Tim Hanlon of gizmag.com recently got an IdeaPad S10 – Lenovo’s lovely, $400 “netbook” – to test. He didn’t just do the usual benchmarks, though. His review also included the unlikely choice of Ableton Live and, thanks to a free ExpressCard slot, a MOTU Traveler FireWire interface.

The inclusion of an ExpressCard/34 slot opens the IdeaPad up to a range of high-bandwidth applications. The most relevant for me as a musician was the possibility of using one on stage alongside a professional audio interface. Taking your expensive (and for some, irreplaceable) main rig out on tour and having to constantly keep an eye out for people putting their beer down on the stage next to it is a stressful affair, and the thought of using a relatively cheap, incredibly portable, and ultimately replaceable machine instead was always incredibly attractive – and I’m very glad to say, now possible.

We used a Silicon Memory ExpressCard/34 adapter that added an additional USB 2.0 port and two FireWire 400 ports, although any adapter based on a Texas Instruments FireWire chipset should work with a vast majority with audio interfaces. Windows XP Home recognized the adapter and installed the drivers automatically without needing a driver CD, and we quickly had the MOTU Traveler interface up and running.

My current Ableton Live set sat at a perfectly manageable 15% CPU usage for a majority of the time, however you will need to watch the CPU intensive plugs. One particularly long reverb tail using Ableton’s built-in reverb used up 25% of the CPU on its own.

Check out the full story on Gizmag:

Lenovo’s IdeaPad S10 Reviewed

One major catch, before you get too excited: Tim has the same problem I have universally with these ExpressCards. They just stick our awkwardly. They’re even worse on the full-sized slots on bigger laptops. Chancing an audio interface popping out while playing pretty much kill the appeal for me, especially when there are plenty of workable USB2 audio interfaces out there (including from MOTU). MacBook, you’re not off the hook yet, because this just means I want more USB slots, but I digress.

The bigger message here to me: software developers ought to pick up a couple of these machines and think about what will run on them. With zillions of these netbooks now shipping, why not? They’re not going to replace even standard laptops, but it’s an opportunity to sell more software by targeting these boxes, or even testing lighter-weight software on them. (Imagine notation or quick drum machines.) I don’t really miss the days when we ran Ableton Live on 400MHz G3s, but, well, we did.

And Tim has a point: next time you’re playing a frightening club with chicken wire and angry drunks, here’s your machine! Actually, that S10 is cute. Maybe just bring a tarp and some tazers.

On a purely technical level, how does Windows Vista work with a leading pro audio application? A lot of that depends on just how much the developer does to tune their software, and to hook into some of the new audio technologies in the OS.

I wanted to know more about how Cakewalk’s SONAR 8 DAW was specifically optimized for Windows Vista. SONAR 7 was already out in front with support for Vista’s audio plumbing, but SONAR 8 promises quite a bit more. With the help of CTO Noel Borthwick, we were able to go through internal engineering documents and communication and get the full story. (Noel, who has a resume as a Linux programmer as well as leading the top Windows audio developer’s technical efforts, has been very frank in the past about Vista, walking us through changes before launch and real world experiences one year later.)

As Noel puts it, this is “more minute detail than most sane people would care to read,” but that’s just the kind of detail we like. If you just want to know whether your software will work, this is overkill. But for those of you who, like us, are interested in why some things work, this is a good place to start. I also sincerely hope other developers on Windows will start to invest more time in some of these details.

If SONAR 8’s music features are what interest you, see our first look:

SONAR 8 Preview: Instrument Tracks, Beatscape Instrument, Transient Shaper, Enhanced Performance, Other Goodies

I’ll repeat my current recommendation on Windows. If you’ve got a system running XP and you’re happy, I’d stick with it. But I see no reason to avoid SP1, unless you have a specifically incompatible setup, now that SP1 and driver updates have brought some maturity to the platform. I find the new OS more usable and, with the right software and drivers, even more stable. (This is not what I would have said before SP1, especially early after launch.) In fact, this walk-through with Noel demonstrates why, in the case of a SONAR system, you might be happier under Vista, on a point by point basis. I’ll avoid the “versus Mac” or “versus Linux” arguments, as those tend to get more complex and abstract, but there’s some good stuff here for those of you with Windows experience.

And yes, if any developer would like to do a similar tour on the Mac or Linux, I’m all ears. But just in case you think I’m crazy when I say there is some really robust stuff for audio in Vista, now you’ll know just what I mean.

CDM Executive Summary

Okay, here’s the quick run-down.

