[HN Gopher] Apple unveils biggest update to Logic since the laun...
___________________________________________________________________
Apple unveils biggest update to Logic since the launch of Logic Pro
X
Author : todsacerdoti
Score : 135 points
Date : 2020-05-12 12:35 UTC (6 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.apple.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.apple.com)
| throw_this_one wrote:
| Eric Prydz uses Logic
| dangoor wrote:
| It seems odd to me that there are no videos accompanying this
| press release, and there also don't appear to be any videos in
| the Mac app store. It seems like video (with audio!) would be a
| much better way to show off what this new version can do.
| bredren wrote:
| Your comment reminds me of the last time they tried to show off
| audio production using the all new Touchbar in 2016:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oO-t2TTIdPE
| monkeyfacebag wrote:
| Relative to the competition, Logic is an incredible value. I am
| an Ableton Live user, but Logic, an arguably superior product, is
| available for a fraction of the cost of Live Studio. I have my
| fingers crossed that Ableton can catch up on some of Logic's
| features (flex pitch comes to mind).
| [deleted]
| jasode wrote:
| I own Apple Logic and thus I'm grateful for the continuous
| updates. On the other hand, I'm mystified why Apple continues its
| investment in this audio program.
|
| Yes, when Steve Jobs bought Logic from Emagic in 2002, it made
| strategic sense to fortify Apple's "software portfolio" to make
| Mac hardware more attractive. But that was before the surprising
| massive success of iPhones in 2007. Now, it seems like sales of
| Logic would be a insignificant rounding error in Apple's revenue.
| If Mac software portfolio was that big a deal, I'm not sure why
| they discontinued Aperture instead of Logic. It seems like
| there's a bigger market of customers that would catalog and
| modify photos rather than record music.
|
| Intuit sold off Quicken to a private equity firm and yet Apple
| continues to own and develop Logic. I like Apple's stewardship of
| Logic but I can't understand its strategic value to today's
| Apple.
|
| Anybody have any thoughts on what Logic does for Apple that
| Aperture didn't?
|
| EDIT to several replies about "enhancing brand image": That's
| plausible but AVID Pro Tools is even more prestigious than Logic
| and AVID's market cap is only $250 million[0]. Apple could
| acquire AVID easily with their ~$200 billion cash on hand to _"
| strengthen Apple's brand among the professionals"_. People have
| been speculating this possible acquisition for years but I don't
| think it will happen. So not sure what Logic does for Apple that
| AVID Pro Tools doesn't.
|
| [0] https://www.nasdaq.com/market-activity/stocks/avid
| salimmadjd wrote:
| When Apple vs. PC wars first started, PC won because of
| software. It's a lesson Steve learned which is probably still
| guides their thinking. This is why there is numbers, keynotes,
| Pages, etc.
|
| Apple still wants to empower the creative community with
| Finalcut Logic. To ensure if you're a creator there is a
| software to support you on the Mac platform.
| freeqaz wrote:
| I agree with this and it makes me chuckle to think about how
| much Google has distorted outer world view. A tech company
| isn't nuking their legacy software!? I'm shocked!
| neutronicus wrote:
| Once the DJs start using Windows, they'll stop buying iPhones,
| and once the DJs stop buying iPhones, the people who go to
| clubs will stop buying iPhones, and once the people who go to
| clubs stop buying iPhones so will everyone else.
| purerandomness wrote:
| The Windows port was discontinued the same day Emagic was sold
| to Apple.
|
| I always assumed that the goal was to strengthen the Apple
| brand and signal that it's a more suitable system for creative
| work.
| thdrdt wrote:
| Thinking about a Mac Pro market I came to the conclusion [1] it
| might be for the audio market. If this is true I can imagine
| that Logic is still important for Apple.
|
| [1] Lack of Nvidia support means 3D/CAD and video/FX users will
| choose other brands.
| culturestate wrote:
| > I can't understand its strategic value to today's Apple
|
| I've long had the same question about Claris. At least Logic
| fits in to Apple's brand thesis; FileMaker would make way more
| sense at Microsoft or Oracle.
| jchrisa wrote:
| Logic is better than ProTools (not encumbered by legacy
| implementation). It is also the basis for GarageBand on Mac and
| iOS.
