analysis

SoundCloud, now Vimeo of Sound, instead of YouTube of Sound?

SoundCloud’s do-or-die moment came Friday – and it seems it’s do, not die. The company now takes on new executives, and a new direction.

First, it’s important to understand just what happened yesterday. Despite some unhinged and misleading blog reports, the situation didn’t involve the site suddenly switching off – following the layoffs, the company said it had enough cash to survive through the end of the fourth quarter. That said, the concern was, without reassurances the company could last past that, SoundCloud could easily have slipped into a death spiral, with its value dropping and top talent fleeing a sinking ship.

What happened: New investment stepped in, with a whopping US$169.5 million, for SoundCloud’s biggest round ever (series F). That follows big past investments from Twitter, early venture funding, and debt financing last year.

This gives the company a new direction, some new leadership and leadership experience, and the stability to keep current talent in the building.

Under new management

What changes: Plenty. When you invest that much money, you can get some changes from the company to ensure you’re more likely to get your investment back.

  • New CEO: Kerry Trainor (formerly CEO of Vimeo)
  • New COO: Mike Weissman (formerly COO of Vimeo)
  • New board members: Trainor joins the board, alongside Fred Davis (a star investor and music attorney), and Joe Puthenveetil (also music-focused), each coming from Raine (the firm that did the deal).
  • A much lower valuation: In order to secure funding, SoundCloud adjusted what had been at one point a $700 million valuation to a pre-investment $150 million. That’s not much above its annual run rate, and it indicates how far they’ve fallen.
  • …but maybe we don’t do this runway thing any more. The good news – TechCrunch reports the company says it has a $100 million annual run-rate. This investment means they’re not in urgent need of cash. They’ve bought themselves time to genuinely become a money making business, instead of constantly needing to go back to investors for money. (“Dad??? Can I borrow $70 million?”)

What stays the same:

  • SoundCloud as you know it keeps running. (Meaning, if you aren’t terribly interested in the business story here, carry on uploading and forget about it!)
  • Eric Wahlforss stays on. The co-founder’s title is adjusted to “Chief Product Officer” instead of CTO, but it appears he’ll retain a hands-on role. That’s important, too, because no one knows the product – or how it’s used by musicians – than Eric does. It’s easy to criticize the executive team, but if you’re a current user, this is good news. (Just bringing in some Vimeo people and dumping the people running the product would have almost been very bad for the service you use.)

Now, most headlines are focusing on the cash lifeline, and that’s absolutely vital. But this is a major talent injection, too. Fred Davis is one of the key figures in New York around music and tech, from his role as an attorney to as an investor. (He was known to float around hackdays, too.) Oh, yeah – he’s also the son of Clive Davis, who started NYU’s music business school. Puthenveetil also represents some significant expertise in the area.

Kerry Trainor is about the single most experienced person you could find to lead SoundCloud – more so, in fact, than the executives who have steered the company before. His streaming experience, as SoundCloud points out in their press release, spans back 20 years. (They leave out the names, because kids don’t like AOL, Yahoo Music, or Launch Media any more, but experience matters.) And he is largely credited with making Vimeo a profitable company.

What’s the future of SoundCloud now?

For all the skepticism, Alex seems to have delivered on exactly the promises he’s been making in past weeks, vague as they may have seemed. SoundCloud does appear ready to re-focus on creators, and the financing means ongoing independence is a real possibility.

Whether it works or not, it’s tough to overstate what a significant shift in direction this represents. For years, people have casually referred to SoundCloud as the “YouTube of audio.” (Oddly, the phrase I first wrote when they started was a “Flickr or audio,” which, uh, dates that story. But it does also indicate creators, not consumers, were initially the focus, so I at least go that bit right.)

It seems SoundCloud aren’t just bringing on former Vimeo executives. They seem poised to follow Vimeo’s example.

We already know that endlessly expanding scale and more streaming is a disastrous business model. The issue is, if listeners aren’t paying, and any royalties are accruing, the more people listen, the more money you lose. Spotify is facing that now and may need a similar change in direction, and the entire music industry is caught up in this black hole. Companies like Google and Apple can absorb the losses if they choose; an independent company can’t.

So scale alone isn’t the answer. And just having more listeners doesn’t necessarily mean the kind of attention that gets you caring fans or lands you gigs.

Vimeo faced a similar challenge, in the face of challenges from YouTube and Facebook’s own video push – each backed by big companies and revenue streams that the creator-focused, smaller company lacked.

What’s unique about Vimeo, under Kerry Trainor in particular, is that they found a way to compete by focusing on the creators uploading to the service rather than just the viewers watching it. While YouTube always tried to encourage uploads, its focus was on scale – and ultimately, the toolset was geared more for advertisers and watchers, and casual content creators, than for serious content makers.

Vimeo offers an alternative that serious uploaders like. Actual streaming quality is higher. The presentation is more focused on your content. There are powerful tools for controlling that presentation and collecting stats – if you’re willing to pay. And there’s not only greater intangible value to those serious uploaders, but greater tangible returns, too. It’s easier to sell your content – and, because there’s a collected community of pro users, easier to get audiences that support paying gigs.

Now, to do that in the face of YouTube’s scale, Vimeo had to make money. And that’s where Trainor did, by encouraging more of its creators to pay.

We already know SoundCloud’s plans to make listeners pay have fallen flat. So, as users have been clamoring for years, now is a chance to refocus on the creators.

I think anyone who knew Vimeo figured this was the best guess as the company’s new strategy the moment they saw Trainor and Weissman rumored to take over executive roles. And sure enough, in an exclusive talk with Billboard, Trainor says point blank that’s his strategy:

SoundCloud’s Pro and Pro Unlimited subscription services provide insights into which tracks are most popular and where. The Pro service, which costs $7 a month, provides basic stats such as play counts and likes, see plays by country, turn on or off public comments and upload up to six hours of audio. The Unlimited offering, for a $15 monthly fee, lifts the cap on the amount of music that can be uploaded and provides more specific analytics.

Trainor hopes to increase the number of creators who pay to use SoundCloud Unlimited’s service by adding an even more robust creative toolkit.

Emphasis mine. And reaction from users I’ve seen is, even a lot of die-hard SoundCloud enthusiasts in my early adopter social feed suggest people found reason to pay for Pro, but not Unlimited. Poor differentiation and stagnant offerings just gave little motivation.

That’s not to knock even SoundCloud’s rocket growth. On the contrary, it’s pretty tough to argue against sharing your sound on a site that’s one of the Internet’s biggest, with one of the world’s most popular mobile apps alongside. But now having grown to a huge audience, SoundCloud needs to fresh its tools for creators.

Translating from video to audio isn’t going to be easy. Part of the reason SoundCloud presumably didn’t push as hard on creator subscriptions is, there’s no clear indication what would make musicians pay for them. Audio is simpler than video – easier to encode, easier to share. Serving video on your own server is a nightmare, but serving audio isn’t. And, sorry to be blunt, but then there’s the issue of whether music producers really earn enough to want to blow cash on expensive subscriptions. Compare a motion graphics firm or design agency using Vimeo, who could make back a couple hundred bucks in subscription fees in, literally, an hour of work.

