MasamunE Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 Hi! I 'm wondering if any of the nerds here would be both so kind and interested in sharing their opinions on what are the best value components to give yourself the best chances at making quality music. EXAMPLE RESPONSE: I'm not really the best qualified to answer this (hence the thread!). Based on my limited research and little to no experience with legitimate music production: Worth $100 of every $1 (Confusing, but this means these are the most important things when deciding on your system) O A powerful processor (look for the best deals), but go for the sweet spot on higher end processors. (2500k, for example, atm. Linux should have a slight advantage with AMD brands for now, but it still never seems to beat Intel deals). There does not seem to be much of a difference between Chip bonus features effecting performance (fx8150 vs 2500k) for making music, unless you consider virtualization important to your production setup. O A lower range monitor quality headphone. (example: AKG K-240) O 6B of decent high speed ram. (Usually about $30 per 8gb as of these days) More than 6B if you want to multitask (up it to 8gb) Worth $30 for every $1 O A large amount of good speed ram More than 6GB + for normal setups, More than 8gb for multi-tasking setups. O Sound software plugins (Im def not the authority on the values of each kind, or the general value) O A psu that both won't blow up your system, and has enough wattage to handle your computer. (Music systems should be able to get away with really low wattage psus, especially if you aren't sticking a big bad discreet video card into it. Worth $10 for every $1 O Extremely high end processors before the prices comes down and hits the sweet spot of prices / performance (Core I7s in general) O High end monitor headphones O Unless you are deciding to overclock, a music system should run a bit on the cool side with less ambient temperature villains in the case. So this would imply case design and other cooling equipment would be less important, even with high cpu load over long times. Worth ?? for every $1 (per your preferences) O An ssd card to speed up song / sample / program initial load times (But will not increase performance?) O Motherboards are so different between motherboard that its difficult to say how much a better quality motherboard would improve performance. But like ssds, if the mother board is usb 3.0 / sata 6.0 compatible can spell increased performance in loading times in combination with an ssd that is fast enough to make use of that, but as far as I can make sense of, won't improve performance beyond that. Also important is what integrated sound processor is on the chip if you dont get a discreet sound card, but I'm not well knowledgeable on this. Worth $1 per every $1 O Graphics cards. O Sound cards? Want to put in your own two cents? Great! Here's a bunch of endless crap discussing the concept that really no one should read and just base their response on the above example. I have a problem of not being able to shut up, and its all essentially talking out of my ass for 10 more paragraphs. I think you ladies and guys are bright enough to understand the general concept of this post by the example above! Warned about 10+ needless filler paragraphs below: Imagine a scenario where you have a limited amount of money to spend. You want to get the most bang out of your buck. You currently have a your computer you had 8 years ago, and your headphones are $3 deal extreme ear buds. Without being specific (as in, without looking up current deals and prices and recommending a list (hey, you can do that if you want to, I certainly won't stop you! )), what types of value does each type of component mean to you? In the.. ultra nerdy and detailed sense! Not as though you are just going to the store and getting a Dell, but difficult to research questions (I'm an idiot, and if I am missing a site that has answers to information like this, a link to it would be a blessing from Zeus himself!) . Examples of questions include but are not limited to: How valuable is an SSD (kind of a generic way to put it as SSDs certainly aren't created equal) to music creation performance? What types of benefits could one incur from moving 50gbs of sound samples / vsti s onto a SSD? Just initial load up / sound / sample load times, or are these things not normally cached? How would you rate these benefits in comparison to those dollars spent in a more powerful cpu, headphones, ram or even gpu? You are free to value software too! How much success do people have getting their programs to utilize video card power for music creation? I've been confused as to which programs exactly can make utilization of this. Would you rate the video card's performance to be better or equal to dollars spent on cpu? As far as I've been able to research, the answer seems no, but its rather ambiguous. I'm currently deciding to skimp out on no discreet video card on my build (and hey! I love Skyrim just as much as the next, but 800x600 will have to do. Sacrifices must be made!) The rules in this thread are set to pure anarchy against a ragtime score. I would be absolutely thrilled to see any perspectives on the subject. But only do it if its fun to, ok? Mwahahaha. I'm dirt poor at the moment, so