Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The impact of Apple Silicon Macs on Broadway

brianli.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 294 posts

Re: The impact of Apple Silicon Macs on Broadway

#281

Post by marcan_42 »

saagarjha wrote: post #229
marcan_42 wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well yes, x86 macs in those classes were using underpowered Intel CPUs :-). That said, I've yet to see any serious benchmarks of this kind of workload. We know the M1 is fast for single threaded UI code (fast as heck atomics sure help with ObjC reference counting), but that says nothing about SIMD and floating-point heavy audio processing. Rosetta adds overhead to that, potentially a lot vs native ARM code, depending…

See https://lemire.me/blog/2020/12/13/arm-macbook-vs-intel-macbo... for SIMD performance. M1 is fairly competitive even under Rosetta. Also, if your audio code is self-modifying, I really have no idea what you could possibly be doing.

Self-modifying code is just one example. The point is there is no way to positively identify all basic block entry points on x86 (especially due to its variable-length instructions). That means that there is always the possibility that the AoT didn't catch everything, and then your plug-in takes a novel uncached codepath at some point, the JIT fires, and you get a real-time constraint violation and a drop out.

Also, audio companies sometimes like to use "fun" DRM/copy protection systems.

Besides, audio apps themselves doing JIT would not be unheard of. For example, that'd be a very efficient way of implementing a modular synth. Those apps could JIT in a realtime-safe way; Rosetta can't (it doesn't have enough info).

Re: The impact of Apple Silicon Macs on Broadway

#282

Post by andy_ppp »

sonotmyname wrote: post #242
andy_ppp wrote: post #28

What high end sample libraries do they use? Also to be fair the Korg D1 sounds perfect for this and only around $600 each...

A Kong D1 is just a keyboard- it can’t run Mainstage, store gigs of samples, or run a DAW...

I know, the point I’m making is (if you read the article) you don’t have to spend $3000+++ on keyboards. The D1 has an amazing action but is still reasonably priced. Used as a midi keyboard with all the things you mentioned it’s fine/designed for exactly this.

Re: The impact of Apple Silicon Macs on Broadway

#283

Post by amatecha »

geerlingguy wrote: post #132
amatecha wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, when I started out with the first Intel Core Mac Mini, I bounced down most of my effects-heavy tracks, though I did this pretty begrudgingly. Fortunately Logic has a great feature where you can "Freeze" a track to a "bounced"/rendered audio file -- if you want to make edits to the effects, you can un-Freeze, make your changes and re-Freeze. Only downside is, this takes up precious time when you're trying to be…

I remember seeing ProTools and other audio workstations around my city still running on old 68K Macs for years after the PPC transition because they worked, had crazy-expensive licenses, and were treated more like racked equipment than traditional computers.

Yeah, audio/musician guys I know were using PowerMac G4 towers years into Apple's "Intel" transition. And yeah, "upgrading" means basically tossing away a perfectly good $1k piece of software and paying nearly as much for an upgrade license.

Re: The impact of Apple Silicon Macs on Broadway

#284

Post by archi42 »

wezen wrote: post #244
archi42 wrote: post #77

I'm puzzled why there is such a strong dependency on Mac? I mean, the M1 looks pretty nice; but if the author is budget constrained AND the hardware is too slow, wouldn't "normal" computers with Windows/Linux make much more sense anyway? I fondly recall how a good friend of mine was impressed by the compute performance of the Apple based workstations at her university. I convinced her to get a PC for the same cost as…

How much does it cost to build a Intel/AMD computer with performance comparable to a m1 Mac mini?

The author talks about his past experience, so did I. Back in 2014 the 1500 Euro Mac was beaten in image manipulating workloads (Adobe stuff) by a PC of the same price range.

Today, for a proper answer I'd had to check specific benchmarks and compare prices. If noise is no problem (e.g. separate tech room backstage, where the power amps live) used server hardware could be a reliable and performant option on the cheap.

Re: The impact of Apple Silicon Macs on Broadway

#285

Post by someperson »

imron wrote: post #250
wezen wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does their performance compare to a m1 Mac mini?

Appallingly

Citation needed. There are Ryzen 5 mini PCs with active cooling [1]. You don't need to use an Intel chip manufactured on an aging 14 nanometer node.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLATODi7KlU

Re: The impact of Apple Silicon Macs on Broadway

#286

Post by archi42 »

blymd wrote: post #106
archi42 wrote: post #77

I'm puzzled why there is such a strong dependency on Mac? I mean, the M1 looks pretty nice; but if the author is budget constrained AND the hardware is too slow, wouldn't "normal" computers with Windows/Linux make much more sense anyway? I fondly recall how a good friend of mine was impressed by the compute performance of the Apple based workstations at her university. I convinced her to get a PC for the same cost as…

Software we use is only available for macOS. Also, Mac mini availability across the world is important. Lastly Mac mini form factor is perfect for the use case.

