audio. The Fusion Drive adds $300 to the price of a Mac. (EDIT: Oops, it is $250 so slightly more advantageous than I thought but still no winner). For slightly more than that you can get a 500GB Samsung 840 SSD from Newegg. That is MUCH better bang for your buck. Combine that with an OS that performs significantly better for audio (Windows) and the Fusion Drive becomes quite a bit less interesting as part of a total solution for audio purposes in an audio studio. Even on a Mac I would advise people to use a larger sized SSD for higher performance.

PS: If you want real performance (and have very deep pockets) you don't go for Fusion Drive, you go for Fusion-IO: http://www.fusionio.com/products/iodrive-octal/

Alistair
Old 25th January 2013
  #59
Lives for gear
 
skira's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
You are either being deliberately obtuse, or worse, unintentionally so. I know what I am saying, and I know what you are falsely inferring. The Fusion patent was reported filed in the 1st quarter 2010. I know what Macs are, and what PCs are. You seem to be splitting hairs while bald. The technologies you listed are not the same as Fusion.
Old 25th January 2013
  #60
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by skira ➡️
You are either being deliberately obtuse, or worse, unintentionally so. I know what I am saying, and I know what you are falsely inferring. The Fusion patent was reported filed in the 1st quarter 2010. I know what Macs are, and what PCs are. You seem to be splitting hairs while bald. The technologies you listed are not the same as Fusion.
I'm the one splitting hairs?

Not a single argument. Just unsupported attacks. Typical fanboi.

TIER is near identical to the Fusion Drive but I doubt you actually understand any of this technology. You only believe Apple marketing.

As there is no point in arguing with a fanboi, enjoy your ignorance. Over and out.



Alistair
📝 Reply

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 5805 views: 1868761
Avatar for Drumsound
Drumsound 5 hours ago
replies: 62 views: 66426
Avatar for Alex Kretov
Alex Kretov 27th May 2019
replies: 295 views: 72485
Avatar for anguswoodhead
anguswoodhead 26th March 2013
replies: 1296 views: 178751
Avatar for heraldo_jones
heraldo_jones 1st February 2016
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearspace Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…

Forum Jump
Forum Jump