SONAR 8 involves improved performance optimizations, even relative to previous versions of SONAR. As far as I know, this is unparalleled progress on the Windows platform; few, if any developers are doing this kind of work. That’s not to say you won’t get good performance out of other Windows apps under Vista – certainly, I spend a lot of time in hosts like Ableton Live, Kore, and FL Studio on Vista — just that SONAR is leading here. (Developers out there doing similar work, we’d love to hear from you; developers not doing this kind of work, I hope this can piqué your interest and/or point you in the right direction, and certainly I don’t think anyone on Windows is trying to protect “trade secrets” – the better this stuff works, the better for everyone.)

The upshot of all of this should mean:

• Reduced audio glitches and performance bottlenecks, thanks to improvements to the audio engine itself, as well as the way the software makes use of the kernel (which impacts drivers also using the kernel)
• Smoother peformance in the UI as you zoom, draw, and the like
• More efficient performance, through optimization at the driver level and by better supporting Vista’s new audio API and threading mechanisms
• Better support for both WDM (Windows Driver Model) and ASIO drivers, and better performance at lower latency (that’s always the measure – you can always reduce latency, the question is whether you can maintain reliable audio performance when you do so)
• x64 is now, effectively, ready for prime time latency-wise

Now, here’s Noel to say that in more technically precise terms.

Performance Optimizations

Although every version of SONAR we shipped in the past had some degree of optimization work, SONAR 8 is the first version of SONAR to which we applied the same engineering process to performance optimizations as we do with other more user visible features.

i.e. we established goals, built a specification for the optimizations, split up the work into milestones and tracked the progress of these tasks just as we do for other features. To make testing more deterministic, we devised various internal profiling tools in order to track and measure changes in performance across a variety of hardware platforms on XP as well as Vista.

Systems tested included brand new cutting edge platforms from Intel and AMD as well as earlier generation machines.

We split up this work into the following classes of performance enhancements for SONAR 8:

1. CPU and kernel level optimizations – use less of your CPU to do the same amount of work
2. User Interface optimizations – faster drawing, scrolling, zooming
3. Driver level optimizations – more efficient access to drivers, minimizing driver state transitions
4. Vista OS specific optimizations – Better use of MMCSS thread priorities, support for custom MMCSS task profiles, new WASAPI support
5. Audio engine optimizations – optimize "hotspots" in our bussing, streaming and mixing code

As a result of all these changes, SONAR 8 has the following benefits:

• greatly minimized kernel usage. This helps provide more "kernel bandwidth" to drivers who need it the most. More kernel bandwidth translates into less potential for audio glitches.
• Lower CPU usage – translates to better performance at low latency
• More efficient use of audio drivers – esp with ASIO drivers
• Better performance on Windows Vista esp X64 [64-bit Windows]. Many of the complaints of Vista performance as compared to XP have been solved with SONAR 8. X64 low latency performance should now be on par with X86.
• Faster application launch
• Less flicker in GUI. Track view splitters no longer flicker when resizing.
• More responsive zoom and scroll with large projects. Zooming with wave files now uses 1/2 the RAM with 24-bit or less stereo or mono files used.
• Better meter performance.
• Improved thread scheduling by insuring threads are properly distributed on processors.

Benchmark: Overall benefits of SONAR 8 as compared to SONAR 7

CDM: Will we see these improvements in Project5? What about your instruments, like Rapture and Dimension, running as apps (instead of inside another host)?

Noel: We don’t have any firm plans for P5 at this time. Our “minihosts” for instruments don’t have these enhancements. It’s less relevant since these are far simpler with just a single instrument.

Windows Vista – New WASAPI driver mode

WASAPI (Windows Audio Session API) is the new multimedia API to talk to audio devices in Windows Vista. It represents the first real general purpose audio API from Microsoft in over 15 years, since MME from Windows 3.1.

The primary advantages of WASAPI are:

• Supports a wide variety of audio devices (any device that has a WDM driver should work in WASAPI mode if Windows can use it in exclusive/event mode)
• Provides low latency access to the device in WASAPI exclusive mode. (unlike older Microsoft API’s like MME or DirectSound)
• Model that is the closest to the low level WDM kernel streaming approach, while yet providing a higher level of abstraction for the device.
• Primary audio API for next generation of Windows.

Windows Vista: WaveRT

In WDM mode WaveRT is automatically used internally when SONAR detects a WaveRT capable WDM driver. A [WaveRT] suffix is added to the driver name in this case.