I can't offer people much for their help, but if you want and recommendations on deals out there (basically I just check slick deals a lot while considering this computer), I can do that! You could put together an Fx-4100 8gb ram, 32gb ssd with a crappy video card, normal case and psu for $180 or so for instance if you wanted to right this moment! Hehehe I mean for this thread to be a little more universally helping of peoples choices in how to spend their money who might stumble here through google or what have you and not my own. I'm building a system which isn't quite just dedicated to music, rather graphics editing, folder organizing.. hell, an attempt at 20 boxing wow too, why not? So I apologize to all who make recommendations of which I might not end up using There's a lot of things to factor into my decisions, its a bit confusing, so I'm hoping a thread like this can shed some light! As for me, I have a meager $370 or close to that to spend, oh yeah. As of now, based on the information I understand hardware's effect in music editing performance prior to this post, here 's my dream comp I have figured if it helps anyone! Cpu: Intel I5-2500k $180 Mobo: Gigabyte ga-z68ma-d2h-b3 $55 (AR and discount) Drive: Patriot Torqx 32gb SSD Free (with discount from purchasing ram) (will also use some old HDDs for whatever else. Nows not the time to buy HDDs if you are poor) Ram: 16 GB gskill 1600 1.5v $55 Gpu: None (using the 2500k's wimpy hd3000 video (quick sync is pretty aweosme though! But thats outside the scope of a music related computer I'd guessss) Case: Already had Psu: Already had. I can build computers but I cant say they won't blow up and I'll have parts to spare for new ones Ears: AKG K240: $95 Total $385 Close enough, I'd guess! Perhaps that 2500k will go down to $160 again within a few weeks. Lets hope! This has been an endless search for both deals and figuring out what are the dollars worth for performance. There are endless benchmarks etc for games and such, but music? I have been struggling to find it. When making this, I thought of such questions as, would it be worth it to get another ssd and sacrifice on something else, which could hold all of those samples? Or perhaps i'd only be sacrificing the time it takes for the song to and samples to initially load if they go through the memory, which is something that definitly seems dollars would be better spent on a more powerful cpu for performance. Also confusing is that this system uses a wimpy on cpu gpu. How big of a deal could a good gpu be for increasing Fl studio, Reason, Lmms, what have you's performance? I haven't heard of any such things utilizing it, so Im supposing that thats also money much better spent per dollar on a beefier Cpu. I'm suddenly realizing that I have gotten to the point of text per post with this that I need to shut up and send about 7 paragraphs ago. Have fun if you want to play the game of nerdiness! I may not be able to offer much for your kindness, but I will pray to all who help that they get more marshmellows in their Lucky Charms or something else of negligible but well intentioned value. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moseph Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 GPU isn't important at all. You could probably get by with an i3 if you want to save money. Is 16GB RAM for $55 a typo? If you can get it that cheap, there's no reason not to go for it, but you could also cut your RAM to 8GB with no problem. An audio interface would be a good investment especially if you want to do any recording, but you can probably get by with onboard sound. I've never used one so I don't know how performance is, but a 32GB SSD is too small to make a good sample drive. If you're using this SSD, I'd put the OS on the SSD and the samples on a larger disk drive. Have you budgeted for the cost of the OS, or do you already have that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dannthr Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 My 16GB is insufficient. I'm going to have to start looking into getting a new Mother Board as I've already maxed out the one I've got. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MasamunE Posted January 23, 2012 Author Share Posted January 23, 2012 16GB of... is that ram? ---and that's too little for your songs? Good gods, haha. Everyone is different of course, but that would make me feel that getting at least 8GB, even 16GB of ram depending on how much they do electronically would be worth as much or more than a powerful processor. I'm curious about the recommendation for valuing processors less and sound cards more. As for sound cards, would you say that they increase performance more than cpus? Is it an either sound card or cpu type of thing? Perhaps a beefy cpu would be a better choice for someone in terms of performance who would not use real life instruments or external recording? I've always been rather confused about this, and whether a beefy sound card could beat an Asio 2500k or so dollar per dollar. I'd probably chose the 2500k anyway since this won't be a dedicated comp, but for those who could benefit from the knowledge As for gpus, they need to be CUDA (nvidia only, no amd equivalent?) AND, the vsti or program needs to be coded to be able to use Cuda. I've only been able to find a