3x 27" iMac core i7 or 1x 2009 8core Mac Pro?

[logicalways]

Hi there, I have a few options in the running right now. I just sold my dual 30" Apple Cinema displays because i want to move to 3x 24" Cinema Displays for the extra screen. Then i got thinking. Why not sell my 2009 8core mac pro 2.93Ghz with 24 gigs of ram as well and buy 3x 27" iMac 2.8Ghz Core i7 and run them together as one large computer.

here are my questions

1. Can 3 quad core iMacs be run together to make one large 12 core computer per say or

2. Can I run virtual instruments split onto 2 iMacs and run my tracking & Mixing on the 3rd iMac

3. or is running it all on one 8core mac pro better?

Price wise, if i can sell my $8000 Mac Pro for $7000 to this guy and i've already sold my 30" Cinema displays for $3000 thats $10,000 I have to play with. It's cheaper to buy three 27" iMacs for $7000 and pocket $3000.

What do you guys think also what software would run 3 computers with Pro Tools like that?


Chers
Logic

[Mason00]

Dell is launching a 27" Screen with 2560X1440 res, same as the iMac most likely at CES. I've read that the iMac 27" screen is made by LG and so is this new Dell model U2711.

[logicalways]

the screens should be nice. I'm pretty much going for 3 screens 24" refurbished LED cinema displays for $699 Canadian each from apple cause after January 1st when i ship these out i wont have anything to use so I need a Screen sooner. but mostly more interested in finding out if the iMac is a viable option going forward or is the power of 1x 8core mac pro better then 3x quad core iMacs

[flommer]

1. Can 3 quad core iMacs be run together to make one large 12 core computer per say No, sorry Pt will not work in this way. One of the other DAWS (Maybe Cubase??) allows for a network of computers to add to the overall processing power. I have never heard of the results that can be had doing that.

2. Can I run virtual instruments split onto 2 iMacs and run my tracking & Mixing on the 3rd iMac Yes, this can be done. One acts as the master sequencer and handles all audio and MIDI tracks, and additional computers will simply be very powerful hardware synthesizers. The tricky thing is having enough audio connections. The primary ProTools sequencer machine on an iMac will be limited to 18 ch I/O so your VI slave machines could only feed up to that many audio inputs in real time. You can have submixes coming from the slaves (just like a multitimbral HW synth), but that might not be ideal if you want to handle them individually during mix down. You also need interfaces on the 2 slaves, but you would not necessarily need ProTools on them. Some people do this as a way to use Logic VIs in ProTools sessions

3. or is running it all on one 8core mac pro better? Probably.. I seriously doubt that anybody has done a comparison of your specific scenario, especially since the quad iMac has only been available for a couple months. Most people would say 3 top of the line iMacs for your intended purpose would be excessive IMO

Are your sessions actually making your MacPro crap out? Are you trying to fix what isn't broken, or is this mostly a thought experiment...

[logicalways]

Okay thats pretty helpful. I Use structure for my sampler and 24gigs of ram, 8core 2.93Ghz mac pro can't keep up on the last few sessions of MIDI that i was running. so i bounced the MIDI to audio and it worked fine but still a pain in the butt.

I mostly wanted to see if it would set me forward or set me backwards moving to 3 quad core iMacs. The screens are amazing, 3 computers to process the sessions would be amazing and i would put money back into my pocket by the end of the day by $2000 or more. So i thought it would be something i'd like to research a bit more.

I'd like to learn more about what you said with running logic on two computers to handle the instruments and the 3rd as a master sequencer. Could you sort of discuss a bit more how to set that up?

[flommer]

Originally Posted by logicalways

Okay thats pretty helpful. I Use structure for my sampler and 24gigs of ram, 8core 2.93Ghz mac pro can't keep up on the last few sessions of MIDI that i was running. so i bounced the MIDI to audio and it worked fine but still a pain in the butt.

I mostly wanted to see if it would set me forward or set me backwards moving to 3 quad core iMacs. The screens are amazing, 3 computers to process the sessions would be amazing and i would put money back into my pocket by the end of the day by $2000 or more. So i thought it would be something i'd like to research a bit more.

I'd like to learn more about what you said with running logic on two computers to handle the instruments and the 3rd as a master sequencer. Could you sort of discuss a bit more how to set that up?

Unfortunately all that RAM isn't being put to good use. PT will only use up to 4 GB as it is a 32 bit process. Structure does seem to have some problems but there is supposed to be an update on the horizon. Maybe it will increase it's efficiency... Anyway...

I think the best way to think of the slave computers is as Hardware synths. That means that you control them with MIDI and you simply route the audio output back in to the Main PT sequencer computer.