In SONAR 6.2 we first introduced support for Vista-specific WaveRT. Direct WaveRT mode is available in SONAR when you are using WDM as a driver mode and a WaveRT capable device is detected. In Vista SP1, Microsoft made some fundamental changes to WaveRT API’s that return the device sample position,
returning a cyclic position rather than a monotonically increasing position. In SONAR 8 WaveRT support has been updated and enhanced so that it works properly with Vista SP1.

CDM: You talk about using a WaveRT driver. Do you have to do anything to switch to WaveRT?

Noel: You don’t switch to WaveRT. In WDM [Windows Driver Model] mode, there is no choice – if a driver exposes itself as WaveRT, that’s the only mode of communicating with it. The same applies in WASAPI except the difference is that WASAPI itself communicates with the driver in WaveRT mode internally.

CDM: I have to admit, I’m used to working with ASIO. How do I know if a device has a WDM driver?

Noel: Any audio interface that works in Windows itself (i.e. if it shows up as a device in control panel -> sounds and audio devices) HAS to have a WDM driver. Otherwise Windows will not recognise it.

I don’t know of any interface that provides ONLY an ASIO driver. Some provide minimal WDM drivers that aren’t tested very well.

Windows Vista: MMCSS task profile support

The Multimedia Class Scheduler Service (MMCSS) provides Windows multimedia programs, including SONAR, with prioritized access to CPU resources for time-sensitive processing.

By default, SONAR uses the MMCSS task profile named Pro Audio. If desired, you can now instruct SONAR to use a custom user created MMCSS task profile.

CDM: Under what circumstances would you switch task profiles? What profile other than Pro Audio would you want to use?

Noel: You can tweak the MMCSS thread settings via a custom profile. I have a profile I tweaked that works marginally better than Pro Audio. It’s pretty technical stuff – You will have to read this link to get the details.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms684247(VS.85).aspx

Ed.: That’s a very technical explanation of a very technical topic; for more resources –

Mark Russinovich tours the enhanced Vista kernel

MMCSS, the Cliff Notes-style version on Wikipedia

Mark Russinovich on the interaction of MMCSS and networking

Interesting thread on the Cakewalk forum

More Information

You’ll want to see, previously…

Overview of Vista

Adieu, XP; How Vista SP1 is Doing, and Why This OS Generation Has Been So Tough

Vista for Audio, 1 Year Later: Talking OS Plumbing with Cakewalk’s CTO

Vista for Music + Pro Audio: Exclusive Under the Hood with Cakewalk’s CTO

Windows Sound Glitches Explained, Plus Glitches and the Fight-or-Flight Response

Compatibility

Cakewalk Vista Musicians’ Resource Page, Lots of Vista Drivers

Digidesign Talks Latest Windows, Mac Releases, Compatibility, Drivers

M-Audio Responds: Update on Driver Situation, New Drivers

Helpful utilities

12 Free and Cheap Must-Have Music Utilities for Windows

10 Free Non-Musical Windows Software Every Musician Should Use

MacBook Pro knows the way to Santa Rosa

One thing I was a little unclear on in my previous story is what matters in Santa Rosa, Intel’s latest architecture platform. (They didn’t call it Core 3 Duo, but then, consistent branding and Intel don’t generally go together.) As with Core 2 Duo over Core Duo, we’re getting incremental performance enhancements relative to the previous generation. Each step is relatively small, but they start to add up — hence, Apple quotes 50% gains over the original Core Duo. (And that’s why they dumped PowerPC, which in the mobile space was starting to practically paddle backwards.)

The key differences as far as raw performance: faster front-side bus (800MHz instead of 667), which for audio is a big deal, faster clock speeds on the models themselves at the same price, and fast RAM, plus a faster GPU for GPU-related tasks. (And, um, any day now we’ll start to see audio on the GPU — it’s tough to program, and GPUs are only now becoming the norm, and CPU cycles are getting cheaper, but it will happen.)

Also, none of this was meant to say “eBay your MacBook Pro.” PowerBook G4, maybe, but the first-gen MacBook Pro is still a terrific audio machine, with a GPU that’s no slouch. My main laptop right now is a first-gen MacBook (no Pro), and it blazes through everything I throw at it.

Apple has unveiled its revised MacBook Pros today, with some subtle but significant improvements. I spoke to Apple a few minutes ago to get some of the details on what’s new.