few, and beyond that, I am mystified as to the performance, if it is even equal to dollar per dollar processor or sound card performance. I'm sorry that I can't be more dramatic, and object to something, but saying 32gb is just not enough for sound samples, I def agree Im still thinking drive performance would only be initial load up times, but I wonder. As for the $55 for 16gb, it wasn't a typo, but..... it was referring to 4x4GB sticks If that is what you are referring to though, and are curious, the prices seem to have slid up justtt a little bit (Im seeing g-skill rip jaws for around $38 per 8gb at the moment.) If you don't mind waiting, I'd recommend giving it a few weeks, there's often been sales for decent or even performance quality 8gb for $30 and under. Also wondering if the Thailand floods have upped memory prices lately, all I've seen noticeably are hard drives. As for 2x8gb sticks, the best deal is exceptionally higher at $109 I guess. I'll vilely salivate in jealousy and squinting peering eyes if you ever do put that system together Dannthr! The .. 50 box, and various needless virtual boxes I could run on that just for the sake of being able to. Thanks for the picking of your brains ya two! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dannthr Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 My current system is an AMD Phenom II x6 3.2GHz (T1090) 16GB of 1333 SDRAM 8 HDDs (1 System (7200rpm), 1 Storage (7200rpm), 6 Samples (10krpm)) I just built my new Orchestra Template and it's just a basic template, it takes up about 10GB of RAM on its own. That only leaves me a few gigs for system operations and a few gigs for extra instruments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nabeel Ansari Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 My 16GB is insufficient. I'm going to have to start looking into getting a new Mother Board as I've already maxed out the one I've got. Get some 8GB sticks, yo. Also, always go Intel. AMD Bulldozer just doesn't measure up to Sandy Bridge in processing power, plus Ivy Bridge is right around the corner at more power and heat efficient and the same price. Never compare processors by their GHz speeds or their listed specs. Always look up benchmarks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moseph Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 16GB of... is that ram? ---and that's too little for your songs? Good gods, haha. Everyone is different of course, but that would make me feel that getting at least 8GB, even 16GB of ram depending on how much they do electronically would be worth as much or more than a powerful processor.I'm curious about the recommendation for valuing processors less and sound cards more. As for sound cards, would you say that they increase performance more than cpus? Is it an either sound card or cpu type of thing? Perhaps a beefy cpu would be a better choice for someone in terms of performance who would not use real life instruments or external recording? I've always been rather confused about this, and whether a beefy sound card could beat an Asio 2500k or so dollar per dollar. I'd probably chose the 2500k anyway since this won't be a dedicated comp, but for those who could benefit from the knowledge As for gpus, they need to be CUDA (nvidia only, no amd equivalent?) AND, the vsti or program needs to be coded to be able to use Cuda. I've only been able to find a few, and beyond that, I am mystified as to the performance, if it is even equal to dollar per dollar processor or sound card performance. I'm sorry that I can't be more dramatic, and object to something, but saying 32gb is just not enough for sound samples, I def agree Im still thinking drive performance would only be initial load up times, but I wonder. As for the $55 for 16gb, it wasn't a typo, but..... it was referring to 4x4GB sticks If that is what you are referring to though, and are curious, the prices seem to have slid up justtt a little bit (Im seeing g-skill rip jaws for around $38 per 8gb at the moment.) If you don't mind waiting, I'd recommend giving it a few weeks, there's often been sales for decent or even performance quality 8gb for $30 and under. Also wondering if the Thailand floods have upped memory prices lately, all I've seen noticeably are hard drives. As for 2x8gb sticks, the best deal is exceptionally higher at $109 I guess. I'll vilely salivate in jealousy and squinting peering eyes if you ever do put that system together Dannthr! The .. 50 box, and various needless virtual boxes I could run on that just for the sake of being able to. Thanks for the picking of your brains ya two! Yeah, Dan does massive orchestral arrangements professionally, hence the 16GB RAM and 8 drives. The system he needs is far, far beyond anything you'd need at this point. For comparison, my system has 8GB RAM and two drives (1 OS/general, 1 sample), and I can load everything in Vienna Symphonic SE Plus with room left over for pretty much any of the other libraries I use. I haven't hit a performance wall yet (though I also haven't tried EWQL Choirs on top of VSL yet). There have been experiments with CUDA for audio purposes, but no serious applications of it as far as I know. Video cards are useless for audio performance as things currently stand. The benefits of an audio interface are that the