Even beyond that, I’m not clear what SoundCloud creators want from the service that they aren’t already getting. (Okay, Groups – but those probably aren’t coming back, and I don’t know that people would pay a subscription for them.) The toolchain out of the browser is already powerful and sophisticated, which has always made Web tools a bit less appealing – why use a browser-based mastering tool like Landr when you already have powerful mastering tools in your DAW, for instance? If you’ve invested enough money in gear and software to want to share a track to begin with, what will make you spend a few dollars a month for more?

That said, there’s clearly a passionate and motivated community of people making music. And note that the new talent at SoundCloud has music experience and interest as well as video. Trainor is evidently an avid guitarist (what, you’re not a fan of “Etro Anime,” his band?). He cut his teeth in tech in the area of music. (LAUNCH Media went from CD-ROM-taped-to-a-print-magazine to Internet radio offerings that look a lot like how we listen to music now.) And he’s currently on the board of Fender guitar.

Vimeo also had a long-standing interest in music and the music community in the company’s native New York City.

These are tough problems to solve. But I can think of few better people to tackle them. Basically, Alex and Eric not only saved their company for now, but seem to have gotten what they wanted in the process.

Also, it’s worth pointing out – the music business wants SoundCloud to live, not die. I think it would be unequivocally bad for musicians and labels, in fact, with independent and international artists feeling the worst impact. But it’s also worth noting Fred Davis tells Billboard: “If I could show to you the number of people who have been calling us, expressing fear about it going away, you would be shocked.”

It’s still possible investors will look to sell, but I suspect with the valuation at its low point and the tech world in general losing interest in music’s money-losing propositions and legal mess, independence is probably the safe bet.

If SoundCloud can turn this around, it’ll be a great example of a tech company humbling itself and successfully changing course.

We’ll be watching, and when this team settles in, hopefully will get to talk to the new team.

Background:
SoundCloud saved by emergency funding as CEO steps aside [TechCrunch]

SoundCloud Secures Significant Investment Led by The Raine Group and Temasek [SoundCloud press release]

Exciting news and the future of SoundCloud [Alex on the SoundCloud blog]

The post SoundCloud, now Vimeo of Sound, instead of YouTube of Sound? appeared first on CDM Create Digital Music.

Export to hardware, virtual pedals – this could be the future of effects

If your computer and a stompbox had a love child, MOD Duo would be it – a virtual effects environment that can load anything. And now, it does Max/MSP, too.

MOD Devices’ MOD Duo began its life as a Kickstarter campaign. The idea – turn computer software into a robust piece of hardware – wasn’t itself so new. Past dedicated audio computer efforts have come and gone. But it is genuinely possible in this industry to succeed where others have failed, by getting your timing right, and executing better. And the MOD Duo is starting to look like it does just that.

What the MOD Duo gives you is essentially a virtualized pedalboard where you can add effects at will. Set up the effects you want on your computer screen (in a Web browser), and even add new ones by shopping for sounds in a store. But then, get the reliability and physical form factor of hardware, by uploading them to the MOD Duo hardware. You can add additional footswitches and pedals if you want additional control.

Watch how that works:

For end users, it can stop there. But DIYers can go deeper with this as an open box. Under the hood, it’s running LV2 plug-ins, an open, Linux-centered plug-in format. If you’re a developer, you can create your own effects. If you like tinkering with hardware, you can build your own controllers, using an Arduino shield they made especially for the job.

And then, this week, the folks at Cycling ’74 take us on a special tour of integration with Max/MSP. It represents something many software patchers have dreamed of for a long time. In short, you can “export” your patches to the hardware, and run them standalone without your computer.

This says a lot about the future, beyond just the MOD Duo. The technology that allows Max/MSP to support the MOD Duo is gen~ code, a more platform-agnostic, portable core inside Max. This hints at a future when Max runs in all sorts of places – not just mobile, but other hardware, too. And that future was of interest both to Cycling ’74 and the CEO of Ableton, as revealed in our interview with the two of them.

Even broader than that, though, this could be a way of looking at what electronic music looks like after the computer. A lot of people assume that ditching laptops means going backwards. And sure enough, there has been a renewed interest in instruments and interfaces that recall tech from the 70s and 80s. That’s great, but – it doesn’t have to stop there.

The truth is, form factors and physical interactions that worked well on dedicated hardware may start to have more of the openness, flexibility, intelligence, and broad sonic canvas that computers did. It means, basically, it’s not that you’re ditching your computer for a modular, a stompbox, or a keyboard. It’s that those things start to act more like your computer.

Anyway, why wait for that to happen? Here’s one way it can happen now.

Darwin Grosse has a great walk-through of the MOD Duo and how it works, followed by how to get started with

The MOD Duo Ecosystem (an introduction to the MOD Duo)

Content You Need: The MOD Duo Package (into how to work with Max)

The post Export to hardware, virtual pedals – this could be the future of effects appeared first on CDM Create Digital Music.

Here’s how to download your own music from SoundCloud, just in case

SoundCloud’s financial turmoil has prompted users to consider, what would happen if the service were switched off? Would you lose some of your own music?

Frankly, we all should have been thinking about that sooner.

The reality is, with any cloud service, you’re trusting someone else with your data, and your ability to get at that data is dependent on a single login. You might well be the failure point, if you lock yourself out of your own account or if someone else compromises it.

There’s almost never a scenario, then, where it makes sense to have something you care about in just one place, no matter how secure that place is. Redundancy neatly saves you from having to plan for every contingency.

Okay, so … yeah, if you are then nervous about some music you care about being on SoundCloud and aren’t sure if it’s in fact backed up someplace else, you really should go grab it.

Here’s one open source tool (hosted on GitHub, too) that downloads music.
http://downloader.soundcloud.ruud.ninja/

A more generalized tool, for downloading from any site that has links with downloads:
http://jdownloader.org/

(DownThemAll, the Firefox add-on, also springs to mind.)

This tool moves to a new service – unattended – though I’m testing that now. (I do think backup, rather than migration, may be a good step.)
https://www.orfium.com/

Could someone create a public mirror of the service? Yes, though – it wouldn’t be cheap. Jason Scott (of Internet Archive fame) tweets that it could cost up to $2 million, based on the amount of data:

(Anybody want to call Martin Shkreli? No?)

My hope is that SoundCloud does survive independently. Any acquisition would likewise be crazy not to maintain users and content; that’s the whole unique value proposition of the service, and there’s still nothing else quite like it. (The fact that there’s nothing quite like it, though, may give you pause on a number of levels.)

My guess is that the number of CDM readers and creators is far from enough to overload a service built to stream to millions of users, so I feel reasonably safe endorsing this use. That said, of course, SoundClouders also read CDM, so they might choose to limit or slow API access. Let’s see.