The new MacBook Pro includes new, faster CPUs and the Santa Rosa Intel architecture refresh to the Core 2 Duo, delivering 2.2GHz and 2.4GHz brains and 4MB L2 cache. That should translate to a marginal but very measurable performance improvement, without having to spend a penny today over what you did yesterday. Santa Rosa also allows memory expansion to 4GB, huge news for anyone working extensively with sample libraries. There are also improved displays with LED backlighting and the addition of the NVIDIA GeForce 8600M GT GPU, basically a generation ahead the ATI X1600 in the original MBP (itself a very respectable card). We’ve got more on the visual side of the equation on Create Digital Motion, basically because I’m rapidly developing GPU lust.

What does this mean for music? Not the earth-shaking shift from G4 to Core Duo, but still some very good news. Think faster performance in audio apps, more memory for samples, and better displays and graphics. I know plenty of people on the fence on the MacBook Pro. Apple has the latest and greatest from Intel at roughly the same time as their PC-only competitors, so this should mean you can make an educated purchase decision today. And yeah, this might be my first choice even when I have to run Windows. (Come on, sometimes you need to make some beats in FL Studio or do your accounting.)

Improved CPU performance means faster music apps

Think 30% to nearly 60% performance gains in creative apps, thanks to incremental improvements in first the Core 2 Duo and now Santa Rosa.

I’ve been a big fan of the Intel Core Duo architecture since the beginning. This was what was missing from the PowerPC roadmap that was a big factor in making the switch to Intel in the first place. I had done extensive tests of the MacBook Pro for music for Macworld.com, using the first Core Duo. We noted back then that “In Apple’s tests, a 2.16GHz MacBook Pro running Logic 7.2 processes 135 PlatinumVerb reverb plug-ins, 4.5 times as many as a 1.67GHz PowerBook G4.”

Well, Apple has unearthed their PlatinumVerb reverb test again. Comparing their original 2.16 Core Duo MacBook Pro to the current 2.4GHz Santa Rosa Core 2 Duo, the latest machine demonstrates what Apple claims is a 55% improvement of the fastest machine today over the fastest machine when the MacBook Pro shipped. That’s pretty impressive for just over a year.

Now, Apple’s tests — loading an absurd number of reverbs — aren’t exactly real-world. But Macworld found that the performance gains were still impressive in real-world tests, particularly for audio, which is by its nature full of parallel processing. With apps like Logic and Live optimized to take advantage of multithreading on these processors, this is very good news.

I look forward to testing this myself. I also would love to put a new MacBook Pro up against my quad G5 tower. The original MBP was actually nipping at the heels of the Power Mac in processing performance. The new MacBook Pro should actually outrun the tower. Since the MacBook Pro has FireWire 800, you could even hook up a hard drive RAID, a 30″ display (which is bigger than most of us need, anyway), and replace your desktop.

I also think yet again audio is an excellent indication of the robustness of the CPU architecture in general. We’re one of the only markets that requires all of that performance in real-time, onstage even. With the last of the Intel-native music software finally making the jump, I think you’ll see even more MacBook Pros on tour than you do now.

What about PCs? Of course, in fairness, Apple isn’t the only company shipping Santa Rosa laptops. You should see similar performance gains on Windows running apps like SONAR, Live, and FL Studio, each of which have multi-processor optimizations of their own. Then again, you’ll also see performance gains on Windows XP and Vista on the MacBook Pro, which for me is pretty tough to resist. (Worth buying an optional, bigger hard drive add-on to run both OSes to me.)

New Displays

I’ll talk more on Create Digital Motion about the visual side, but suffice to say, you’re getting a better, more ecologically-friendly display on the new MacBook Pro than the old one. The LED backlighting looks better, delivers full brightness the moment you turn it on rather than taking a few minutes to warm up, doesn’t contain eco-unfriendly mercury, and uses less power. Apple claims they save 30 minutes of battery life in their wireless web test, and up to a full hour. That’s consistent with other numbers we’ve seen on the backlighting technology. (And frankly, as it is, I’ve been pretty happy flying New York to San Francisco with my MacBook. I mean, you need to take the occasional nap break, or put down the laptop long enough to eat stale chips.)

Also interesting: not only does the 17″ display now have a 1920px option, but it has improved low-frequency response in its speakers, for when you’re watching Daily Show in bed and don’t want to futz with headphones.

Which Machine to Buy?

Apple definitely lacks a low-cost 15″ laptop option, so it may cause a little sticker shock having to start at US$2000 for a 15″ display. On the other hand, try configuring a PC laptop with a higher-quality 15″ display, higher-quality case, built-in webcam, extras like the sudden motion sensor and disk protection, FireWire 400 and 800, ExpressCard, and high-end dedicated graphics card. What I think you’ll find is not that Apple charges a hefty price premium, but that the MacBook Pro is competitive with premium PCs. Apple just doesn’t let you strip down the configuration or choose a lower-end model. If that’s important to you, and you don’t need to run Mac software or don’t care about the Mac OS, then the PCs are still a competitive choice. I think it’s tougher to say the PCs are competitive at the premium level, though, because you wind up paying the same (or more, strangely enough) for one OS instead of two, and arguably with an inferior product design.

