Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[gert79]

Sorry i am not sure if i am on the right section of the board here.

I built my OS9 system mainly for running Studio Vision Pro, but now i saw some DAWs higher version numbers can be run in OS X (version 4? opinions differ).
It is a 2002 QS 933 with 1GB ram, running on SSD with sata/parallel adapter.


Now i was wondering is it worth the upgrade, on a second partition? Is it snappy? How does it perform with midi, is latency and jitter comparable to OS9?

I know this is maybe the wrong forum to ask but i guess many people have OS X installed aswell and can tell the differences.

[ssp3]

When it comes to 'snappiness', nothing comes close to OS7-OS9. Period.
(I'm deliberately leaving OS6 out)

[DieHard]

Now i was wondering is it worth the upgrade, on a second partition? Is it snappy? How does it perform with midi, is latency and jitter comparable to OS9?

I know this is maybe the wrong forum to ask but i guess many people have OS X installed aswell and can tell the differences.
Modify message

This response can be 10 to 30 pages, so I will restrict myself from temptation, and break this into 2 sections.

1) If you are keeping the QS G4 and attempting to make a very usable studio DAW, then OS 9 wins hands down.  It will feel absolutely 5 to 10 times faster on your QS (with 1 GB) then any version of X and the corresponding later DAW application version.  MIDI will be less laggy then using that QS machine with X hands down.  You have to realize that OS9 and the apps for it are very optimized to use less resources.

2) If you want a modern DAW with Modern features, buy a newer machine, Mac Pros are dirt Cheap now, Logic Pro x is cracked or inexpensive to buy

[GaryN]

This is very hard to answer properly without a lot more info, so I'll only tell you what my experience is.
I have a dual-boot system and a crazy-fast one at that (2x1.8Ghz MDD).
In OS9 you only get to use one CPU anyway 80% of the time - there are only a few apps that can use two.
As far as MIDI, nothing but nothing is better, faster, stronger (lol) than SVP and a Studio 4 or 5. Not even close.
BUT, you pay a price: No VSTi support. If that's a big deal for you, you need either OSX or a different DAW.
I get around that by (A) sometimes using an external VSTi host and (B) sometimes exporting tracks to Logic OSX and back.
SVP digital audio performance is excellent as well when supported by a good interface.
Now……
In more years than I like to admit, I have had no/none/zero issues with "latency" and "jitter" using MIDI.
MIDI, like everything else in this world, has limits and one must understand and work within them.
That means that piling on excessive aftertouch and continuous controllers on every track when they're not even needed will cause problems.
I suspect many folks who obsess over jitter would also argue for hours about what kind of $100/ft. speaker wire is the best.
Also…
Re: That missing info: If you're just starting out, picking the best DAW to use is critical. IF, however, you're already a comfortable SVP user, changing horses to an entirely new one is a big deal. The way you succeed at being a musician/engineer/producer is to be as familiar and comfortable with your electronics and software as you are with your instrument(s). Every minute you're interrupting your creativity to search through menus and/or manuals to see if you can make your tools do what you want is a minute you're not creating anything and worse, breaking the creative roll you were on that you now have to get back to. That shit gets tiring and depressing real quick.

[IIO]

about audio and midi everything has been said already.

but of course there might be a few programs u like which are OSX only, and i personally would never have no OSX installed on a G4, because it is an interesting utility for this and that.

for example i regulary need it to format HDs, burn BD discs or unrar .rar files.

it can also help to fix issues or run OS9 programs in classic mode which are extremly unstable in the native OS.

to me it is a utility to OS9 similar to how windows is a utility to OS9. not the main thing, but still important.

[coachla]

For audio perhaps. Not for MIDI. In my case, number one dealbreaker is that Sounddiver OSX is out of the question. There are unique OSX applications  that have no OS 9 equivalent, such as the old PPC version of EWQL Symphonic  Choirs with Wordbuilder. But then, I have no desire to sound like a real choir or real symphony which is just that and nothing else. It can't hold a candle to an FS1r. I usually end up forgetting about anything OSX beyond a little experimentation.

In a musical context the last thing I want to hear are words like permission, privileges and bill of materials. I have a Mac Pro1,1 with 10.4, 10.5,10.6 and a Cylinder 2013 6,1 with 10.9. There is always some distracting glitch that robs my time fixing. In my view the whole premise and development of OSX is the opposite of what I want. It's all about upgrades and making you obsolete.

I would sum it up this way: If you have the urge to make a quick trip to the store for some milk for your coffee, why stand in line for the dirigible to arrive? You want to take the Lotus and maybe rally a bit through the back roads too. It's not for the scenery. It's for the drive.

It's always the good old days when I turn on my system.

[gert79]

Thank you guys for all the answers.

All i am looking for is tight midi (and audio recording) so i will stay with OS9 and not experiment with OSX.