My advice, though: do grab the stuff you hold dear. Put it on an easily accessible drive. And make sure the media folders on that drive also have an automated backup – I really like cloud backup services like Crashdrive and Backblaze (or, if you have a server, your own scripts). But the best backup plan is one that you set and forget, one you only have to think about when you need it, and one that will be there in that instance.

Let us know if you find a better workflow here.

Thanks to Tom Whitwell of Music thing for raising this and for the above open source tip.

I expect … this may generate some comments. Shoot.

The post Here’s how to download your own music from SoundCloud, just in case appeared first on CDM Create Digital Music.

With Japan’s latest Vocaloid characters, another song from the future

It’s a cyber-technological future you can live now: a plug-in using sophisticated samples and rules that can make a plug-in sing like a Japanese pop star.

Yamaha has announced this week the newest voices for Vocaloid, their virtual singing software. This time, the characters are drawn from a (PS Vita) Sony video game property:

The main characters of the PS Vita games Utagumi 575 and Miracle Girls Festival, as well as the anime Go! Go! 575, Azuki Masaoka (voice actress Yuka Ohtsubo), have finally been made into VOCALOID Voice Banks!

“Finally.”

Here’s what those new characters sound like:

And the announcement:

Announcing the debut of two new female Japanese VOCALOID4 Voice Banks

The packs themselves run about 9000 Yen, or roughly 80 US Dollars.

Perhaps this is an excuse to step back and consider what this is about, again. (Well, I’m taking it as one.)

To the extent that pop music is always about making a human more than real, Japan embraces a hyperreal artificiality in their music culture, so it’s not surprising technology would follow. Even given that, it seems the success of Yamaha’s Vocaloid software caught the developers by surprise, as the tool earned a massive fanbase. And while extreme AutoTune effects have fallen out of favor in the west, it seems Japan hasn’t lost its appetite for this unique sound – nor the cult following of aficionados that has grown outside the country.

Vocaloid isn’t really robotic – it uses extensive, detailed samples of a real human singer – but the software is capable of pulling and stretching those samples in ways that defy the laws of human performance. That is, this is to singing as the drum machine is to drumming.

That said, if you go out and buy a conventional vocal sample library, the identities of the singers is relatively disguised. Not so, a Vocaloid sample bank. The fictional character is detailed down to her height in centimeters, her backstory … even her blood type. (Okay, if you know the blood type of a real pop star, that’s a little creepy – but somehow I can imagine fans of these fictional characters gladly donating blood if called upon to do so.)

Lest this all seem to be fantasy, equal attention is paid to the voice actors and their resume.

And the there’s the software. Vocaloid is one of the most complex virtual instruments on the market. There’s specific integration with Cubase, obviously owing to Yamaha’s relationship to Steinberg, but also having to do with the level of editing required to get precise control over Vocaloid’s output. And it is uniquely Japanese: while Yamaha has attempted to ship western voices, Japanese users have told me the whole architecture of Vocaloid is tailored to the particular nuances of Japanese inflection and pitch. Vocaloid is musical because the Japanese language is musical in such a particular way.

All of this has given rise to a music subculture built around the software and vocal characters that live atop the platform. That naturally brings us to Hatsune Miku, a fictional singer personality for Vocaloid whose very name is based on the words for “future” and “sound.” She’s one of a number of characters that have grown out of Vocaloid, but has seen the greatest cultural impact both inside and outside Japan.

Of course, ponder that for a second: something that shipped as a sound library product has taken on an imagined life as a pop star. There’s not really any other precedent for that in the history of electronic music … so far. No one has done a spinoff webisode series about the Chorus 1 preset from the KORG M1. (Yet. Please. Make that happen. You know it needs to.)

Hatsune Miku has a fanbase. She’s done packed, projected virtual concerts, via the old Pepper’s Ghost illusion (don’t call it a hologram).

And you get things like this:

Though with Hatsune Miku alone (let alone Vocaloid generally), you can go down a long, long, long rabbit hole of YouTube videos showing extraordinary range of this phenomenon, as character and as instrumentation.

In a western-Japanese collaboration, LaTurbo Avedon, Laurel Halo, Darren Johnston, Mari Matsutoya and Martin Sulzer (and other contributors) built their own operetta/audiovisual performance around Hatsune Miku, premiered as a joint presentation of CTM Festival and Transmediale here in Berlin in 2016. (I had the fortune of sitting next to a cosplaying German math teacher, a grown man who had convincingly made himself a physical manifestation of her illustrated persona – she sat on the edge of her seat enraptured by the work.)

I was particularly struck by Laurel Halo’s adept composition for Hatsune Miku – in turns lyrical and angular, informed by singing idiom and riding imagined breath, but subtly exploiting the technology’s potential. Sprechstimme and prosody for robots. Of all the various CTM/Transmediale commissions, this is music I’d want to return to. And that speaks to possibilities yet unrealized in the age of the electronic voice. (Our whole field, indeed, owes its path to the vocoder, to Daisy Bell, to the projected vocal quality of a Theremin or the monophonic song of a Moog.)

“Be Here Now” mixed interviews and documentary footage with spectacle and song; some in the audience failed to appreciate that blend, seen before in works like the Steve Reich/Beryl Korot opera The Cave. And some Hatsune Miku fans on the Internet took offense to their character being used in a way removed from her usual context, even though the license attached to her character provides for reuse. But I think the music holds up – and I personally equally enjoy this pop deconstruction as I do the tunes racking up the YouTube hits. See what you think:

All of this makes me want to revisit the Vocaloid software – perhaps a parallel review with a Japanese colleague. (Let’s see who’s up for it.)

After all, there’s no more human expression than singing – and no more emotional connection to what a machine is than when it sings, too.

More on the software, with an explanation of how it works (and why you’d want it, or not):

https://www.vocaloid.com/en/vocal_synth/

The post With Japan’s latest Vocaloid characters, another song from the future appeared first on CDM Create Digital Music.

Berghain, by the numbers: data on the relentless Berlin techno club

In the era of fake news and big data for corporations, there’s an obvious antidote: getting actual data for yourself.

So, it’s a given that too many words have been spilt over Berlin’s Berghain. But in trying to portray the club’s hype or mystique, I notice that there’s not often much discussion of its consistency. And to understand how techno and in a broader sense electronic music and the various fashions about it are projected into the world, understanding that consistency is key. If a club is repeatedly pushing out long queues every Saturday and Sunday night (yes, Sunday), and if that is having the influence that Berghain does on bookings elsewhere, on musical aesthetics, and even on how people dress, then part of what you’re actually describing is consistency. These are all measures of repetition.

So, what are the actual numbers? Musician and developer Olle Holmberg aka Moon Wheel is a geek and coder as well as a musician. So, curiosity evidently led him to write a JavaScript app to crawl Berghain’s Website – from late 2009 to present.

You can check out that Google Doc. And of course someone could write a better script – or even try to do other analyses on other clubs.
Berghain — all sets 2009-2017 (data from berghain.de events pages) [berghain.de]

This isn’t revealing any secrets in the club. Quite the contrary: it’s taking public-facing information, and separating the reality from people’s perception.

Now, I’m not one to just say “hey, let’s post a story on Berghain to see if it works as clickbait.” I actually find the results interesting. One thing that particularly struck me about Berghain regulars was their tendency to swoon “oh my God, the lineup this weekend is amazing” – then go on to describe the residents playing on the program.

More analysis will require more work, but we can at least pull up the artists who play most often (and they do so by such a large margin that even minor bugs in the crawling/scripting won’t make so much difference).

The top 25 (from end of 2009, with some minor glitches possible as the program is crawled as plain text):

1. Boris 99
2. Sammy Dee 88
3. Norman Nodge 86
4. Zip 85
5. Marcel Dettmann 80
6. Fiedel 76
7. Ben Klock 75
8. nd_baumecker 73
9. Marcel Fengler 71
10. Len Faki 70
11. Steffi 68
12. Ryan Elliott 65
13. Tama Sumo 63
14. Nick Höppner 62
15. Margaret Dygas 58
16. Soundstream 49
17. Virginia 49
18. Answer Code Request 45
19. Dinky 42
20. Gerd Janson 41
21. Efdemin 40
22. Function 38
23. Kobosil 37
24. DVS1 35
25. Oliver Deutschmann 35

Major disclaimer: this is incomplete data. The opening years of the club are missing. Artists wanting to share their anniversary dates or more complete data or stories, of course, you’re welcome to.

Olle tells CDM that at least one or two people who have seen the numbers have already expressed interest in doing analysis on gender and measures of diversity.

I can at least eyeball these 25. In case you’re wondering, five out of those top twenty five are female, so we’re far from any gender parity even in one of the world’s more progressive big venues. The top of the list is also overwhelmingly white, although it’s also fairly German. (That says something about residents versus guests, of course – and about who is settling into Berlin for the long term. It’s not exclusively German. Dinky is from Santiago, Chile. DVS1 was born in Leningrad, USSR, but grew up in the USA. Boris cut his teeth in the scene with none other than Larry Levan in New York’s Paradise Garage.)

They’re also all there for a reason. The reason for the German representation is also a story about how the music scene in the country has grown up since the 90s, with many of these residents having made their mark in the labels and parties that helped define the scene since the fall of the Wall, whether Sammy Dee and the Perlon label or Ben Klock and Marcel Dettmann and the homegrown Ostgut label. These artists are German, but they tend to come from smaller towns in both east and west parts of the country.

Speaking of consistency and longevity and day jobs, Norman Nodge is even a lawyer.

So if there’s nothing surprising here, what is here is a metric of what is successfully unsurprising. (That also applies to the value many of these names have in booking. See also the Ostgut booking operation, who hilariously warn that they won’t offer table reservations. That’s hilarious because I’m sure someone is regularly writing and asking. I wonder where people imagine the tables are.)

If you scroll through the raw data, you’ll see more of the untold story of Berghain as the larger complex of event spaces and programs. As the Website publishes not only the club’s best-known too floors, Panorama and the titular Berghain, but also Laboratory, Halle am Berghain, and Kantine am Berghain (the former canteen of the power station), including various special events, you’ll get all sorts of names. (Mine even pops up a couple of times through those weird loopholes, without even me having involved North Korean hackers.) In recent weeks, that also includes a more leftfield program at the club’s new Säule space.

But there’s a deeper message, and it’s one about consistency and repetition. Part of what allows us to get your attention in the press is to try to pass off something as new. But behind the scenes, the other thing that press, bookers, publicists, clubs are all doing is actually about priming you to see certain ideas and certain people as important. And that’s in fact about repetition – reinforcing name recognition and making ideas.

So there’s something to that Sunday ritual. For better or for worse, if you look at the top names here, these are really the foundation of this Berghain effect.

This is, of course, just one club, even if a vital one. I think while numbers don’t tell a whole story, it’s great to have some actual data and do some real research. (And the data can be thought of as a first step, not a last.) So I hope, as with female:pressure‘s analysis of gender on festival lineups, we continue to gather data and use more than just our own limited perception to understand music scenes.

Google Spreadsheet

Oh yeah, and if anyone wants to crowd-source fitness tracker data to see how much you’re dancing, let us know!

Updated: In 2010, the club itself published more accurate statistics.

Of course, this article is completely boring to the resident DJs and anyone working for the club, as they have the numbers.

Berghain also archives their programs – which are uncommon for clubland, filled with art and photos but also extensive curatorial commentary and even sometimes poetry and other tidbits.

On the 11th December 2010, they shared some of their own (far more accurate) in-house stats – at which point the total events (from DJs to concerts) had already numbered a whopping 4774.

http://berghain.de/media/flyer/pdf/berghain-flyer-2010-12.pdf

Based on those stats, Boris was again the winner – then having played his 101st set.
Marcel Dettmann: 84.
Ben Klock: 80.
Prosumer: 77.
Cassy: 73.

Those numbers also tel you the missing first years are really significant. (If I read them correctly, it also means Berghain is less about the resident frequency than it once was, which would make some sense. But without the actual data set, that’s just a guess.)

Full details from the program (written in the usual, rather charming way, so I’ll include it for German speakers):

Wie uns unser Inhouse- Statistiker mitteilt, gab es bis einschließlich dem 11. Dezember insgesamt 4774 Auftritte im ganzen Gebäude, einschließlich aller DJ-Gigs, Live-Acts und Konzerte. Soweit die allgemeine Auswertung, aber kommen wir zum heutigen Abend. Konkurrenzloser Spitzenreiter aller zu unserem Geburtstag spielenden DJs (und wir nehmen an, auch insgesamt) ist Boris. Er spielt heute sein 101. Set. Und zwar unten. Tataaa! Ihm dicht auf den Fersen sind Marcel Dettmann mit 84 und Ben Klock mit 80 Kanzelbesuchen. Gewissermaßen schon auf der Überholspur spielen die beiden heute ein back2back Set in der Panorama Bar. Prosumer, ebenfalls oben, kommt auf 77 Sets, Cassy auf 73. Jetzt rattern die Zahlen steil nach unten. Für sein erst 16. Set kehrt Disko zurück. Er hat sich aber auch wirklich rar gemacht. Das Fünfte sicher gerade sein lassen wird Robert Hood – und zwar mit einem House-Set in der Panorama Bar, Nummer 6 gibt‘s sogar gleich danach mit einem Techno-Set im Berghain. Die bisherigen Gigs von .tobias, Chez Damier und DVS1 kann man an zwar an zwei Händen abzählen, aber spätestens hier merkt nun auch der Letzte, dass Statistik nicht zum Feiern taugt. Feste feiern eben, wie sie kommen. So sind Art Department gar zum ersten Mal bei uns und Shed gibt unten die Live-Premiere seines straighten Equalized-Alias

The post Berghain, by the numbers: data on the relentless Berlin techno club appeared first on CDM Create Digital Music.