I’m also rapidly becoming a believer in running Windows on Apple hardware. I’ve been testing a quad Mac Pro, and it’s been hands-down the best Windows Vista experience I’ve seen on any hardware. Yeah, you heard that right. Apple is just using very reliable, tried-and-true hardware configurations, and they’ve done a good enough job with the Boot Camp beta that you can consider a Mac a PC. Add in the fact that we haven’t seen the final Boot Camp yet, Leopard is around the corner, and Parallels is developing at a ridiculous rate allowing you to run both OSes side by side from the Boot Camp partition, and … well, darn it, I don’t mean to sound like an Apple fanboy. But there’s a lot of Mac- and Windows-exclusive software I like to run. With Boot Camp, I no longer have to commit to one or the other. And I really am running both — FL Studio and z3ta+ are worth booting into Windows for, just as Logic and VDMX5 for visuals are on Mac.

Now, sure, you could buy a MacBook and a dirt-cheap PC and still get two OSes; 15″ laptops starting at US$1999 isn’t cheap (and I believe the situation is actually worse for some of you in other parts of the world). But having one machine do both is at least worth considering.

The MacBook remains a great machine if you’re on a budget. I love its pint-sized form factor on the road, more than the MacBook Pro. And for audio, raw CPU performance is very, very good on the US$1100 MacBook — certainly beyond what I need live. Via HD for Indies, you’ll see Macworld likes the MacBook (non-pro) changes.

It comes down to this:

The MacBook Pro is worth getting if you need FireWire 800, a larger display, a real GPU, or ExpressCard. (And all of them together are a pretty big deal. Not to mention, the keyboard backlighting is pretty handy for live use.)

The Mac Pro is still worth getting for expandability, internal RAID, support for dual displays, and if you don’t mind having a machine tied to your desk.

But as I type this, coincidentally, booted into Vista on a Mac Pro, I really do think Apple does deliver a fantastic Windows PC. Any hardware that ends silly OS vs. OS wars and lets you use whatever you want is okay by me.

And this looks to me like the mature MacBook Pro a lot of us have been waiting for.

Now you just have to think of a creative way to cover up that glowing Apple logo so you don’t look like everyone else. Knitting a cover could be a good way to go. Black electrical tape looks ghetto. Don’t do it.

Previously:

Macworld Verdict: MacBook Pro Blazes Through Logic

Ableton Live + Logic 7.2.1 + ReWire + Intel Mac Hands-On: It Works, It Rocks, More Ableton Forum Speed Tests

Ableton Live Benchmarks: PCs, Macs, and Intel Macs

MacBook Gets Core 2 Duo; Live Laptop Config; What’s Your Laptop Pick?

Does this MacBook now become the perfect music laptop? How should you configure it? Does Core 2 Duo matter? What’s the best music laptop choice at this point? Impressions and discussion, after the jump:

Finding the Perfect Configuration

The other change on the MacBooks, aside from CPU, is RAM. Previous MacBooks had 512M standard (256 x 2); the new model has 1G (512 x 2). That’s kind of a pain, again, since you’ll have to rip out 512M to install a 1G upgrade. I suggest at least installing 1G for 1.5 total, though, and jumping for 2G if you can; if you buy from someone other than Apple, the going rate is about US$160 for 1G even with factory-standard Samsung chips.

With a RAM upgrade and a hard disk upgrade, the MacBook should be one lean, mean mobile music machine. Logic Pro 7 and Ableton Live 6 both run beautifully on this architecture, for instance, delivering what feels like desktop-class performance. The 13″ size is perfect for gigs, because it allows you to focus all your gear-lugging pain on stuff like keyboards and controllers. And the glossy screen works just fine in most environments in my experience, despite my initial reservations.

You could upgrade the internal hard disk to a 7200 rpm drive, but to my mind the better option might be to go to an external disk. That way, you can easily tote large projects from a desktop machine at home if you’ve got one, and your projects are separate from your laptop in case your laptop drive decides to die. It’s also cheaper. FireWire 400 + a 7200 rpm drive (or, given improved 5400 rpm performance, even a 5400 rpm drive) should give you the extra disk I/O you need for disk-hungry apps like samplers and Ableton Live. Jerome at createfilmscores points to the new OWC SATA FireWire 400/800/USB2 enclosures:

OWC Mercury On-The-Go with SATA Drive

They’re portable, bus-powered, reliable, and cheap. Best bargain: get the enclosure and add your own drive.

