Once you've finished working on them (for now. Many projects consist of several parallel sections that don't really involve each other, and which you focus-on one at a time. Such that the only way that you can solve the problem is by breaking it down: by planning-ahead on your project in stages so that you do certain things "not 'in real time.'" "Freeze," "Bounce in Place," and other features actually work quite well: Logic's designers obviously realized the importance of this, so they addressed the need quite admirably. Now, having said that: eventually you will run up against some limit of your hardware, no matter how "phat" it is. This is why, of the various other factors, RAM-size is always most important: the computer can't make information available if there is no place to put it, and "virtual memory" in this case is not the same. (Otherwise: "system overload.") It doesn't matter how many CPU(s) it has to work on the data, if the data is not there. Remember: "RAM is the only thing in your computer that is just as fast as your CPU(s)." And: "your CPU(s) can do nothing without it."Īs a so-called "real-time application," Logic, when used in real-time mode, must be able to get whatever-it-needs into RAM before it is needed. I'd say the most significant thing about a MacBook isn't what it can't achieve, but what it can. But I reckon I could just about make it work if I used Freeze on tracks, so they weren't running the plug-ins in real-time. Would I choose a MacBook Pro to handle a plug-in heavy 32+ track mix? Er. They certainly didn't want catch a flight to assemble in one studio for a mass sing-a-thon! The song was a big hit. That was because a lot of singers were prepared to take part, as long as the project came to them. I remember a charity single, more than 20 years ago, where most of the vocal tracks were recorded on a MacBook. It depends what you're trying to achieve, and your budget. However, I completely agree with that RAM is king when it comes to the number of real-time processes a machine can handle. If you want to run LPX on a laptop, the MacBook Pro is really the only machine to buy. What it 'looks like' is not really the point, with respect. Can a computer-like thing, what looks like reminiscent of a monolithic thin client, used in client-server systems, considered studio-ready at all? Maybe it need a application server?
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |