Apple Updates Logic Pro X With Feature and Performance Improvements, 300+ Chinese Instrument Loops

Heck yes. This is the best DAW by far IMO. Not only is it one of the cheapest, but you don't need to lug along an iLok just to use it. Absolutely love this software.

Tim is trying so hard to please and be friends with China.

I would absolutely love to hear some of the stuff you did over the years, just to almost 'hear' how technology progressed. Even if it's silly stuff you've recorded or written. Just how production has changed, how your approach has changed – everything like that.

It astounds me sometimes. Just as one example, Cher's 'Believe' was mixed on a 350MHz iMac G3; a computer with considerably less power than a 5-year-old iPhone. And yet … it didn't stop them. Because that was the limit of the tech. They made the best of it.

I feel like I'm swimming in redundancy sometimes. All these features, and I have no idea how to use them. Spoilt for choice, so I end up adding everything and ultimately make it sound worse. Yet some people wrote music on a tape machine with the power of a calculator, creating vast soundscapes using nothing but time, patience, skill, and sheer force of will.

Sorry to seem a little wide-eyed in child-like wonder here; or even a little pathetic – but I'd really, really like to hear your stories! Did you ever think: "wow, this is amazing?" Or was technology just one incremental feature after another, to make your life steadily more easy?

I just got on the ride when I went to University (around when 10.6.4 was released, I think). You lived through the curve.

Back in the days (1993 and before), the computer just provided MIDI command to drive external sound modules, wired to a mixing desk.

I remember I rented my Powermac 7100 to Deep Dish who was visiting my producer's studio, and he did everything in the box with protools. We were shocked.

My first release in 1993 was "rotterdam 93", which charted in Spain and Italy and was made using a cracked version of Notator on the ST, an Ensoniq EPS16-plus, a 909 and an Alesis drum machine, on an Allen&Heat mixing desk, recorded on a Sony DAT and normalized on a Protools system running on soundcards on a original Macintosh.

They seem to be updating everything software wise before WWDC, I thought that's what WWDC was for.

Not quite. WWDC is for third-party developers. That means they will show new features of iOS and OS X, or programming languages, which developers can utilise to better their apps.

Updating LPX and other Apple applications with bug fixes and additional features isn't really the same thing.

I would absolutely love to hear some of the stuff you did over the years, just to almost 'hear' how technology progressed. Even if it's silly stuff you've recorded or written. Just how production has changed, how your approach has changed – everything like that.

It astounds me sometimes. Just as one example, Cher's 'Believe' was mixed on a 350MHz iMac G3; a computer with considerably less power than a 5-year-old iPhone. And yet … it didn't stop them. Because that was the limit of the tech. They made the best of it.

I feel like I'm swimming in redundancy sometimes. All these features, and I have no idea how to use them. Spoilt for choice, so I end up adding everything and ultimately make it sound worse. Yet some people wrote music on a tape machine with the power of a calculator, creating vast soundscapes using nothing but time, patience, skill, and sheer force of will.

Sorry to seem a little wide-eyed in child-like wonder here; or even a little pathetic – but I'd really, really like to hear your stories! Did you ever think: "wow, this is amazing?" Or was technology just one incremental feature after another, to make your life steadily more easy?

I just got on the ride when I went to University (around when 10.6.4 was released, I think). You lived through the curve.

My first recording system involved an Apple IIe and 2 Rhodes Chromas connected through serial ports (Midi hadn't been invented).

I would program all the synth tracks and then put it onto a 4 track cassette recorder with a "live" track. Then I would bounce two stereo tracks mixed with another new track to the other two tracks, or sometimes record all four tracks and mix them to two, put them back on the 4 track. There were all kinds of ways to get multi-tracking without the actual tracks.

Thinking back I don't know how I made anything that sounded good at all. But it did. You just had to be careful and do things like adding extra treble because you were going to lose some though the bounces, and you had to be an actual musician because you had to play a whole take at once because you couldn't punch in and out.

You youngins don't know how good you got it. Now get off m'lawn.

Agreed. I use it since it was called Notator, on the Atari ST.

I would absolutely love to hear some of the stuff you did over the years, just to almost 'hear' how technology progressed. Even if it's silly stuff you've recorded or written. Just how production has changed, how your approach has changed – everything like that.

It astounds me sometimes. Just as one example, Cher's 'Believe' was mixed on a 350MHz iMac G3; a computer with considerably less power than a 5-year-old iPhone. And yet … it didn't stop them. Because that was the limit of the tech. They made the best of it.

I feel like I'm swimming in redundancy sometimes. All these features, and I have no idea how to use them. Spoilt for choice, so I end up adding everything and ultimately make it sound worse. Yet some people wrote music on a tape machine with the power of a calculator, creating vast soundscapes using nothing but time, patience, skill, and sheer force of will.

Sorry to seem a little wide-eyed in child-like wonder here; or even a little pathetic – but I'd really, really like to hear your stories! Did you ever think: "wow, this is amazing?" Or was technology just one incremental feature after another, to make your life steadily more easy?

I just got on the ride when I went to University (around when 10.6.4 was released, I think). You lived through the curve.