Apple announces that they’re not ready to announce new pro hardware

Apple today summoned a handful of tech reporters to a product lab, essentially to announce that … they were between announcements.

Apple’s unusual PR experiment today was to mix mea culpa and product teaser, in a drawn out explanation of why their hardware wasn’t shipping. The result of this messaging technique: journalists in the room for the briefing dutifully recorded the agonizing details of how Apple sees its “pro” user base and how it prioritizes desktop functionality:

The Mac Pro is getting a major do-over [Mashable]
Apple pushes the reset button on the Mac Pro [TechCrunch]
The Mac Pro Lives [Daring Fireball, who at least added some more reflection]

Journalists not invited to the same briefing tended to go to an angle more like this:
Apple admits the Mac Pro was a mess [The Verge]

There are two questions here, though, as I see it.

Question one: what’s a pro user, anyway?

It’s easy to dump on Apple here, but one thing I will say is that they’ve historically understood the first question better than any of their competition. Gruber was actually the only writer who seemed to pick up on Apple’s intention there. And, frankly, the results were telling. One big revelation (if an unsurprising one): most Mac users aren’t pro users. Defining the percentage of Mac users who use apps for serious creation and software development as pros at least once a week, Apple found only 30% of users count. For more regular use, that number drops to 15%. And notebook computers (MacBook) dominate both that pro market and the overall Mac user base, at 80% (I think that’s by revenue, not number).

Catering to slivers of that group can’t be easy. When users talk about “pros,” what they really mean is themselves, individually. And that market is full of endless variation.

CDM readers are routinely doing far more specialized things, like virtual reality experiments or live visuals or running 3D game engines onstage or programming robotic drum ensembles. That may sound extreme to even cite as an example, but remember that over the years Apple Computer (under Jobs but also under other CEOs) did sometimes refer to exactly those kinds of weird edge cases in, you know, expensive TV ads. In fact, today, you still see edge cases cited in iOS ads.

Question two: what hardware do you make for that user?

If pro users are by a definition an edge case, and desktop a subset of that, and advanced desktop another slice, we’re talking ever-smaller bit. It’s not totally clear what Apple sees as important to that group, actually – and it’s even murkier what they intend to do. Here’s what Apple did clearly say publicly, though it was more about what they aren’t doing than what they are:

What they aren’t doing:
They’re not shipping new iMacs until later this year.
They’re not shipping a new Mac Pro in 2017.
They’re not shipping a new dedicated display in 2017.
They’re not shipping a largescreen dedicated touchscreen or a product like the Surface Studio, and they say the Mac Pro user they’re targeting isn’t interested in that.

What they will be doing in the future:
There will be a new iMac this year, and it will cater to pro specs.
There will be some kind of ground-up redesign of the Mac Pro, and it will be “modular” (which I could interpret from context only as meaning there’s no integrated display).
There will be a display to go with it.

What they didn’t entirely rule out:
Federighi followed up ruling out touch for the Mac Pro user by mentioning a “two-prong desktop strategy with both iMac and Mac Pro.” (I wouldn’t interpret that as a promise of a touch iMac, but it did seem to leave the door open. Then again, he also was responding to the question of the Microsoft Surface Studio, which seems a lot like what a touch iMac would be.)

What they’re shipping right now:
There’s a new Mac Pro configuration. You won’t want it, though, as it only swaps a new CPU and GPU config for the existing model – so you’re still stuck without modern ports (Thunderbolt 3, USB-C). It’s also bloody expensive:

US$2,999 now buys you a 6-core Intel Xeon processor, dual AMD FirePro D500 GPUs and 16GB of memory. That’s £2,999.00 (UK)/ €3,399 (Germany).

US$3,999 gets you an 8-core processor and dual D700 GPUs. £3,899.00 (UK) / € 4,599.00 (Germany).

Each of those has 256GB of internal storage. It does not include a mouse, keyboard, or display. Memory, storage, and graphics are upgradeable options, but they’re expensive — the base model with 32GB of RAM and 1TB of internal storage will run you US$3,999. (Maximum is 64GB of RAM, 1TB of SSD.)

Those are middle-of-the-road CPU and GPU specs, too, given what’s now available in desktop factors in larger form factors.

What did we learn?

Uh… nothing? Well, we learned that Apple isn’t eliminating the iMac or the Mac Pro. We just have no idea what they’ll look like.

Look, I’ll be honest: this is weird. Apple has a decades-long record, under multiple different leadership teams, that demonstrate the importance of letting shipping products do the talking rather than future products, and focusing on user stories over specs. Today feels a bit like there was a transporter accident and we a reverse-universe Apple that did the opposite.

The only thing missing was Tim Cook showing up with a beard.

Windows I think has some opportunities here – not least because Apple for some reason decided to make headline news of its own shortcomings rather than its strengths. In theory, the Windows PC ecosystem has always been better positioned to cater to specific edge cases through hardware variety, and things like music and motion qualify. In practice, though, it’s down to whoever delivers the best user experience and overall value.

If Windows continues to improve the OS experience and offer competitive hardware options, I don’t doubt that we’ll see some re-balancing of the OSes used by creative users.

This is nothing new; we’ve seen regular oscillations between platforms for decades. But I think the next months will be revealing; you compete with what you’re shipping, and PC makers keep shipping new stuff while Apple isn’t.

The post Apple announces that they’re not ready to announce new pro hardware appeared first on CDM Create Digital Music.

The first generation of CDs is already rotting and dying

Digital media is a double-edged sword. Digital data itself can be duplicated an unlimited number of times without any generational loss – meaning it can theoretically last forever. But digital storage on physical media is subject to failure – and that failure can render the data inaccessible. In other words, archivists (including you) have to transfer data before the media fails.

And we’re already entering an age when one of the most popular formats is reaching the start point for common failures.

A report by Tedium (republished by Motherboard) demonstrates one of the most alarming failures. Some media, evidently using faulty dyes, can fail in under ten years, via something unpleasantly dubbed “disc rot.”

The Hidden Phenomenon That Could Ruin Your Old Discs

At issue is the fact that optical media uses a combination of different chemicals and manufacturing processes. That means that while the data storage and basic manufacturing of a disc are standardized, the particulars of how it was fabricated aren’t. Particular makes and particular batches are subject to different aging characteristics. And with some of these failures occurring in less than ten years, we’re finding out just how susceptible discs are outside of lab test conditions.

In short, these flaws appear to be fairly widespread.

That just deals with a particular early failure, however. In general, CD formats start to fail in significant numbers inside 20 years – on average, not just including these rot-prone flawed media.

What’s tough about this is that the lifespan can be really unpredictable. Before you dismiss the CD as a flawed storage format, many discs do reach a ridiculously long lifespan. The problem is really the variability.

