Is Studio 1 the only realistic alternative to Cubase ?

[apoclypse]

Snip.

Apples performance on a per watt basis is pretty much unmatched. The M1 Max has been shown to perform about as well as desktop 2080 in terms of graphics and it does it barely 70w full load for the whole system on battery. You are not going to find an Intel or AMD machine that can do that without significant downgrade in performance when running on battery at the moment or at least not for long. The equivalent gpu on mobile is the lower watt 3080. That takes up 100W or more by itself.

I would think those who make music of all people would appreciate a system that performs well quietly and without requiring that you carry around a 230W power brick on top of that. Maybe it’s just me.

[Haptix]

Snip.

Apples performance on a per watt basis is pretty much unmatched. The M1 Max has been shown to perform about as well as desktop 2080 in terms of graphics and it does it barely 70w full load for the whole system on battery. You are not going to find an Intel or AMD machine that can do that without significant downgrade in performance when running on battery at the moment or at least not for long. The equivalent gpu on mobile is the lower watt 3080. That takes up 100W or more by itself.

I would think those who make music of all people would appreciate a system that performs well quietly and without requiring that you carry around a 230W power brick on top of that. Maybe it’s just me.

I will just leave this here for you to ponder upon on...


https://wccftech.com/m1-max-macbook-pro ... %20because

70W is still 70W no matter what kind of quantum alien architecture you use..

[BONES]

Honestly, who gives a shit about "on a per watt basis", especially when the battery life is no better? If you have to define performance in those terms, then you've lost the argument already. That's shit for the engineers who design the computers, not for me trying to make music or create graphics for work.

All I need to be able to do is get through a 60 minute set on batteries, or an hour or two in a meeting with a client, and I've been able to do that with the last 4 or 5 laptops I've had. Oh, and my current laptop's PSU is quite a bit smaller than a MagSafe Mac charger.

[apoclypse]

Snip.

Apples performance on a per watt basis is pretty much unmatched. The M1 Max has been shown to perform about as well as desktop 2080 in terms of graphics and it does it barely 70w full load for the whole system on battery. You are not going to find an Intel or AMD machine that can do that without significant downgrade in performance when running on battery at the moment or at least not for long. The equivalent gpu on mobile is the lower watt 3080. That takes up 100W or more by itself.

I would think those who make music of all people would appreciate a system that performs well quietly and without requiring that you carry around a 230W power brick on top of that. Maybe it’s just me.

I will just leave this here for you to ponder upon on...


https://wccftech.com/m1-max-macbook-pro ... %20because

70W is still 70W no matter what kind of quantum alien architecture you use..

Right but that’s 70w total system draw. On PC laptops the system will pull more than 100W just for the gpu alone.

As for the pic, I’m not sure what point you are trying to make. If you’ve used an M1 Mac before the machine barely spins the fan on the heaviest of loads on the system. It’s actually quite amazing. My PC laptop sounds like an airplane just doing a Webex call. I personally have never heard the M1 Max fans even on the heaviest of heavy session in Studio One.

[apoclypse]

Honestly, who gives a shit about "on a per watt basis", especially when the battery life is no better? If you have to define performance in those terms, then you've lost the argument already. That's shit for the engineers who design the computers, not for me trying to make music or create graphics for work.

All I need to be able to do is get through a 60 minute set on batteries, or an hour or two in a meeting with a client, and I've been able to do that with the last 4 or 5 laptops I've had. Oh, and my current laptop's PSU is quite a bit smaller than a MagSafe Mac charger.

The M1 Max 16” gets 22 hours of battery life on a single charge, the 14” gets 17. No PC laptop gets even close to that. At least state facts if you are going to show your bias so plainly. That shows that you’ve actually lost the plot not just the argument.

Performance per watt may not matter to you but it does matter to people who buy laptops and travel.

As for graphics, unless you are buying a gaming focused laptop your typical laptop is coming with integrated Intel graphics or AMD integrated graphics and even the base M1 macs run circles around that so I don’t see what your point is there.

[syntonica]

Meh. I like my MBA for its quality components (i.e. no plastic shite like in my PC laptop) and now for the fact that it's 6x faster than my older laptop, but runs fanless all day long before needing to be charged. The fact I don't have to deal with Win10 or 11 is a plus.

Don't get me wrong--there's plenty about macOS that annoys me and my neighbors often hear about it.

That said, use what makes you happy. All this platform religious BS is just that. BS.

[Haptix]

Snip.

...

I will just leave this here for you to ponder upon on...
...
70W is still 70W no matter what kind of quantum alien architecture you use..

Right but that’s 70w total system draw.

...aaand that makes absolutely no difference what so ever...the thermal solution in the picture (which is from M1 max) still needs to handle all of it.

On PC laptops the system will pull more than 100W just for the gpu alone.

Please. Its not a question of these retarted 'this vs. that' -things.

As for the pic, I’m not sure what point you are trying to make.

I'll ask it simply - How well (in your own professional knowledge of electronics) you would say, that the particular thermal solution will handle the 70W? How long it will take before the chip simply needs to slow itself down in order to stay cool enough to be still functional? A.k.a use less power, because the heat cannot dissipate fast enough (bear in mind that the benchmark scores are made under full load).