I’m not concerned about the integrated Intel graphics on the MacBook. Unless you’re doing heavy-duty 3D, it should be just fine. If you’re running music into a customized version of Unreal for live 3D graphics, of course, go get the MacBook Pro with the ATI X1600. (A number of PC vendors are shipping the lower-end, dedicated mobile graphics cards like the ATI X1400 and NVIDIA 7300. These offer marginally better performance than the integrated Intel graphics, but not enough to make them worth it for most consumers.)

Core 2 Duo vs. Core Duo

Much has been made of Apple’s claim that the Core 2 Duo is “39% faster” than the Core Duo. Apple didn’t make up that number, though; the issue is that it’s not a real-world benchmark. Check the fine print, and you’ll see Apple uses the SPECint and SPECfloat tests, which are purely abstract/mathematical benchmarks of processing performance. Integer performance is where the Core 2 Duo shines. In real-world situations, you’ll never see a gain that significant. But that doesn’t mean the Core 2 Duo isn’t a good deal.

First, normally performance gains come with a corresponding increase in heat and power consumption. Not so with Core 2 Duo. Macworld finds the C2D cooler than the CD in the 2.16 model, and other benchmarks have found similar marginal improvements.

Apple’s current claim on the MacBook is actually 25%, and they do cite real world figures, like 20% faster performance in iMovie.

Macworld’s benchmarks for the MacBook Pro have been widely quoted as having only a “10%” gain in performance. But take a look at the Speedmark and Photoshop CS2 numbers: major gains. Generally, benchmarks from a wide variety of sources show that the Core 2 Duo kicks into high gear when given a lot of multitasking or multithreading. That should mean it does quite nicely on apps like Ableton Live 6 (which features enhanced multithreading) and Logic Pro, not to mention even a 10% gain — for no added cost — can be welcome when you’re redlining a project.

For some PC-side benchmarks, see PC Perspective. Again, overall marginal improvements, but some significant gains in certain areas, and I’m guessing you’ll see better results from audio apps.

The Core 2 Duo definitely isn’t revolutionary, and I wouldn’t lose any sleep if you have a Core Duo machine already. But is it worth a speed bump? Absolutely. And if you’ve been delaying purchase on either the Mac or PC side, you may be rewarded by buying now.

What’s Your Laptop Pick?

This naturally turns to the question of which laptop to get. I’ve been eyeing low-end configurations on both the Mac and PC side, and, frankly, it’s a great time to be getting a laptop for music. For US$900-1300, you can get a fantastic machine.

The addition of the Core 2 Duo should make the Mac more competitive. There’s still a slight price premium for the Mac over bargain PC laptops (especially from makers like Dell, Toshiba, and HP), but look closely when you comparison-shop. The moment you upgrade a budget PC to a 2G CPU over the now-standard Core 2 Duo 1.66 CPU, you’re generally looking at MacBook price territory. Apple doesn’t offer real custom configuration, but what they do give you is a fairly premium configuration at a competitive price.

Also, try this experiment: take a PC that looks cheaper, and add Windows XP Professional. It tends to obliterate the US$150 difference between models. If you don’t get Pro, you’ll not only lose out on some important features, but you’ll only be able to upgrade free to Vista Home Premium, or you’ll wind up stuck with XP Media Center Edition, which is officially incompatible with Ableton Live. Sure, you’ll need an XP license on the Mac to take advantage of dual-booting, but you’ll also have the equivalent of two machines.

The other problem on the PC side is that it seems virtually impossible to get a small laptop for a bargain price. Apple’s MacBook is basically a small but heavy (for its size) portable. On the PC side, your choices are basically large and heavy (7 lbs. and 15.4″ screens are common) or “ultra-portable”, with fewer pounds but a significantly higher price — and often 12″ or 14″ but rarely 13″ screens. There are some exceptions if you shop around, but Apple has done a good job of providing a configuration a lot of people will want without a bunch of choices you probably don’t. (That kind of sums up the platform, huh?)

That said, there are some very appealing deals on the PC side. The Dells, while fugly as all get-out, are really cheap on the Inspiron line. Lenovo recently discounted its IBM-style ThinkPad line, making it as cheap as the bargain-basement C series. Lenovo, you’ll recall, is IBM’s former computer division under new owners. Their new Lenovo-designed models have been roundly judged disappointing. The ThinkPad design is still great, and you could have a fully-loaded ThinkPad for the same price or less than a MacBook.