To get an accurate picture, you need to study a big collection of different discs from a lot of different sources. Enter the United States of America’s Library of Congress, who have just that. In 2009, they did an exhaustive study of disc life in their collection – and found at least some discs will be usable in the 28th Century (seriously). The research is pretty scientific, but here’s an important conclusion:

The mean lifetime for the disc population as a whole was calculated to be 776 years for the discs used in this study. As demonstrated in the histograms in Figures 18 and 19, that lifetime could be less than 25 years for some discs, up to 500 years for others, and even longer.

COMPACT DISC SERVICE LIFE: AN INVESTIGATION OF THE ESTIMATED SERVICE LIFE OF PRERECORDED COMPACT DISCS (CD-ROM) [PDF, Preservation Directorate, Library of Congress]

Other research found failures around 20-25 years. That explains why we’re hearing about this problem round about now – the CD format was unveiled in 1982, and by the 90s we all had a variety of optical disc storage to deal with.

There are two takeaways – one is obviously duplicating vital information on a regular basis. The other, perhaps more important solution, is better storage. The Library of Congress found that even CDs at the low end of life expectancy (like 25 years) could improve that lifespan by twenty five times if stored at 5 degrees C (41 degrees F) and 30% relative humidity. So, better put that vital collectors’ DVD in the fridge, it seems. That means instead of your year-2000 disc failing in 2025, it fails in the 27th Century. (I hear we have warp-capable starships long before then.)

But anyone using discs for backup and storage on their own should take this even more seriously, because numerous studies find that writeable CD media – as we purchased with optical drives in the 90s – are even more susceptible to failure.

There are many other issues around CDs, including scratch and wear. See this nice overview, with some do’s and don’ts:

CD and DVD Lifetime and Maintenance [wow, 2007 Blogger!]

Or more:
CDs Are Not Forever: The Truth About CD/DVD Longevity, “Mold” & “Rot” [makeuseof]

I’ve seen some people comment that this is a reason to use vinyl. But that misses the point. For music, analog storage media still are at a disadvantage. They still suffer from physical degradation, and reasonably quickly. For digital media, hard disc failures are even more frequent than CDs (think under three years in many cases), and network-based storage with backups more or less eliminates the problems of aging generally, in that data is always kept in at least two places.

The failure of CDs seems to be more of a case of marketing getting divorced from science. We’re never free of the constraints of the physical world. As an archivist will tell you, we have to simple adapt – from duplication to climate control.

But I’d say generally, with network-connected storage and automation, digital preservation is now better than ever. The failure point is humans; if you think about this stuff, you can solve it.

The post The first generation of CDs is already rotting and dying appeared first on CDM Create Digital Music.

Why KORG Gadget on the Mac is a big deal

Remember when some pundits thought we were all going to dump our laptops and switch to tablets and iPads? So – not so much. But mobile platforms are having a big impact on music software – and KORG Gadget, now making the leap from iOS to Mac, may be most emblematic of that.

Who is KORG Gadget for? Well, sort of for everyone. Beginning users can find it a nice way to play around – and might well try this before desktop software. More advanced users are likely to find it an appealing set of tools, but would want to use it to extend other hardware and software – on the go, or integrated with those tools when they’re at home or in the studio ready to work.

If you haven’t tried it and you’ve got an iPad (or iPhone, even), Gadget is great – fun to play, lots of tools, and lots of great sounds. KORG also have nailed the smart approach of adding modules in a way that’s fun, so that adding additional instruments feels a bit like getting a new cartridge for your Game Boy or adding a stomp box to your pedalboard.

Gadget started on these Apple things.

Gadget started on these Apple things.

Now, adding Mac support fills in some gaps – especially because of how KORG has gone about it. This looks like a template for what software development in 2017 should be:

Social. Allihoopa is just emerging as a way of sharing music with other producers, but KORG are embracing it. (The sharing site began its life with Propellerhead before being spun off. So naturally Reason, Figure, and Take all have integration – and KORG Gadget, too.) That seems essential, given the signal-to-noise problems sharing music online.

Synced. Ableton Link support, also quickly becoming a must, means you can sync with Ableton Live, Reason, Maschine, and other apps on desktop, plus loads of apps on iOS – so, easy local sync on your computer between software tools, easy sync between computers, easy sync with mobile, whether you’re playing alone or jamming with other people.

Wireless. There’s Bluetooth MIDI support, too. For new users, this means the possibility of using hardware without thinking about wires and MIDI adapters.

It makes sense on your computer screen. Full-screen apps are a bit silly on the more generous screen real estate on your desktop, so KORG have opted for a four-app split-screen approach that makes loads of sense.

Complete plug-in support, when you want it. AU (for Logic and GarageBand), AAX (for Pro Tools), and VST (for everything else) are all supported. There’s even NKS support, which lets you integrate with Native Instruments hardware and software easily. (For instance, you’ll get physical controls on NI’s Maschine hardware and keyboards.) The upshot of this: all those clever independent instruments and effects from the iPad are now just as modular on the desktop, dropped into whatever your software of choice is.

On the go and back again. The whole point of this, of course, is the ability to complete workflows between desktop and mobile seamlessly. And that’s where a lot of conventional software from Native Instruments, Ableton, Propellerhead, and others are a little uneven (partly because they began their life on desktop). Here, you have essentially the same tools in both places.

Gadget on the Mac also brings some new devices – a 16-pad drum machine, and two new audio recording tools.

But there are two paths here – the beginner and the more advanced user. Beginners may find this a way to start to take steps from mobile to desktop tools (and hardware). Advanced users may come from the opposite direction – trying Gadget with or without an iPad, and integrating on-the-go or casual use with sitting down seriously at a computer and finishing a track.

This gets us out of a cul-de-sac in music making software that we’ve been stuck in for a few years. Desktop software has always tended to be more complex and larger, with fairly monolithic tools that try to appeal to everyone, but then tend to turn off newcomers. Mobile software may seem like a way out of that, except that the low price points users demand on the app stores make it hard to justify development costs. Innovation on both tends to be stymied by those same problems.

So, imagine instead that you combine the benefits of both.

KORG Gadget is then just one small step. And it’s also limited to Apple platforms – just as Windows gets a bunch of interesting hardware. But it could be a nice sign of things to come.

We’ll be watching closely to see how KORG prices Gadget on the Mac versus mobile, what the experience is like on desktop (since we’re judging only by iOS), and who embraces it.

But it’s very nice to see an option like this that looks friendly to beginners, without forcing advanced users to give up their way of working. We’ll be eager to test it.

Also, lest it seem like I’m waxing poetic about Gadget for no reason — I’m very much indebted to other people who have spent loads of time working out how to get the most out of it and making great music. Our friend Jakob Haq has done some nineteen videos so far for Gadget alone, and it’s chock full of tips and musical inspiration.