Heres another pic for reference and educational reasons:



Its a very fine laptop indeed, 4 cores 8 threads and a decent iGPU. It has very typical thermal solution for those 'ultrabook'-type thin and pretty laptops, you know the ones all the manbun wearing communists use.

It has a whopping (nominal) 15W (12-25W conf.) of intense and unlimited power - and with about 60 - 70% cpu and 99% (=full) gpu load, it takes about 15 seconds to slow down in order stay functional. Other choice for it would be to make a 'puff' - sound and nice little mushroom cloud.

^
This does not mean, when it slows down, it would be somehow completely useless or anything like that - but for sure you are not getting all the power advertised by the few seconds lasting synthetic benchmarks either

Well, I quess my point was that, please do not make retarded comparisons like:

The M1 Max has been shown to perform about as well as desktop 2080 in terms of graphics...

Just no. It does not. No matter how many clickbait articles you find about how great it is, it will not perform anywhere close to a desktop gpu.

If you’ve used an M1 Mac before the machine barely spins the fan on the heaviest of loads on the system. It’s actually quite amazing. My PC laptop sounds like an airplane just doing a Webex call. I personally have never heard the M1 Max fans even on the heaviest of heavy session in Studio One.

I really do not care.

Meh. I like my MBA for its quality components (i.e. no plastic shite like in my PC laptop) and now for ...

So...why exactly you bought a 'plastic shite' - as you put it and now start complaining about it? You know they come in all shapes, sizes and materials...

Edit:

Could you please elaborate what makes it ok to use 'quality components' and Apple in a same sentence? Jeez...

[BONES]

The M1 Max 16” gets 22 hours of battery life on a single charge, the 14” gets 17. No PC laptop gets even close to that.

Not even close to true, here's a chart that shows 19 hours battery life from a Lenovo laptop -

https://i.pcmag.com/imagery/reviews/05J ... JFR-10.png

More to the point, here are some real battery life test results, not just bullshit claims from manufacturers. Yes, the Apple silicon lasts longer but they fall way short of the numbers you've quoted and the difference from an Intel powered PC is hardly impressive, given Apple's claims. It is certainly nowhere near enough that it would change my purchasing decision, even if battery life was vitally important to my needs.

At least state facts

I'm not just stating facts, I'm providing you with links to real evidence to back it up.

That shows that you’ve actually lost the plot not just the argument.

Right, because I'm providing links to evidence while you just spout unsupportable bullshit from Apple.

Performance per watt may not matter to you but it does matter to people who buy laptops and travel.

And what makes you think I'm not one of those people? After all, we perform all over the world, not just in our mum's basement. We get up on stage in front of people and rely 100% on the performance of my laptop and its battery. I honestly can't think of anyone who is more reliant on both the performance and battery life of their laptop than I am.

As for graphics, unless you are buying a gaming focused laptop your typical laptop is coming with integrated Intel graphics or AMD integrated graphics and even the base M1 macs run circles around that so I don’t see what your point is there.

My point is that there is a whole world of laptops that don't rely on Intel or AMD's integrated graphics. You're just making artificial distinctions to try and make your point look reasonable when it totally isn't. My last laptop cost around US$1200, brand new from Dell, and had a GeForce RTX2070 card on board, with 2,304 CUDA cores for massive parallel processing. You're kidding yourself if you think any SoC can hope to match that kind of performance.

[chk071]

Mac vs. PC Reloaded. Part 213.

[Bartone]

Moderators: should the title be “Mac vs Windows”?

[FapFilter]

Amiga!

[dellboy]

So back on topic.

Now that Cubase12 is finally out, how does it compare to the latest version of Studio One. Has anything changed your opinion with regard to Cubase. The obvious major change is now the lack of a dongle for Cubase. Will this influence your buying decision?

[chk071]

The elimination of the copy protection dongle means Cubase is 100 times better now than Studio One.



Well... at least it means that I can happily install Cubase AI 12 now, and don't have to bother about plugging in that USB thing every time.

[LeVzi]

So back on topic.

Now that Cubase12 is finally out, how does it compare to the latest version of Studio One. Has anything changed your opinion with regard to Cubase. The obvious major change is now the lack of a dongle for Cubase. Will this influence your buying decision?

Good luck keeping it on topic.

But in answer to your question, no I am sticking with Cubase for V12 at least. Nothing has changed in regard the VST2 issue on Windows yet. I am hoping it never does.

[Bartone]

So back on topic.

Now that Cubase12 is finally out, how does it compare to the latest version of Studio One. Has anything changed your opinion with regard to Cubase. The obvious major change is now the lack of a dongle for Cubase. Will this influence your buying decision?

I could consider Cubase now since it doesn’t need the dongle anymore. But I am waiting for the demo to be available (the free trial version will be released soon - no any info /estimated time when it will be).

S1 is very nice. But I would really like to try Cubase12 how it feels/compares. Especially the workflow S1 vs Cubase12.

I really don’t like in S1 the pen & eraser function in piano roll. I know I can use the arrow tool for drawing and then the eraser tool isn’t automatically there… but I find the double clicking a bit frustrating compared to single click with the pen…