new music computer-->iMac or Mini??

[charlesparente]

It's almost time to replace my 4 year old Mac Pro.

I'm seriously considering switching to either an iMac or Mini.
I do 99% MIDI/VI work, single machine, no slaves. Currently have 18GB ram which has never been a limitation. In VE Pro, I think so far my highest RAM count has been 6 or 8 GB on my largest templates.

My workspace is very small, and my Mac Pro creates massive heat in my room (the fans run all the time, but not abnormally fast.)

So I'm hoping for less heat production from my next computer.

1) For the iMac, do the fans get noisy when running big projects??
Noise might drive me crazy since the fans are attached to the monitor itself..I can't just stick the noise producing part under the desk!

2) For the Mini, is anyone out there using one as their only machine, and doing heavy VI work?
The specs really seem to be improving for the mini over the past few years.

3) For sample storage, I will probably use the Lacie 2Big Thunderbolt, which should work fine.
Or wait for the price of 512 GB SSD drives to drop even further, and stick them in enclosures.

Any opinions greatly appreciated!

[kgdrum]

Well fwiw this came from OWC the other day.
Quote:
"Mac mini 2012 has a pronounced problem with Bluetooth & USB 3.0
Although few and far between, we started hearing reports of customers experiencing issues with certain USB 3.0 drives and their 2012 Mac mini. As it turns out, USB 3.0 can emit interference that can affect not only Bluetooth, but also 2.4GHz Wi-Fi as well.

It seems the problem is some minis may not have proper shielding applied internally. While most Mac mini 2012s have had their Wi-F/BT work fine with connected USB 3.0 devices, some users experience up to total loss of Bluetooth even at very short range. This random occurrence appears to be due to the specific placement of shielding inside the mini, which from our investigation appears to vary from unit to unit.

The solution – we now have a blog up with a video demonstrating installation of a very simple solution to the problem. Insulated EMI shielding foil can be used to shield the mini's Bluetooth module from the internal USB 3.0 emissions and substantially restore your Bluetooth range. With this solution applied, and with using multiple Bluetooth devices together, we've seen range consistently restored to between 20 and 25 feet. Not quite the max 30 feet advertised for Bluetooth, but certainly useable.

A true 'how-to' installation video version of this 'first look' is in production now. In the meantime, the present video in our blog covers things more than adequately so those affected can waste no time in restoring their Bluetooth to an acceptable range. Furthermore, we've assembled a complete Bluetooth Shielding Kit for Mac mini for $9.79 that has proper insulated shielding and all the tools you need too. We're all about solutions and are pleased to quickly offer one to you for this troublesome problem.

As a further note on this issue, it can actually affect other USB 3.0 equipped Macs and PCs as well. It can also be highly affected by low-grade USB 3.0 cables. We are pleased to confirm that our included double-shielded USB 3.0 cables are of substantial quality and do not further exacerbate the problem. We also found this to be true of the cables included with many of the other brand USB 3.0 solutions we offer with the exception of LaCie. If you have a LaCie USB 3.0 cable and are having issues with Wi-Fi/Bluetooth – a new cable may also be part of the needed solution."

[charlesparente]

Thanks, yes---I had read about that also.
Sounds like an easy fix.

[bayswater]

1) For the iMac, do the fans get noisy when running big projects??

Yes. If I was doing this now, I'd go with Minis. At the time I got the iMac Minis were still using Core 2Duo, and the iMac was a cheap way to get a big Apple screen.

[charlesparente]

Thanks for the feedback!

[denekawa]

I just dumped my iMac for an older 8 core Mac Pro system quite similar to what you currently utilize. From my experience I will say that you will be disappointed if you are going from your current system to an iMac unless you get at least a quad core and max out the RAM. I find the Mac Pro far more efficient in it's ability to handle a heavier workload with a more intensive track count and multiple plug-ins. What used to drive my iMac into panic mode doesn't even disturb the Mac Pro even modestly. I have no experience with the Mini, but going to an iMac is definitely a huge step down from my experience.

