Run a serious studio from a MacBook Pro?

OK, So I am about to buy a new computer very soon, been talking about for long enough I know!

However....

Since my 15" 2015 2.8 quad core 16gb RAM Macbook Pro had its battery replaced as part of a recall, the fans hardly ever kick in, its silent 90% of the time, if its a really intense project with CPU hungry plug ins, then the fan is noticeable (but not unbearable) for a few minutes.

Other than this, I can run huge Logic sessions with automation, plugs ins, 50+ tracks, with no problems whatsoever, I never need to freeze tracks, never get any glitches or spinning wheels etc!

This makes me wonder, is this computer fine to run a small pro studio? or would people not take a studio seriously that is ran from a laptop!?

The big question is what can a small pro studio that consists of a laptop and an audio interface do that any other laptop with an audio interface can't ? In other words - why would people want to come to you and pay money instead of doing it themselves for free ? Can you offer things like:

- a great recording room with optimized acoustic treatment, ideally with either a big and still isolated window or none at all (check out Realworld's big room)

- a great control room with optimized acoustic treatment so you can actually hear what you do

- a great working atmosphere so musicians want to give their best

- years of expertise in recording anything from an angsty teen squealing into a microphone for the first time in her life to a full blown 6-piece band recording with 28 mics open and a separate headphone mix for everyone

- great people skills to make sure you can push a reasonably sized recording session along with good results and happy clients who will want to come back for more

- extraordinary stamina to survive long hours of endlessly dropping in at the same point of that guitar solo

- knowing which one of your large collection of mics is suited best to record that accordeon

- knowing how to deal with clients that surprisingly don't have the money to pay for the session and at the same time proudly show off their new tattoo

- knowing how to pull in clients that can actually contribute to the large investment that a small pro studio actually is

If you have checked all these boxes, then you will realize that the computer is the least of your worries.

Great reply fuzzfilth,

Thank you, much appreciated

knowing how to deal with clients that surprisingly don't have the money to pay for the session and at the same time proudly show off their new tattoo

Or the endless lowballing as well: "well I don't have the money now, but when I get it, can you record 3 songs for 150 bucks? It shouldn't take more than 2 hours, we know the songs."

Because getting drum sounds is a thing of 5 minutes.

It's 2020 and Billie Eilish won the grammies from her bedroom, i don't think anyone cares anymore

If you have checked all these boxes, then you will realize that the computer is the least of your worries.

Yes, it's actually the converters

i had a studio in times square for several years; everyone wanted time in exchange for a 'percentage of the song', or needed a favor (a mix, a vocal session, etc). when i said 'no, here's my rate'... a lot of people vanished.

when i closed the studio, i felt soooo good... until i started back up on the lower east side. now i record elsewhere, and mix at home. and love that...

but back to the subject at hand; i worked for several years (more recently) on a 13" macbook pro... and got my work done. so a new macbook pro should do well. just go for the best processor, and 16gb ram, reboot before a session, and only open logic; let that always be the focus during a session...

best processor can be an unnecessary expense in the new models.

The i7s in the 13" barely outperform the i5s, and the i9s... are thermally limited anyway.

best processor can be an unnecessary expense in the new models.

The i7s in the 13" barely outperform the i5s, and the i9s... are thermally limited anyway.

i would go for, at least, the i7 over the i5, at the absolute least...

just a quick google search (& you can find mac-specific info as well, of course):

https://www.pcmag.com/news/which-cpu-should-you-buy-intel-core-i5-vs-i7

best processor can be an unnecessary expense in the new models.

The i7s in the 13" barely outperform the i5s, and the i9s... are thermally limited anyway.

 

i would go for, at least, the i7 over the i5, at the absolute least...

 

just a quick google search (& you can find mac-specific info as well, of course):

 

https://www.pcmag.com/news/which-cpu-should-you-buy-intel-core-i5-vs-i7

I was in the same conundrum, then took a peak at sustain multicore performance and went with the i5 - identical chip sans slightly lower clock, which gets neutered by cooling when boosting anyway.

since having it for a year, i never once regretted that i bought the i5 in the MBP.

As far as i7 vs i9 in the 2018 15" - also because of thermal neutering, i9 didn't get a single track more in most benchmarks.

i5 vs i7 vs i9 is a bit moot nowadays... They don't tell you much about the chip anymore.

