Composing : New equipment... by Tobias Jäck

You are going to get answers all over the board on this - just like asking should you use an iPhone or Android. Having spent over 30 years in IT, I would say, the first thing you need to ask and answer is why change your hardware at all? What is the benefit that the new hardware gives you. Secondly, imho, the hardware should be chosen based on the software you need. These are tools and the hardware is there to support your tool. So your question should be does Logic do the job for you and can you continue to grow and use it - not change your software because you prefer a pretty platform. Remember, our tools are just that. We use them to create music and our customer - whether it be the sound editor/director/producer (notice your customers are your 'stakeholders' not film viewers) or musicians (if you score and conduct) will not know nor care what tool created your product. All that counts is the quality of your product. Though, on the other hand, if you decide as they do in some card games, that you don't like your cards and turn them all in, then you can rightly ask what do others use. Keep in mind that your scoring work and hence your platform chosen must be congruent with your style, sound, work style, and environment. Makes no sense for you to spend a lot of money necessarily on a set of tools and a platform designed for composers who participate in a large 'workflow' (that is you collaborate with people both prior, during and after the scoring process - i.e., there is more than one person involved in the score), if you score all by yourself. So for example, why spend the thousands of dollars on a high end Mac-based Protools platform with Vienna samples unless you can justify the expense? If you were working on mid to large budget films and involved with/in the sound mixing and design (and the others were also on protools), perhaps. But a high end solution may not be at all beneficial for a low to no budget indie filmmaker environment. Some people like to 'overbuy' and show off what they have. It makes then feel 'better' or 'more secure'. Perhaps even touting their tools / workbench as a status symbol. I am not one of those types. I treat composing as a business and my tools as capital expenditures. If the purchase doesn't impact my products or improve my work environment, then I don't buy or at least hold off. For example, most composers work with multiple displays - composing software on one and sync'ing film on a second. I looked at that environment and decided for the films I was scoring, I could do without a second display (and the extra table space/cost and re-arranging of my studio). Perhaps someday, but not yet. I can just as easily keep the film in a small window in the upper right hand of my single display. So how do you know "it's time". Sometimes you have no choice - the hardware breaks or malfunctions and it must be replaced. Other times, as I found out last year, you need to 'up your game' by improving your product. And also keep in mind, that your composing platform may be needed for non-composing tasks (I have a day job as a wedding videographer and so like a filmmaker, I needed a high powered, high configured machine capable of video editing and rendering). So last year, I finally got tired of outside and my own critiques about the quality of some of my orchestral sounds. After 10+ years of using Miroslav Gig samples, it was time. Keep in mind in my environment, the issue was the samples and sampler and not the composing tool (whether it be Sibelius or Sonar - my two tools). I looked at my needs, the ability to expand, and the costs, and decided to stay on the Windows 7/64 bit platform. But to best utilize my new sampler (Kontakt), primary sample set (CineSamples), and my day job (Video editing and rendering), I needed a platform with power and capacity to support. So I purchased a very high end Dell using a Xeon E5-1660 with 32 GB of memory and 1 TB SSD for the operating system, software and samples (along with a 4 TB hard disk for everything else). There are so many different CPUs with similar names that it is important you know how it performs relative to your current CPU so check http://www.cpubenchmark.net. And an SSD is crucial to good performance. In fact on my studio laptop (with identical software, samplers, and samples), I have two 1 TB SSDs and no hard disk at all. All this does not come cheap. I am not anywhere near a 'high end' studio system environment and I spent $3k - $4k on hardware and about $2k on samples and samplers. And so I end this the way I started - my story is just that - my story. I came from 23 years at Exxon and while my job was to evaluate technologies for 20 years (I was 50 feet away from Steve Jobs when he announced the Mac at Comdex in 1983) and I saw and used pretty much everything, I still came from a corporate environment and so all else being equal - I tend to go with a Windows platform. The Mac platform can do the job equally and some argue even faster and more efficiently though the major tools and samples are available for both.

Thanks a lot, Joel. That is very helpful to me. Probably I should ask myself if I even need the new hardware... All the best!

I use digital performer, uad, sibelius, and OS X 10.11.6 on an older macpro. Most recording studios and engineers are gonna use protools, but wavs can go any where so everything works these days. For composers... it's all over the map for daw's and then either sibelius or finale. I have logic and use to use it a lot when I was working with a producer in Philly who wanted to keep projects in logic and I've also had a pc with cubase. I like digital performer best, but that's not to say it's any better than the next guys. They all have that crap in crap out feature.

Thanks Linwood!

Hi Toby, I am celebrating 12 years with cubase and windows this year. Macs were relevant in the 80s when there was nothing else. Now there's software available for both platforms so go with what's easiest for you. I found cubase much easier, quicker and cleaner to work with.

Do you use cubase artist or pro? Because I feel like artist won't do it...

I haven't done any composing on a Windows machine, but I have been loving doing it on my Mac. My entire uni is fitted out with macs too, so I'm sure they'd recommend the Mac too

I can write equally bad on both pc and mac. lol

I know its not very orthadox, but ive been using Reason 7 with windows for ages. With a couple of decent refills (projectsam orchestral sampler and stringwerks) im starting to get close to decent orchestral sounds. Still want to try a mac though, just out of curiosity.

Here's the deal: any DAW will deliver you the tools you need to be a successful composer. To choose a DAW comes down to how well you can write and program and how fast you can do that. If your tool is limiting you from doing any of those things then you need to move to a different DAW. Logic, cubase, protools, digital performer are the 'pro' DAWs that you will see in 90% of the 'Hollywood' composer studios. 2cents: If money is a concern, I would move to pc/cubase. I have used nearly every DAW out there, I personally love Cubase and Protools.

iMac works well although frustrating at first works well with tools like GarageBand if you use that at all. Other programs I hear work good like audacity but can be back breaking in some other areas. Samsung is more refreshing I do prefer both!!!

I've got a 5k iMac at home with 4ghz, ram, and ssd. This week I put a motu interface, DP, Omnisphere 2, Superior drums on it just to give it a go. It runs like the wind, dead quite, and those 5k monitors will spoil you.

I'd rather stay on Mac because I've been using it all my life so far. Though it's not the cheapest option and spending 3k on a Mac is quite a commitment...

Here's another thing: has anyone of you guys ever heard of Hackintosh? It's basically a PC running MacOS. I'm not sure if it's that good of an idea though... Any experience with that?

Would not advise hackinstosh at all. 1) updating OS (something you have to do with Logic) is not easy. 2) it's a lot of work, spend the time composing.