#1
Of all the professional recording studios' websites I've ever seen, they all seem to have Macintoshes as their computer of choice for recording. So, besides home studios, does anyone know of any professional recording studios that use PCs (as in Windows XP or Vista)? And if so, please provide a link. Thanks
#2
I know quite a few members running high end studio off PCs at the Studio-Central board. (Nearly all of them are on the stable XP though).

IMO its all personal preference...which interface do you enjoy working on?

I work on Macs at work and PCs at home and have crashed both quite a few times doing video editing work....(seems too easy haha).
#3
Quote by moody07747
I know quite a few members running high end studio off PCs at the Studio-Central board. (Nearly all of them are on the stable XP though).

IMO its all personal preference...which interface do you enjoy working on?

I work on Macs at work and PCs at home and have crashed both quite a few times doing video editing work....(seems too easy haha).


I know what you mean, but I'm talking about professional studios where professional music artists go to record their albums. I've visited many websites, and all their studios and rooms contained macs, and as far as I could see, no PCs.
#4
It's probably because of Pro Tools HD. Add in Boot Camp, and there's hardly any reason to switch (since I seriously doubt they build their own computers). Also, if I'm not mistaken, Mac software only have to deal with CoreAudio, while PCs have multiple sound engines.

Audio engineers are a difficult bunch to change their minds...and I'm sure many studios are modeled after Abbey Road: big Neve console in the center + vintage analog equipment for the warm sound qualities.

That said, Steinberg's products (Cubase, Nuendo) are available on both platforms.
Quote by keiron_d
thank you sooooooo much for the advice Fast_Fingers...i would hug you if i could...i looooove you!


True love exists in UG. Can you feel it?

Recording Guitar Amps 101
Last edited by Fast_Fingers at Sep 21, 2008,
#5
Quote by Fast_Fingers
It's probably because of Pro Tools HD. Add in Boot Camp, and there's hardly any reason to switch (since I seriously doubt they build their own computers). Also, if I'm not mistaken, Mac software only have to deal with CoreAudio, while PCs have multiple sound engines.

Audio engineers are a difficult bunch to change their minds...and I'm sure many studios are modeled after Abbey Road: big Neve console in the center + vintage analog equipment for the warm sound qualities.

That said, Steinberg's products (Cubase, Nuendo) are available on both platforms.


But Pro Tools HD runs on Windows as well as OSX. And just like Macs can run Windows with Boot Camp, PCs can run OSX with other software, such as Easy BCD. So if both can run both, but PCs can be more powerful and cheaper depending on the one you get (since there's so many options compared to macs), then why not PCs? Is it because these studios started a while back with Macs (since that was all that was used), and they still use it because they're used to it, even though it's just as good on PCs? I just don't understand.
#6
ProTools was made for Mac, not PC. They adapted it later on. It's developed and made on macs for macs, so it tends to run just a tiny bit more smoothly. Once you're building a studio, money isn't really a factor any more, so springing the extra few bucks for a mac doesn't break the bank.
Telecaster - SG - Jaguar
Princeton Reverb, Extra Reverb
P-Bass - Mustang Bass
Apogee Duet 2 - Ableton Suite
#7
Quote by Sid McCall
ProTools was made for Mac, not PC. They adapted it later on. It's developed and made on macs for macs, so it tends to run just a tiny bit more smoothly. Once you're building a studio, money isn't really a factor any more, so springing the extra few bucks for a mac doesn't break the bank.


I know that, but I doubt it would run worst on Windows just because it was originally made for Macs. Tons of programs were made for Windows first that were then ported to Mac, and the quality is the same.

But yes, I can understand that the money thing isn't an issue for professional studios. But, if you were to make the most powerful PC ever, or buy one pre-made, and this same PC was optimized for recording stuff, then it would cost 20x that of the most expensive Mac. And, PCs are upgradeable, Macs aren't (even though, still, money isn't an issue).

So does anyone know of any professional studios that use PCs?
#8
For the record, the high end Macs (which they use in the studios) are upgradeable.

Anyway, one band I know of offhand that use PCs are Hellogoodbye, the record themselves so there you go.
Telecaster - SG - Jaguar
Princeton Reverb, Extra Reverb
P-Bass - Mustang Bass
Apogee Duet 2 - Ableton Suite
#9
Quote by Sid McCall
For the record, the high end Macs (which they use in the studios) are upgradeable.