Have a look – as these videos might be relevant to you for the first time if you’re on the Mac but don’t have an iPad:

http://www.korg.com/us/products/software/korg_gadget/

The post Why KORG Gadget on the Mac is a big deal appeared first on CDM Create Digital Music.

Sennheiser wants to bring 3D audio recording to the masses

The consumer electronic drive to high definition and virtual reality is having a curious, parallel impact on sound. And so it is that Sennheiser now want to market binaural recording to your average smartphone owner – really.

Now, of course, the normal human perception of reality includes both visual depth perception and the ability to localize sound in a 360-degree sphere around the head. That is, provided only one’s eyes and ears are fully functional and each pair is intact, the human brain adapts to these perceptions.

But “3D” visuals and “3D” sounds aren’t themselves directly connected in terms of technology. Firstly, until we begin connecting directly to the human brain, any of the tech billed as 3D is illusory, aimed only at creating sensations that remind us of our normal perception. (And, remarkably, for years even two-dimensional images and monophonic sound sources do a pretty reasonable job!)

From a marketing standpoint, though, the connection is more real than ever.

And what I think may be exciting to music and audio enthusiasts is that this means specialist technology we’ve loved for years is suddenly becoming mainstream.

ambeo-smart-surround_3

Sennheiser’s AMBEO isn’t itself revolutionary, apart from the fact that it’s marketed to the masses. It’s a binaural microphone recording system that adds mics to conventional in-ear headphones. The personal nature of audio here offers an advantage: because you recorded with your own skull wearing the headphones, you’ll be able to play back the same recording with what I imagine is a sensation of “being there” again. That is, the mics were in your own head, so the sound will seem to you to be natural.

There’s also an accompanying VR microphone with a capsule pictured here, though Sennheiser haven’t provided any other details of that. I’ll try to get hands-on with this hardware soon.

Sennheiser haven't said much about this mic. Technologically, it's unrelated - basically, it seems to be a 3-capsule condenser for more precise spatialization. But it also demonstrates that more products are coming under the 3D sound rubric.

Sennheiser haven’t said much about this mic. Technologically, it’s unrelated – basically, it seems to be a 3-capsule condenser for more precise spatialization. But it also demonstrates that more products are coming under the 3D sound rubric.

Sennheiser makes a really weird claim in the press release – they say that they contributed to the first wave of binaural audio by introducing the first open-ear headphones. Uh – no. But that said, I think Sennheiser are the ideal brand to introduce this tech to the listening public, especially with their combined prowess in mics and headphones and their ability to produce both leading pro and leading consumer solutions.

ambeo-smart-surround_remote

There is an element missing here. So, these binaural recordings will sound really three-dimensional – to you. But give them to someone else, and because they’re essentially listening to a recording made with your skull, the results won’t be as effective. What’s cool about the AMBEO line, though, is it’s the first step. The next step, I think, will be self-calibration routines in software.

And we’re practically there already. Remember that 3D scanning app Microsoft showed lately? If you can take produce a three-dimensional model with your phone, you can adjust sound playback for each listener’s heads.

It’s going to look a little weird doing the calibration routine, in that you’ll be waving your phone around your head, magician style. But you would only do that once for each listener – and there’s no special hardware to wear, either. (Take that, VR helmets.)

This is also the latest evidence in why the move to digital headphones and away from headphone jacks isn’t necessarily such a bad thing.

That said, the connector is an issue. Whereas Android vendors are using a standard USB-C port, Apple continue to insist on Lightning. To add insult to injury, they’ve missed the opportunity to add their own proprietary port to their own line of laptops – I think there’s absolutely no rational explanation for why the new MacBook Pro standardizes on USB-C but lacks Lightning, unless Apple are planning to themselves dump Lightning for USB-C.

ambeo-smart-surround

But let’s not get too hung up on that. The long view is still a positive one.

And it involves not one but two transformations. Not only do you start recording and playing back sound in a way that’s more naturally spatialized than stereo, but you open new possibilities by adding dedicated microphones to headphones.

We’re entering an age that could really change how people listen and record sound. There are applications for deep listening, field recordings, sound walks, for acoustic ecology and sound sensing, for fitness applications that are mindful of exposure to sound and potential hearing damage. Oh, yeah, and … I for one welcome all the mad amounts of bootlegging that will invariably occur. But maybe that’s because I always flake and don’t record my sets.

Mark my words: even if this specific Sennheiser product flops, this stuff is the future. And it’s been a long time coming.

Capture your world in 3D

The post Sennheiser wants to bring 3D audio recording to the masses appeared first on CDM Create Digital Music.

Surprise, Final Cut Pro could be the MacBook’s killer feature

Here’s an unexpected twist in the plot: Final Cut Pro, the product that perhaps more than any other earned ire from users for not being “pro,” might be the thing that sells you on the Mac.

Why? Final Cut Pro is really, really fast.

After all, paper specs don’t matter. It’s really world performance in the software you use that counts. And there, Final Cut Pro is a bit of a champ.

Indie tech reporter / filmmaker Jonathan Morrison has a snappy review that gets to the point.

Now, first, you’ll read a lot of reviews complaining the MacBook Pro isn’t really “Pro.” They mean that literally. Apple inexplicably made a clearly differentiated line, with a 13″ with only two USB-C ports and no Touch Bar, and then 13″ models with USB-C ports, a Touch Bar, and faster graphics. But they didn’t give the low-end model a different name, like MacBook, which means there’s no point to having anything called “Pro” anyway.

More on the models in a moment.

But the important thing in Jonathan’s review is the speed of Final Cut Pro versus Premiere, the other popular choice. His benchmark is just an H.264 render, but that’s exactly the kind of thing you’d notice when you’re up against a deadline – and even with a slower CPU inside, the Mac smokes the PC.

Johnathan isn’t the only one pointing this out. In fact, I’d say Final Cut is generally fast enough that you actually feel the different subjectively. You can toss loads of high-res footage at the software and you’re almost never waiting for a render. For sheer performance, Final Cut and Compressor are a beautiful combination.

And sure enough, liking Final Cut Pro X makes pros feel differently about the Mac. Here’s another example:
One Professional’s Look At The New MacBook Pro [Huffington Post]

That writer is an editor with Trim Editing in London. As he puts it:

First off, It’s really fast. I’ve been using the MacBook Pro with the new version of FCP X and cutting 5k ProRes material all week, it’s buttery smooth. No matter what you think the specs say, the fact is the software and hardware are so well integrated it tears strips off “superior spec’d” Windows counterparts in the real world. This has always been true of Macs.

He also praises Touch Bar support in Final Cut, which is to me definitely a place where it makes lots of sense, since video editing necessarily includes a lot of contextually specific parameters and commands. I can also imagine it’s handy when editing on the go (at least until Apple unveils an external Touch Bar keyboard, which they really ought to do).

This still may not necessarily be a reason to buy the new Macs – but it might be a reason to look at, say, a spec’ed out previous-generation model on sale. And it’s definitely something to consider when comparing Mac and Windows laptops.