As appealing as dual-booting the Mac is, I think for now your fundamental question is which OS you prefer. If your only reason for running Windows is occasional accounting apps or connecting to the office software you need, then virtualizing or dual booting on the Mac should be just fine. But if you really prefer Windows, I’d get the PC. And if you prefer the Mac, you now have a great option — with the early-adopters having already taken some of the initial bugs (discoloration, heat, weird nosie, reliability problems) while you enjoy the more-polished version.

But enough of what I think: what’s your current laptop of choice? Any PC brands to suggest? (We’ve seen people burned by HP, at least.)

[tags]advice, hardware, laptops, Mac, Apple, Mactel, Intel, computers, benchmarks[/tags]

I’d love to measure WDM/DirectX Windows driver latency, which is where problems usually occur, though I’m not sure I’d like the results. For those of you not in the know, ASIO is generally the way to go.

Let us know how much latency you get; reply here.

CEntrance Latency Test Utility, via Sonic State

Propellerhead has just unveiled three updates, Reason 3.05 for Mac, and ReWire 1.7 and an updated REX library for Mac and Windows. The big story is native compatibility of Intel-native Macs for Reason, but that’s not the only story. Just about everyone will benefit from the new versions, on PowerPC and Intel Macs, and Windows PCs, possibly even if you don’t run Reason itself. This general trend could be enough to make 2006 the Year of Music Software That Finally Runs Faster.

If you have an Intel Mac and Reason, you now have an Intel-native Reason application, version 3.05. (While beta builds were separate for Intel and PowerPC, this build is fully Universal for both processors.)

If you have an Intel Mac, even if you don’t have Reason, the updated REX and ReWire libraries are also Intel-native for use with other applications that rely on those applications (like Ableton Live and Apple Logic Pro).

If you have a PowerPC-based Mac, you’ll still get boosted performance out of the new Reason and ReWire.

If you have a Windows machine, you’ll get improved performance from ReWire 1.7.

Or, to put it more simply, Intel Mac users are no longer waiting and everyone, regardless of machine, gets improved performance, even if all you’re doing is running ReWire with another application. So go download thus updates, everyone! (I think — so far, no word on whether there are any compatibility issues with the update and other software. As always, proceed with caution, back up your old version, and let us know how it goes.)

Propellerhead Downloads

You can add Intel-native ReWire to the other major technology on the Mac for routing audio between applications, Jack OS X, which is also Intel-native. Not everyone will be ready to make the jump — you can’t run non-Intel plug-ins inside an Intel-native application — but if your studio setup is Live + Reason, for instance, you may be ready to take the plunge.

And for Windows users, Reason isn’t the only app that’s promising simultaneous advantages on the Mac and PC. I think that’s not only because the two platforms share Intel chips: even with AMD processors, what appears to be happening at a lot of software houses this year is a general house-cleaning of code. If you have to add Intel Mac compatibility (or x64 and Vista compatibility on Windows), why not have a little spring cleaning in some other areas? That appears to be the thinking, and the truth is that many performance optimizations work on all platforms, regardless of whose brand-name is on the CPU, especially when you’re talking about multithreading for the increasing number of dual-processor and dual-CPU machines.

And what a sweet combination it is.

Finally, you can add ReWire tracks to a Logic project using the Create Multiple Tracks command (or use one of the updated ReWire templates), and since 7.2 added better labeling and stereo support for ReWire, interconnecting the two is truly plug and play. Load up Live, and you have both apps working together beautifully — just blazingly faster than anything you’d see on a G4-based Mac. As I found with Logic Pro, Ableton Live runs almost as fast on the dual 2.0 MacBook Pro I tested as it does on my dual-2.7 G5 tower. The iMac and mini aren’t slouches, either.

The Ableton user forum has already extensively benchmarked each new Intel Mac machine, and the results are impressive. Since Live is especially popular onstage, you’ll be happy to see you can tote just about any complex project, even on the single-core Mac mini. The dual-core machines should get even faster with the next release of Live, since Ableton is promising more extensive multithreading, among other optimizations.