[bayswater]

I just dumped my iMac for an older 8 core Mac Pro system quite similar to what you currently utilize. From my experience I will say that you will be disappointed

Without knowing what iMac you had, this doesn't tell us much. The first iMac had 128M of RAM and G3 processor. That would be disappointing.

[mikehalloran]

I posted the Geekbench scores in another thread for my 2010 i7 and my wife's 2011 i5, both 27" iMacs. The i7 has a huge advantage when it comes to floating point integer processing. Recent issue Mac Pros are better, as they should be. It would be interesting to see how the Minis stack up.

I am happy with my 2010 iMac. DP 8 and OS 10.8.2 make better use of memory and run much better than DP 7.24. I expected to be pushing the limits of my machine by now and am pleasantly surprised to find more headroom than before.

The fans aren't much on an issue even on the hottest days. My G5, G4 and G3s were all louder - by quite a bit. My air conditioner even louder still.

Does one need to max out the memory? I don't know. 20G (8+8+2+2) is working great for me. Upgrading to 32G is only $95 from OWC if I feel the need later.

MacMini HDs are slower unless you go SSD, Thunderbolt or both. I have the eSATA kit from OWC on my i7 - this allows me to run one eSATA drive. My wife's and the current Minis have TB which allows you to run multiple eSATA or TB drives - a plus if you have the need for speed.
Nothing about a Mini tells me it would be better. An upgrade would be to a Mac Pro.

[charlesparente]

Mike--thanks for your comments. You always have insightful comments about hardware, which I appreciate.

In terms of CPU, RAM speed, SATA speed, system bus speed...either a top of the line mini or iMac will be an improvement over my Early 2008 mac Pro.
And I would install a SSD if I purchased the mini, or buy the 27" iMac with SSD or fusion.

Then again, I don't hit the CPU ceiling with my current Mac Pro.

The 16GB ram limit on the mini might be more of a limiting factor if I start using huge templates.

And using a lacie 2big TB for my two sample drives should permit even better streaming performance than I currently get with internal SATA drives inside my mac pro.

I'll probably wait for some reviews on the 27"iMac once they start shipping
before I make up my mind on this one.

[denekawa]

I just dumped my iMac for an older 8 core Mac Pro system quite similar to what you currently utilize. From my experience I will say that you will be disappointed

Without knowing what iMac you had, this doesn't tell us much. The first iMac had 128M of RAM and G3 processor. That would be disappointing.

Sorry, I should have been more clear. It was a Early 2009 iMac so the RAM maxed out at 8GB. I know the later iMacs can take up to 16 GB of RAM depending on the model. But the processor was the issue really as the 2.66 duoCore could not compare to the Mac Pro 3.0 8 core. I hope that is more explicit and at least helpful.

[bayswater]

Yes, those are very different machines. But later i7 iMacs have processing speed in the same general vicinity as the Mac Pros, so the main difference is expandability.

[ironchef_marc]

Charles, I can't tell you how a Mac mini would run as your main but the beauty with it if you feel you need more memory you can easily at a relatively affordable cost (as far as MAC products goes) add another one as a slave. (tiny foot print, low noise and heat)

[mikehalloran]

>I know the later iMacs can take up to 16 GB of RAM depending on the model.<

32G for the 27" since 2010 per OWC. I have 20G in mine and will go to 32G if I need to.

Per OWC, the 2012 27"s will be the same and as easy to upgrade (very) RAM when they start shipping in a couple of weeks.

The 21.5" iMacs cannot take as much RAM and the 2012 version is very difficult upgrade requiring a heat gun, suction cups and the like - yikes!

[denekawa]

>I know the later iMacs can take up to 16 GB of RAM depending on the model.<

32G for the 27" since 2010 per OWC. I have 20G in mine and will go to 32G if I need to.

Per OWC, the 2012 27"s will be the same and as easy to upgrade (very) RAM when they start shipping in a couple of weeks.

The 21.5" iMacs cannot take as much RAM and the 2012 version is very difficult upgrade requiring a heat gun, suction cups and the like - yikes!

Yeah, like I said depending on the model....