recording capabilities are much better than integrated audio (only an issue if you plan to record), its drivers may work better with a DAW, it may have MIDI in/out (an issue if you need to use MIDI hardware), and the audio output may be better (I noticed an increase in clarity when I switched from my laptop's integrated audio to an external interface). The value of the processor is subjective and depends on how much power you need for your projects. If you only do small, less complicated things, then an expensive processor is overkill unless you're trying to plan for future compatibility. Since I don't know exactly how you'll be using your computer, I can't offer an opinion on whether you'd be better off spending money on a soundcard or a processor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dannthr Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 Get some 8GB sticks, yo.Also, always go Intel. AMD Bulldozer just doesn't measure up to Sandy Bridge in processing power, plus Ivy Bridge is right around the corner at more power and heat efficient and the same price. Never compare processors by their GHz speeds or their listed specs. Always look up benchmarks. You can't just drop 8GB sticks into whatever you want. This is my motherboard: http://www.gigabyte.com/products/product-page.aspx?pid=3417#sp Its maximum capacity for RAM is 16GB, I've maxed it out. The only reason to go with Intel processors is for overclocking, and I don't overclock. I don't overclock because I want my equipment to last longer than I need it. Unfortunately, I burn through hard disks quite often. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nabeel Ansari Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 The only reason to go with Intel processors is for overclocking, and I don't overclock. I don't overclock because I want my equipment to last longer than I need it. Or maybe the fact that it's so much faster and allows for 32GB on the recent motherboards? AMD Bulldozer couldn't even beat Sandy Bridge, and Ivy Bridge will run way more efficiently than SB with lower power consumption as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GallenWolf Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 @danthr: What about additional slave machines with VE Pro to distribute your requirements instead? Disclaimer: I am an uber newb and may not know what I'm talking about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dannthr Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 Or maybe the fact that it's so much faster and allows for 32GB on the recent motherboards? AMD Bulldozer couldn't even beat Sandy Bridge, and Ivy Bridge will run way more efficiently than SB with lower power consumption as well. Recent AMD MoBos support higher RAM. "Couldn't even beat" Not sure what you mean by that, but I'm not here to argue with you about the merits of one brand over another. My choke point is not CPU power. I buy AMD processors because I get a cost/benefit ratio that works to my advantage. Intel processors cost too much for the speeds and cores I want, the only benefit to Intel processors that I can see is that they overclock well, and I will never overclock a CPU. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonicThHedgog Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 I Need a cheap 1tb SSD, cheap/good mother board, i5 or i7, and a cheap power supply. im looking for cheap parts to replace some parts on this old dell pc thats on its knees. (and I really happen to like the case for some reason) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moseph Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 I Need a cheap 1tb SSD You can have cheap or you can have SSD, but not both. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonicThHedgog Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 you can have cheap or you can have ssd, but not both. nooooooooooooooooooooooooooo How about 100gb or 1tb for normal harddrive? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nabeel Ansari Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 nooooooooooooooooooooooooooo How about 100gb or 1tb for normal harddrive? :banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead:Good luck finding a 1TB less than $3000. 120GB, on the other hand, will run you $150-$200 for a Vertex 3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonicThHedgog Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 :banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead:Good luck finding a 1TB less than $3000. 120GB, on the other hand, will run you $150-$200 for a Vertex 3. I saw a few ssd's for $990-$1,500/ low $2,000 range here in bmore Ninja Edit:: The computer shop around me had a liquidation sale, and its too late for me to buy cheap.....ehh but im not spending 3 grand when im saving for a new car 0_o Oh my budget atm (which will prob decrease) is about $2,500 and it needs to buy 3 parts, and how much for a i5 @ 1.8-2.0? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexstyle Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 At the current SSD price points, you're really best off spending your money on an SSD big enough for your boot material (OS, important programs, etc.) and going with a decently-fast hard drive for everything else. I'll slip in and add to the OP that I value my sound card very highly. ASIO4ALL is great, but it doesn't beat having a dedicated sound card (with dedicated drivers and non-CPU-driven audio processing). Plus, I get far higher recording quality, which is important because I tend to record vocals, guitars, and other sorts of things on a regular basis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dannthr Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 Just keep in mind that SSDs based on Flash Memory actually has a maximum write operation per memory cell, and once its maximum write number has been reached, the cell will fail. I would not use an SSD for anything you update often, or write to frequently as more frequent use literally just speeds up the time the drive will fail. All flash memory is only good for a certain number of write operations. I would not use an SSD for an OS drive, as OSs download updates and are the primary drive for virtual memory/page filing as well as the main drive for writing/saving/copying files. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonicThHedgog Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 Just keep in mind that SSDs based on Flash Memory actually has a maximum write operation per memory cell, and once its maximum write number has been reached, the cell will fail.I would not use an SSD for anything you update often, or write to frequently as more frequent use literally just speeds up the time the drive will fail. All flash memory is only good for a certain number of write operations. I would not use an SSD for an OS drive, as OSs download updates and are the primary drive for virtual memory/page filing as well as the main drive for writing/saving/copying files. Thats why I need one for more permanent things, but for my temp build and not my main build incase I need to transfer items back and forth. also any cheap i5's or i7s @ 2.4-3.0? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nabeel Ansari Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 also any cheap i5's or i7s @ 2.4-3.0? Dude. There's this site. It's called Newegg. You should check it out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonicThHedgog Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 Dude. There's this site. It's called Newegg. You should check it out. They're expencive.....unless it comes to moniters for some odd reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexstyle Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 Just keep in mind that SSDs based on Flash Memory actually has a maximum write operation per memory cell, and once its maximum write number has been reached, the cell will fail.I would not use an SSD for anything you update often, or write to frequently as more frequent use literally just speeds up the time the drive will fail. All flash memory is only good for a certain number of write operations. I would not use an SSD for an OS drive, as OSs download updates and are the primary drive for virtual memory/page filing as well as the main drive for writing/saving/copying files. What use is an SSD if it's not the boot drive? Just mirror it to a regular mag-platter drive regularly for backup purposes. Besides, most new SSDs have a far lower failure rate than the early ones did. EDIT: Also, I'm gonna +1 Newegg. If you say it's too expensive, you're looking at the wrong site, haha. Plus, they have some seriously excellent deals on a regular basis. Just subscribe to the newsletter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonicThHedgog Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 What use is an SSD if it's not the boot drive? Just mirror it to a regular mag-platter drive regularly for backup purposes. Besides, most new SSDs have a far lower failure rate than the early ones did.EDIT: Also, I'm gonna +1 Newegg. If you say it's too expensive, you're looking at the wrong site, haha. Plus, they have some seriously excellent deals on a regular basis. Just subscribe to the newsletter. Ok I guess I'll talk you guys words on this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nabeel Ansari Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 They're expencive.....unless it comes to moniters for some odd reason. If you want to find processors cheaper than on Newegg, then you should look at eBay or something. This is OverClocked ReMix, not Slickdeals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SgtYayap Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 Well, in regards to the main topic, I recently acquired a full license of the Arturia Prophet V. It's a terrific virtual analog for the Prophet 5 component, but, unlike the other Arturia recreations, it also has digital wavetables from the Prophet VS, which makes it better than the other Arturia software, in my opinion. Both of my Portal mod pieces made so far (in the Original forum) make use of this synth, and several other recent ones on my Soundcloud page do as well. Wavetable-talk in mind, I also feel the Waldorf PPG Wave 3.V is REALLY worth it, especially since, like the Korg Legacy Collections, the recreation has a retail price lower than what you'd think! All the classic wavetables, the Waveterm B factory sample library, multichannel options, and even built-in effects, all for somewhere like $179! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.