There is one detail that’s troubling the Ableton users: Live still appears to run more efficiently under Windows than Mac, based on the indication from the CPU meter running the forum’s benchmark project on the same Mac on OS X and Windows XP under Boot Camp. I’d take those results with a grain of salt, however. The CPU Meter is not the most efficient way to benchmark a system, because it’s not an entirely reliable or objective measure. Also, it’s difficult to say with just one project what might be causing a discrepency, especially since the gap is now fairly small. Theoretically, based on the numbers coming from the tests by forum users, real-world performance should be close enough on the two systems to make the platforms essentially equal. (In other words, your decision is really more about which OS you prefer than anything else.) Neither the Windows nor Mac build of Live is taking full advantage of the dual-core machines, either, so the results should get more interesting in the next release (they’re still well within high-end desktop-class performance, on both Mac and Windows, even now).

Back on the Logic front, some readers here have suggested a runoff between Logic 7.2 for Mac and Logic 5 for Windows on the new machine, but that seems unfair: Logic has advanced quite a lot since 5.x, so it would be hard to know how to interpret the results.

This point is up for debate, of course, but I think it comes down to this: if you want a system that will keep up with live performance demands, you should be happy with any of the new Intel Core machines, whether you prefer Mac OS X or Windows XP as your operating system. PC users have a more complex choice, given competitive chips from AMD, and Mac users still have to consider the very fine Power Mac G5 in the desktop space, but the new CPUs are delivering the kind of performance they promised.

It’s the moment of truth: we finally get to see how Intel Macs compare to G5 and G4 Macs when running serious audio software.

I got my first opportunity to work with James Galbraith and Macworld Labs to put Apple’s Intel-based Macs through their paces running the new Intel-native Logic Pro 7.2. The results were impressive: a dual-2.0GHz MacBook Pro holds its own when compared to a Power Mac G5 desktop. You may recall that the early reception for the Intel Macs was somewhat lukewarm, when testing the new Intel iMac, MacBook Pro, and mini on consumer-level software like iLife. Serious computer audio lovers, though, must have immediately imagined throwing a bunch of Logic’s Sculpture instruments or Space Designer reverbs at the new machines, and that’s exactly what we got to do.

Testing Logic’s Universal appeal: Intel-native audio app delivers improved performance

I also got a chance to look briefly at the benefits of Logic Pro 7.2 for PowerPC users. I do think it’s an essential upgrade, even if you don’t have an Intel Mac. (The Macs I own are still G4/G5, and for me, the fixes to ReWire alone are worth the upgrade.)

Anecdotally, I can say this: the moment I can pick up a MacBook Pro of my own, I will. While we didn’t get a case labeled “PowerBook G5,” as many of us prior to the Intel announcement last June, we got effectively that. The MacBook will be a dream for laptop musicians — it’s not quite on par with desktop machines, but for live performance, it requires few compromises. (The ATI video card inside also looks great for running live visuals.) And of course, for you Windows lovers out there, this is also very good news for the PC platform and its audio and visual software.

There’s already a lively discussion over on Macworld of the story, but I’m happy to hear questions or comments here.

Live 5 Performance Test [Info, downloadable benchmark at Ableton forums]

Core Duo iMacs (scroll down and look for the words “Intel” and “Mac OS X” in the same post)

So, what can we make from these results, for Mac — or PC, for that matter?

So far, it looks like folks have only posted Core Duo iMacs, but the results are impressive. The iMacs hold their own with high-end PCs, and even beat out a dual-G5 system (though not a quad, which frankly makes sense). Numbers around 27-31% put the Core Duo Intels near chips like the 2Ghz AMD 3400+ and 2GHz Centrino in this somewhat unscientific but interesting test. These folks are definitely at the bleeding edge: one notes that the only plug-in they’ve been able to upgrade is Crystal, and many audio interface drivers aren’t yet available. But these results are encouraging, even if (as I’d recommend) you wait to buy a new machine until summer.

The whole list is pretty interesting from a PC standpoint as well as for the Mac chips. The P4s and AMD64s make a predictably strong showing, though my PC money is currently on the cheaper AMD64. Amazingly, though, the Centrino is right up there.

Expect this list to shuffle a bit once Live fully supports multiple processors and cores later this year; I expect we’ll see machines with “dual” in them do a lot better. That should include dual G5 Power Macs and Core Duo Intels alike, as well as some of the PC chips that now get lost among the Centrinos.

I do like the benchmark. Moving a single project from machine to machine is a pretty decent real-world test of performance. And while the CPU meter in Live represents a lot of different variables, that’s sort of the point: see what you can actually do with these machines. So if you do have an Intel Mac, go download that file and let us know what you think.

Now we just need to construct a file for Cubase and Logic, etc. We could do what Apple did at G5 launch and load it up with an absurd, unrealistic number of reverbs specifically tilted to the G5’s favor (that’s another story). Or we could come up with something real world, which, as you know, is my middle name. (See representative picture below.)