One advantage of using all Macs for this, I guess, is that you can easily use MIDI over ethernet to sync up the MIDI aspect. If you take a look at Audio MIDI Setup, you'll notice that one of the icons says Network. That allows you to use MIDI over a LAN instead of using MIDI cables and interfaces etc. I personally have not used it but I have read reports that it works well.

So once you have your MIDI working, then it is just a matter of what programs you want to trigger on the slaves. You could have Reason on one and Logic on the other. Or maybe one of the stand alone sampler VIs. You could even use a PC with GigaStudio. Again, all they really are in this scenario are hardware synths..

Then you have to deal with the audio connections. Since you are talking about doing this with an iMac, PTLE is your only option (well I guess M-powered, too). That limits you to 18 channels of I/O on the primary ProTools iMac if you get (or have) an 003. You would need additional A/d converters to use the ADAT and SPDIF inputs....

OR

If you are careful about the interfaces you choose for the other 2 iMacs you could accommodate the primary 003's digital inputs by getting interfaces that have ADAT and spdif outputs. Here's an example:

Primary iMac with 003 running PTLE
Slave one with 003R running PTLE (so you could use Structure)
Slave two with M-audio profire 2626 running Reason.. Or Logic.. Or both (maybe)... Or whatever..

This would give you LOTS of different ways to connect the outputs of the slaves to the primary 003. Slave 1's ADAT and SPDIF outputs could be connected to the primary 003's digital inputs giving you 10 channels for Structure. (One thing to be aware of is that if you use ADAT from one slave and SPDIF from the other, then all 3 need to be sync'd with wordclock in some way and that would depend on what interfaces you get.) Then Slave 2's analog outputs would patch into the primary 003's analog inputs giving you the remaining 8 channels.

There is no way around the 18 channel-at-a-time limitation, however. So that means that you would have to do multiple record passes if, for example, you needed 20 channels from Structure.. You wouldn't necessarily be able to do a submix of all or some of them, because maybe you want individual effects on them at mix time. You could just apply your effects on the slave, but this sounds like it might be extra work to have to get the submix perfect in the slave at the same time as getting the overall mix correct. This is one reason why it is probably excessive to have 3 high end iMacs for this purpose. You won't necessarily be able to max out the power of each AND bring it all together into the final mix in real time. It is similar to your work around currently of bouncing your structure tracks to audio to free up processing. There are extra steps involved. I hope I am explaining this well enough..

That's how I conceive of this anyway

[logicalways]

wow okay, I need to read that more in-depth tomorrow (3:30am here) as i'm going to bed but I am running a Digi 003 at the moment with my Presonus DIGIMax FS taking up the BNC and ADAT. I also have an MBox 2 set up as well on my macbook. I'll have a read tomorrow again and see if i can figure out all those steps your talking about and how i could best make it happen. If i can save a couple thousand dollars, it might be worth it. but if i'm spending that money on new gear to make it work, it might be simpler to pass.

I'm a huge apple computer fan and tend to buy things that most people only talk about like my Studiologic Numa Nero and running a 8core Mac pro with dual 30" Cinema Displays. I like the odd system set ups. the ones where you can't even find a write up or pictures on the internet of haha.

Take care and thanks so much for your help.


Logic

[John_Toolbox]

Logicalways -

You can look in your activity monitor to see how much of your RAM is actually being used. I have a feeling you don't need 3 computers at this point unless you are doing large orchestral mockups.

You should take a look at vienna ensemble pro. This will let you host your VI's outside of pro tools (on the same computer, so you can get to use your 24GB of RAM). This way they aren't crippled by pro tools' 4GB RAM limitation. If you do go with multiple computers, it also lets you stream audio over your network, thus eliminating the need for audio interfaces(And also defeating the 18 i/o limitatation of pro tools LE).

I'm running a 27" imac as my main DAW at the moment, but I use PC's for hosting my VIs. I'm using audioport universal to stream audio over gigabit ethernet from the PCs back to the imac.

[John_Toolbox]

There is no way around the 18 channel-at-a-time limitation, however.

Ve pro or audioport universal + bidule.

Not sure on the limitations of VE pro, but I'm using Audioport + Bidule at the moment and it easily defeats the LE i/o limitation. You can rewire up to 96 channels of bidule into pro tools, then recieve up to 32 channels from each slave pc with audioport in bidule.

[flommer]

Originally Posted by John_Toolbox

Ve pro or audioport universal + bidule.

Not sure on the limitations of VE pro, but I'm using Audioport + Bidule at the moment and it easily defeats the LE i/o limitation. You can rewire up to 96 channels of bidule into pro tools, then recieve up to 32 channels from each slave pc with audioport in bidule.

That's pretty interesting..

So audioport is a network audio connection and bidule is the universal rewire client..

Is all this stable?