Also, what was largely missed in the midst of the hullabaloo over the laptop was a significant update to Final Cut Pro X software.

screenshot_644

Meet 10.3

Final Cut Pro X 10.3 is simply the first update in the X series to actually be excited about.

Most noticeably, there’s an all-new look. It’s amazing to me how much of a difference this makes, even if it’s partly psychological. The UI is cleaner, even though structurally it’s the same fundamental UI from the previous Final Cut Pro X. That means more room to work and less of a feeling that the UI is distracting.

Just as importantly as the fact that the UI’s new aesthetics mean more room, you can finally make custom window layouts or hide the Timeline or stick the Timeline on another display. You can also use Thunderbolt to drive an external display.

So, it’s fast, and the UI is nice. That’s little comfort if you just don’t like the way you edit in FCP X (especially if you were an FCP 7 devotee or switched over to Premiere).

But Apple has worked on the Magnetic Timeline, too. First off, I think audio handling in Final Cut is now more enjoyable than any program since Vegas, and that one came from an audio developer. You can use audio “roles” to fluidly view, manage, and edit complex project audio. Roles and color coding are generally expanded.

There’s also Wide Color support, which works in conjunction with those new Mac displays.

Deeper down, there are lots of minor improvements that add up to the program feeling more intuitive, including enhancements to the already-terrific multicam support in FCP X.

Parts of the program still feel like iMovie Pro rather than Final Cut, but then Premiere can sometimes go there, too.

I don’t think this will necessarily win you over if you’re more productive editing in Premiere. But I do think that Apple has done a lot to finally address the stuff that annoyed users about Final Cut, and to hammer a lot of quality issues. If you haven’t used Final Cut Pro lately, you really won’t be aware of this stuff.

I still don’t understand why things like video export in QuickTime are hobbled (requiring a trip to Compressor), but I can say there’s at least some reason to use this program.

Also, I’d love to see that dark UI in Logic. Given the new direction of Final Cut, I’m really curious to see where Logic Pro goes next.

There’s a lot in 10.3; see it here:
Final Cut Pro X release notes

Ouch. It hurts.

Ouch. It hurts.

So, back to those MacBooks…

It’s not just the product; it’s also how you tell the story of the product. And I think there’s no question that Apple told the story of the new MacBook Pro poorly – at least from the pro perspective. Consumers may well have warmed to product.

Certainly, it’s selling well:
2016 MacBook Pro Sales Defy Critics: Tops All New Laptops With Shoppers

Mostly what that says to me is that people shopping don’t really worry about reviews here. For one, I think a lot of people still just want a Mac. All they needed to know here was that new models had arrived, at last. Also, the complaint from me and other pro users was not that the MacBook Pro was generally deficient, only that it didn’t match our own expectations and needs.

What I will say about the new Mac line – it’s really expensive, even with Apple discounting its adapters.

The basic 13″ model, without the Touch Bar, starts at US$1499 with an anemic 256MB of storage and 8GB of RAM, plus slightly slower graphics, and only a 2GHz dual-core Intel i5. Now, you could certainly dispense with the Touch Bar and just load that model up with RAM and storage, but then you’re stuck with only two Thunderbolt ports. Since one of those is used for power, that’s probably not going to make you very happy.

So, more likely you start with the US$1999 model, which finally gets you 512MB internal storage. Upgrade it to 1TB internal storage and 16GB of RAM and you’re at $2599 for a 13″ dual-core notebook with no dedicated GPU. That’s… pretty crazy.

For quad-core CPU and dedicated GPU, you really want the 15″ model. Even the basic model, with only a 2GB GPU, is going to run you $2999 for 16GB RAM / 1TB HD. Upgrade the CPU and GPU one step and you’re at $3499.

So, why would you do it? Well, there are certainly some advantages in Apple’s court.

All reviews of the display have been terrific, and it does give you full color.

Those hard drives are best-of-breed fast, faster than what you get in competing models – which partly explains Apple’s higher price. (But that means you do really want to upgrade them to more storage space when you purchase, since otherwise you can’t take much advantage of it working with media.)

The Touch Bar, while a gimmick, does appear to offer some useful customizable shortcuts, though I wish it included haptic feedback when you touch it.

I’ll be honest, though. On a budget, I’d be inclined to get a high-end model of the last generation MacBook Pro – especially if I were using a desktop monitor and not so worried about the improvements to brightness and color gamut.

Also, anyone considering the new models would do well to wait a few months while the accessory situation for USB-C and Thunderbolt becomes clearer. I haven’t heard audio manufacturers certifying these machines yet, and anyone spending this much on a notebook computer will want to avoid any potential compatibility issues.

Early compatibility tests are not encouraging. I think it’s better to wait and get some data on what works reliably – and maybe see if there are driver or OS updates, too.

Look, Apple’s products are exceptionally reliable, exceptionally cool and quiet (which matters a lot in audio), and exceptionally high end.

The reason some of us are looking elsewhere is, this is enough of a price/performance difference to shop around. Windows has done a lot of improvement in the audio side. And on the live visual side, having a GPU is a real advantage. My friend Tarik Bari, for instance, was an early adopter of the apparently now-defunct Mac Pro. It meant the ability to drive high-res visuals. And Tarik is a huge macOS fan. Now, I know even Tarik was frustrated with the latest Mac offerings, as is everyone I talk to who does live visuals. This is probably a niche so small we number in the dozens, but – that’s the nature of the general-purpose PC as a product. It serves lots of tiny niches.

For sheer GPU power, laptops like the Razer Blade give you desktop GPUs in a form factor and price that’s similar to Mac laptops that lack even dedicated GPUs.

I’m eager to try one to see if fan noise is distracting.

Meanwhile, the Dell XPS line is a good tradeoff – modern specs, not quite the latest gaming GPU as the Razer, but well balanced. One of my colleagues has this in the office, and it’s a really fine machine. It’s quiet, it’s fast, the display and build are great, and … oh yeah, it’s dramatically cheaper than the Apple.

Should Adobe just go and make Premiere faster? Yes, please. Imagine what it could do on this fast hardware if given the chance. But meanwhile, with a diverse range of apps, these specs actually should transfer into real-world performance.

Check the spec sheets on any of these – every Mac user I know who has was floored. You get all the new ports (like Thunderbolt 3) without having to give up basic amenities – proof that this isn’t just Apple “looking forward.” And the price is certainly competitive. You can also (cough) go the Hackintosh route with these machines. (Not that I’m supposed to say that, of course.)

Also, I agree with long-time Mac advocates lamenting the loss of the Mac Pro.

So that’s the equation. Apple’s still the high-end option, and still appealing if money is no object. But their offerings are limited to mid-range GPU hardware (charitably), not the latest gear, and the price difference is pretty huge.

The post Surprise, Final Cut Pro could be the MacBook’s killer feature appeared first on CDM Create Digital Music.