Desktop vs Laptop

[sQeetz]

Laptop then, like others have said, affords the benefit of portability that desktop lacks. That makes it ideal for gigging, touring etc. Ultimately, which one you should go for depends on the use case. Laptop is a more-than-suitable option even for "stationary" production, but I will say that if you intend to use a lot of resource-intensive effects and software synths, then desktop is the better choice. With that, your system doesn't run out of processing power quite as quickly.

This might hold true for the Windows users. Not anymore, though, for (Apple Silicon) Macs. There is no difference between the CPUs used in the desktop computers and the mobile ones. (yet)

[AsPeeXXXVIII]

Laptop then, like others have said, affords the benefit of portability that desktop lacks. That makes it ideal for gigging, touring etc. Ultimately, which one you should go for depends on the use case. Laptop is a more-than-suitable option even for "stationary" production, but I will say that if you intend to use a lot of resource-intensive effects and software synths, then desktop is the better choice. With that, your system doesn't run out of processing power quite as quickly.

This might hold true for the Windows users. Not anymore, though, for (Apple Silicon) Macs.

Well, I do speak as a lifelong Windows user - I don't have the Mac perspective. Only time I've ever used Macs was when I studied music for ~3.5 years because the school computers were all Macs, and frankly I intend to never touch a Mac again. Not as long as Apple keep giving me reasons to not support them - and they've given me plenty of those lately.

[sQeetz]

What I'm trying to say, for the sake of this threads title, is that as of now you buy a Macbook and get the desktop performance. There is no Desktop or Tower that is better than that (for MacOS, that is...)

[FapFilter]

I own an M1 Pro and love it's power, and while it is extremely powerful and efficient for portable technology, people still need to be realistic: Intel's newest desktop chip is IIRC about twice as powerful overall and if you really want to go overboard, you can get some 64 core CPU, which will cost you 8000 bucks for the CPU alone though

[sQeetz]

that's why I said for MacOS. Who knows what the plans are for Apple Silicon Macs.

[FapFilter]

Yes, that post came in between when i was posting mine

[Heartfeltdawn]

Man, I can't wait until you realise that people are still buying vinyl.

Not "still", but "again", which is an even more absurd situation that says a lot about how absolutely f**king pathetic and stupid people are.

Yes "still". Vinyl sales never disappeared completely.

[Sweaty Ear]

the added opinions you've posted has been extremely helpful. after reading all of your replies thinking the laptop used as a stationary might be good to start with followed by a desktop also down the road. my skills aren't up to handling more than 50 tracks yet anyway so probably wouldn't use too much power but that solution seems to be the best of both worlds. (of course a few days ago i was ready to buy a desktop. lol). a portable external drive could also work but how can you be comfortable loading your files onto someone else's computer?

all of my plugins are pc so will most likely stay with that but started on mac. only switched after misreading trends. really glad mac now has powerful laptops. while i'll probably not benefit from them it's good that others of you can.

[BONES]

Nobody's skills are up to handling 50 tracks, that's the recipe for a hot mess. Our best songs invariably have fewer than a dozen tracks.

[antic604]

Nobody's skills are up to handling 50 tracks, that's the recipe for a hot mess. Our best songs invariably have fewer than a dozen tracks.

I also work with extremely low track counts, but your statement isn't really fair - go to VI Control forum and people there (pros, who do music for living) will typically have templates with 500+ tracks. I don't think track number has anything to do with skill or talent

[Harry_HH]

I need both - not only because the portability, but in this way I can have one very good DAW installed in the studio, and the several semi-good working locations all over the flat, including sofa etc.

[chk071]

Nobody's skills are up to handling 50 tracks, that's the recipe for a hot mess. Our best songs invariably have fewer than a dozen tracks.

I also work with extremely low track counts, but your statement isn't really fair - go to VI Control forum and people there (pros, who do music for living) will typically have templates with 500+ tracks. I don't think track number has anything to do with skill or talent

Probably rather with megalomania...

[antic604]

Probably rather with megalomania...

Perhaps, but that would contradict BONES' allegedly low track count, wouldn't it?

[chk071]

I don't know. Is he a megalomaniac?

[BONES]

I also work with extremely low track counts, but your statement isn't really fair - go to VI Control forum and people there (pros, who do music for living) will typically have templates with 500+ tracks. I don't think track number has anything to do with skill or talent

Of course it does. It's like juggling - the more balls you have in the air at one time, the harder it gets. If you've got 50 tracks, there is no way you are giving them all the attention they require and, in all likelyhood, you could go through the finished mix, delete half of them and no-one would notice. You end up making things difficult just for the sake of making things difficult, to impress your clients.

I see it at work all the time - they get an outside company to do some of our campaign designs and the After Effects projects they give us as templates mostly look like they were created by the work experience kid (intern). I'm sure they impress the executives on Level 9 but they are absurdly, unusably complex to work with. There is one I recall fixing where I ended up removing almost 4,000 items that simply didn't need to be there. Even some of our guys here just keep piling stuff on and never go back to tidy up.