 

i would go for, at least, the i7 over the i5, at the absolute least...

 

just a quick google search (& you can find mac-specific info as well, of course):

 

https://www.pcmag.com/news/which-cpu-should-you-buy-intel-core-i5-vs-i7

I was in the same conundrum, then took a peak at sustain multicore performance and went with the i5 - identical chip sans slightly lower clock, which gets neutered by cooling when boosting anyway.

since having it for a year, i never once regretted that i bought the i5 in the MBP.

As far as i7 vs i9 in the 2018 15" - also because of thermal neutering, i9 didn't get a single track more in most benchmarks.

i5 vs i7 vs i9 is a bit moot nowadays... They don't tell you much about the chip anymore.

i hear you ploki, but, based on my own research and observations (having owned both i5 & i7 macs), i stand by my point (not to be difficult!).

i hear you ploki, but, based on my own research and observations (having owned both i5 & i7 macs), i stand by my point (not to be difficult!).

you're technically right.

chips are better (even if marginally), but Apple planned for the 10nm chips in these enclosures, and it just never happened, hence the 33% volume increase of the 16".

The chips themselves are better - the cooling however, doesn't let them breathe

also to note: i5 used to mean no hyperthreading (and often less cores to begin with), but intel screwed everything up, now its nearly identical chips, just different bin. (in some cases, but not all)

my point isnt that there isn't a difference between i5 and i7, my point is that i5 and i7 have become worthless and confusing as descriptors, especially in thermally constrained systems, and by simply going for i9 vs i7 vs i5 won't necessarily do much for performance. Or, it might do a lot.

It's also that the performance increase might not benefit your particular workload at all... which is another aspect to consider.

In short, intel made it really hard to gauge performance of newer chips...

Here's the lineup:

i.e., from current lineup:

MBP 13:

i5 4 cores, HT, 8th gen chip, 6MB cache, iris pro 655

i7 4 cores, HT, 8th gen, 8mb cache, iris pro 655

16" 2019:

i7 6 cores, HT, 9th gen, 12MB

i9 2.3, 8 cores, HT 9th gen, 16MB.

i9 2.4, 8 cores. HT. 9th gen, 16MB

Only difference is turbo and base clock 0.1GHz, and turbo is constrained by the enclosure so both top out at 3.3-3.4GHz multicore. Same two chips in 15" 2019 top out at 3.1GHz due to weaker thermals. It will probably get better bursts on single core (4.8 vs 5.0 max boost)... but that doesnt happen much in audio.

Mac Mini:

i3 4-cores, no HT, 8th gen

i5 6-cores, no HT, 8th gen

i7 6-cores, HT, 8th gen

iMac 21.5" same as mini

imac 27"

i5 6-cores, no HT, 9th gen

i9 8-cores, HT, 9th gen

there's no rules, they're not even the same generation. It's horrible, and unless you know the exact lineup its really hard to tell anything from the iX monikers alone

best processor can be an unnecessary expense in the new models.

The i7s in the 13" barely outperform the i5s, and the i9s... are thermally limited anyway.

Im not running a home studio but is a 13 inch max spec good for using lots of virtual instruments?

I'm searching for a laptop (yep, it has to be a refurb Dell/HP/Lenovo/Fujitsu etc. Hackbook from 2012-14, my budget ends at 200 euros). So it going to be a 3rd gen i5 (4th gen are performing roughly the same in that pricerange) - you rich bastards! But it looks like my tracks are going to be 75 % audios, and 25 % SI's, so I'll manage.

Once I get my first musical or filmscore (never abandon dreaming), I'm going for a 2015 15 inch MBP.

I'm searching for a laptop (yep, it has to be a refurb Dell/HP/Lenovo/Fujitsu etc. Hackbook from 2012-14, my budget ends at 200 euros). So it going to be a 3rd gen i5 (4th gen are performing roughly the same in that pricerange) - you rich bastards! But it looks like my tracks are going to be 75 % audios, and 25 % SI's, so I'll manage.

Once I get my first musical or filmscore (never abandon dreaming), I'm going for a 2015 15 inch MBP.

You will be well happy with the 2014 15" MBP, no T2 Chip, 2 USB ports, HDMi port, two TB2 Ports, fast, reliable, robust, stable!