Anyway, one band I know of offhand that use PCs are Hellogoodbye, the record themselves so there you go.


Oh, they are? Ok, well then that makes sense.

And thanks for giving an example. I'm just a PC user, and while I know Macs are good, it just frustrates me when I find out that a Mac is actually better than a PC in a certain situation, in which this is one. It's totally possible on a PC studio, just no studio I know of uses one which confuses me, but I guess Macs do do the job better.
#10
It's the same software. How could one do the job better than the other?

CT
Could I get some more talent in the monitors, please?

I know it sounds crazy, but try to learn to inhale your voice. www.thebelcantotechnique.com

Chris is the king of relating music things to other objects in real life.
#11
Because it's developed for one system, not the other. It's like if you learned to drive in an automatic, then later learned how to drive stick. You're going to be able to do both, but deep down you'll be more comfortable and more efficient in an automatic, unless you stick to manual for like ten years without driving an automatic, but that isn't happening in the software world.

That was a bad analogy, but hopefully you get it.
Telecaster - SG - Jaguar
Princeton Reverb, Extra Reverb
P-Bass - Mustang Bass
Apogee Duet 2 - Ableton Suite
#12
Perhaps a more fair example would be to say - "which gets the job done better.... a gas-only car or a hybrid?" Answer = neither. They're both driven the same way. The controls are all in basically the same places, etc. To the end user, it is the same. What is different is what happens under the hood. The only people that really need to care about that are engineers and mechanics. Sure, the hybrid will get better gas mileage, which is nice, but one won't get you there any faster, in any more comfort, etc. than the other.

CT
Could I get some more talent in the monitors, please?

I know it sounds crazy, but try to learn to inhale your voice. www.thebelcantotechnique.com

Chris is the king of relating music things to other objects in real life.
#13
Quote by maidenforce19
Of all the professional recording studios' websites I've ever seen, they all seem to have Macintoshes as their computer of choice for recording. So, besides home studios, does anyone know of any professional recording studios that use PCs (as in Windows XP or Vista)? And if so, please provide a link. Thanks


One thing has been running though my mind TS, Why are you looking for a Pro. PC based studio?
#14
That said, it seems Digidesign's definitely paying more attention to Mac than PC. They already have Leopard support, yet they haven't yet upgraded to Vista (say what you will, but people eventually will move to it or Windows 7 for security reasons).

My guess is that the TS wants to build his own PC to host his own studio. Building your own PC means you can have a greater amount of PCI/PCI-e based DSP power (since many motherboards have greater expandability than Mac Pros...especially this one), it will be cheaper, and can be made to run quieter.

The price gap does lower significantly (you'll need two processors...though the performance should be around the level of a $3500 Pro) if you go for a server PC to compete against the Mac Pro, which means you MUST have the obscenely expensive FB-DIMM RAM.
Let me know what's the budget for everything and what you have now, and we'll decide then. Perhaps all you can go for is a good interface and software.
Quote by keiron_d
thank you sooooooo much for the advice Fast_Fingers...i would hug you if i could...i looooove you!


True love exists in UG. Can you feel it?

Recording Guitar Amps 101
#15
Quote by Fast_Fingers
(you'll need two processors...though the performance should be around the level of a $3500 Pro)


No way. Even a modest machine is fine for recording audio. My 1.7ghz machine with 256MB RAM was sufficient to run up to 36 tracks of 24-bit audio with eq and fx, etc.

You can't buy a machine like that anymore.

CT
Could I get some more talent in the monitors, please?

I know it sounds crazy, but try to learn to inhale your voice. www.thebelcantotechnique.com

Chris is the king of relating music things to other objects in real life.
#16
Quote by axemanchris
No way. Even a modest machine is fine for recording audio. My 1.7ghz machine with 256MB RAM was sufficient to run up to 36 tracks of 24-bit audio with eq and fx, etc.

You can't buy a machine like that anymore.

CT


I was describing server-type PCs that take after the Mac Pro, which do come with two processors. Of course, good soundcards and DSP processors will ease the computing load to the point that you won't need anything crazy.
Quote by keiron_d
thank you sooooooo much for the advice Fast_Fingers...i would hug you if i could...i looooove you!


True love exists in UG. Can you feel it?

Recording Guitar Amps 101