MOTUnation.com

Here's my current spec:

Intel (late 2007) 8-Core Mac Pro, 16GB RAM, OS10.6.8
DP7.21, MOTU PCI 424, 2408 interfaces (4)
Mac software: DP, All NI, Plogue Bidule, All Spectrasonics, Waves, Altiverb etc.
MIDI - MOL (to 2 newer 64Bit PCs), MOTU MIDI interfaces (2 to older Gigastudio PCs).
---------

On big projects, I generally run 4 PCs in addition to my Mac Pro.
PC1 (MOL) - PLAY East/West Symphonic Gold (large orch template) (run in large Bidule template)
PC2 (MOL) - Stormdrum / other EW PLAY (run in large Bidule template)
PC3 (MOTU 128 MIDI) - Gigastudio 3(!) (other orch sounds)
PC4 (MOTU 128 MIDI) - Gigastudio 3(!) (other orch sounds)
-------

It's FINALLY time to retire my 2 oldest Gigastudio PCs since they are unstable and have to run on MIDI interfaces, which keep crapping out. For some reason the Mac doesn't like MOL AND MIDI interfaces simultaneously and it keeps loosing connection. Very unstable and inefficient.

My plan it to convert all my Gigas libraries to Kontakt and run them on an external Mac(s).

My question is, should I go for 2 Mac Minis, or 1 new large Mac Pro ? I guess it all depends on the spec, but here's what I'll want to run on the 1 (or2) new Macs:

VE Pro (so MID and audio would be through ethernet) running:
1. Many Kontakt instances playing Giga sounds / other libraries (large libraries/samples)
2. Omnisphere
3. Real Guitar etc
4. Stylus RMX
5. Other softsynths.

Basically, I want to get as many VIs off my main Mac as possible to speed up workflow etc. Does anybody have an opinion on this? e.g. suggestions as to computer spec etc. (how much RAM, whether 2 Mac Minis or 1 Mac Pro etc..)

Thanks!

Chris

The Mac Pro tower has TONS of advantages... Especially hard drive bays... This is crucial with sample libraries... Also, they hold more RAM CAPACITY..

The Mac minis are great little machines but have almost 0 expand ability...

My 2 cents

At first glance, the Minis don't look like a bad idea as they have Thunderbolt and the Mac Pro does not - not even usb3.

What the Pro does have is two ethernet busses for multi-computer processing, much better (and upgradable) video cards with dedicated VRAM, space for four 4Gig hard drives, up to 128G RAM and the ability to add eSATA through PCIe cards (not the speed of usb3 or TB but still 3x or 6x faster than FW800 depending on the card and drives).

It's just no contest in my book. If you are planning to pull a heavy load, what's better: an ox or a pair of turbocharged ponies on steroids? I'd go with the ox.

I used to sell Mainframe, AS400 and Unix emulation software. One time, I was at a presentation where vendor MS extolled the virtue of a huge NT network; vendors HP and O went on about Unix - each took about an hour with PP presentations etc. Finally, the IBM rep loaded his only slide and said, "The IBM AS-400. 15,000 simultaneous connections." and sat down.


Hmmm... I see that the FAQs I wrote are still up on the company web site:
http://www.askcody.com/support/faq/p8taq.asp?js=on

In my opinion, for the money AND the amount of power go with an i7 pc monster. I once said never back to Windows but for slave purposes it's worth it I think.

I got the i7 3930k with 32gb ram and samples on ssd drives. Should be future proof and two or three times cheaper than a mac pro (which is still the 2010!..)

Anyway, good luck!

Both. MP master, MacMini slaves. I'd try to wait until DP8 (64-bit), MacMinis with upgraded RAM capacity, and hopefully new MacPros with TB, and hopefully all of the same ports.