I suspected so. Excuse my rant, and it's not directed at you, but the software companies only supporting macOS: I never understood that crap. Only offering macOS forces their customers (e.g. you) into the Apple lock-in, eliminating them from choosing the best hardware for the task.

Directed at you: I would try to avoid such software, and look for alternatives. (I expect this to be futile?).

x86 is available across the world as well. Others already pointed out comparable form factors.

Also, computerhardware reliability is pretty good these days. Maybe you could set up a scheme to reuse your tech stack?

On the extreme end, server hardware can run for years with 0 hardware-related downtime (and offers nice things like redundant power supplies, 19" rack cases [but much deeper than audio stuff?]). And brutal performance: Even my 450 Euro used&modified (new nvme disk, faster CPUs), 5y old, 1u(!) Intel dual socket system can mop the floor with most desktops below a Ryzen 3900 (at least on my compile workloads, and on anything that swaps on less than 128GB RAM in general).

Re: The impact of Apple Silicon Macs on Broadway

#287

Post by p0nce »

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #266
p0nce wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a plugin vendor supporting Linux: I think the problem might not be technical but is instead all about the UX. Regardless, it's been great supporting Linux as it appear 5% to 20% of our userbase are now Linux users (macOS 30%). On Windows or macOS a dictatorship constrain the Audio API to be X and the Graphics API to be Y. On Linux, as a user I can choose ALSA, JACK, PulseAudio and while I'm sure there is a better…

Thanks for the interesting response. Glad to hear you're supporting Linux with your plugins! There is no way for a DAW to choose "what is best" for the user. On Windows the same range of choices exists whether or not any particular DAW offers it to them. ASIO? WASAPI? WaveRT? MME? There's a case to be made for each, depending on circumstances. Only macOS really gets this right. The user can also select "auto-start" f…

> which will cause them to no longer be asked which to use each time.

This sort of pattern is conceptualized well in the book "About Face". I think it's a helpful book that explain a lot of the DAW popularity variation.

Re: The impact of Apple Silicon Macs on Broadway

#288

Post by chipotle_coyote »

ksm1717 wrote: post #236
chipotle_coyote wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Insert "not sure if trolling" GIF here, but you get that what the OP is saying is that when M1 Macs run x86 code in emulation they're often running it as fast as comparable x86 processors run it natively, right?

Right, but if the conversation is about how this is going to change Broadway or anything, running just as fast means nothing changes (the case if you have to emulate)

The conversation started by the linked article is clearly suggesting it can change Broadway when software is recompiled to run natively with Apple Silicon, though, and this is a perfectly reasonable take. An M1-based Mac mini that's actually less expensive than the Intel one it directly replaced can be a lot faster.

The arguments in the thread about "but a lot of software right now runs in emulation" and "who knows when the software companies will get around to transitioning" aren't wrong, per se, but they're also arguments that long-time Apple users have heard variants of in the PowerPC to x86 transition. And in the (original) Mac OS to OS X transition. And in the 68K to PowerPC transition. It turns out that when transitioning your software to the new platform doubles your performance and/or is necessary to keep selling your product, you have a fairly strong motivation to do the work.

Re: The impact of Apple Silicon Macs on Broadway

#289

Post by nvrGiveUp »

dodobirdlord wrote: post #249
nvrGiveUp wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Software engineers are not Engineers if we use the strict definition of Applied scientists. Software engineers are forced to use tradition and Authority due to abstraction. I say this as a programmer.

Applied scientist is not and has never been the definition of an engineer. Dating back to the term’s earliest usage, predating both modern English and the scientific method, it has meant someone who designs and maintains complex machines.

Industrial engineers? Chemical engineers?

Re: The impact of Apple Silicon Macs on Broadway

#290

Post by imron »

someperson wrote: post #285
imron wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Appallingly

Citation needed. There are Ryzen 5 mini PCs with active cooling [1]. You don't need to use an Intel chip manufactured on an aging 14 nanometer node. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLATODi7KlU

> There are Ryzen 5 mini PCs

So not an intel nuc then, which is what I was specifically referring to.

Post reply on HN