| smcphile wrote:
| > Anybody have any thoughts on what Logic does for Apple that
| Aperture didn't?
|
| I'm not familiar with Aperture. According to Wikipedia it and
| iPhotos were abandoned to the benefit of Photos. Not knowing
| why Apple made this choice, I don't know if doing something
| equivalent with Logic would make sense.
|
| I do know Logic. It's a well respected DAW and some musicians
| do buy a Mac just to be able to use Logic. Also, DAWs take a
| long time term to learn well, so when the time comes for a
| Logic user to upgrade or replace an old machine, they'll
| probably buy a new Mac. (More convenient, less hassle.) All
| this of course helps Mac sales.
|
| And while Mac sales might not be much these days compared to
| iPhone and iPad sales, the margins on Macs are still high, so
| why _shouldn 't_ Apple continue to sell Macs?
| mortenjorck wrote:
| _> I do know Logic. It 's a well respected DAW and some
| musicians do buy a Mac just to be able to use Logic._
|
| I think you just hit on the test Apple has historically used
| to decide which pro software to continue developing and which
| to discontinue.
|
| Logic and Final Cut are both decades-old industry standards
| that demonstrably sell Mac hardware. Aperture, though? It was
| too new to have the installed base of either. It debuted
| around the same time as Lightroom, and as competitive as it
| may have been, I have a hard time imagining a Windows user in
| the 2000s specifically eyeing it as a reason to switch to
| Mac.
| robenkleene wrote:
| The answer to the Aperture question is easy: Apple decided
| those _are_ more popular features and largely rolled those
| features into Photos.app. Even Adobe generally agrees,
| Lightroom CC is more of a competitor for Photos.app (both are
| entirely cloud-based) than Lightroom Classic (which is focused
| on the offline features that professionals generally need).
| robertoandred wrote:
| Photos in no way requires any cloud connection.
| dangus wrote:
| It is simple, it continues to keep professional people with
| large budgets on the Mac. These creative people are often
| influential to others (an example of this is a music artist I
| follow on Instagram who basically constantly posts their mobile
| studio setup that involves a MacBook Pro - free advertising of
| the most valuable type, organic).
|
| Compare Logic's cost with a $800/year ProTools subscription and
| suddenly you might not really mind the fact that the SSD in
| your new Mac is overpriced. With that price difference it would
| be illogical to ever move to software that can run on Windows.
| [deleted]
| gdubs wrote:
| Anecdotally -- I have a lot of friends and colleagues in the
| music industry -- I wouldn't say Pro Tools is more prestigious.
| It seems pretty split on people's preferences and old habits
| die hard, but a LOT of top composers and producers use Logic.
| TheOtherHobbes wrote:
| Avid has pissed off a lot of users by being greedy while not
| providing a reliable product.
|
| PT was pretty much the industry standard ten years ago, but
| since then there's been a lot of churn to other DAWs -
| primarily Logic and Cubase, although a lot of dance/rap
| newcomers use Live and FL Studio.
|
| Bottom line is the resources Apple needs to devote to its
| media products are barely a rounding error, and the rewards
| are increased traction with professionals and a few extra
| hardware sales, especially at the high end.
|
| It's a conservative strategy, and not a terrible one.
|
| The disappointing part is that it could have been part of a
| consistent product plan ten years ago. Now there's always the
| worry that Apple will lose interest again for another 5-10
| years.
| gdubs wrote:
| This is just my random thoughts, but it would seem like
| Apple learned a lesson with the Mac Pro that they're not
| looking to repeat. The other advantage of creating high-end
| tools in-house is that it moves hardware, which remains a
| huge part of Apple's bottom line.
| poof_he_is_gone wrote:
| In addition to what others have mentioned, it is also the step
| up from their free and cross platform Garage Band application.
| It is an easy way to build lock-in on those stepping up from
| novice/hobby users into a professional daw without losing
| control of the soft-synth voice control from one platform to
| the next.
| robenkleene wrote:
| Logic is not just a step up from GarageBand, GarageBand _is_
| Logic re-skinned, if you use GarageBand and import into
| Logic, you can see how all the simpler instruments in
| GarageBand were created by configuring the more complex Logic
| instruments. Logic is probably integral to GarageBand not
| just as being the same code base, but as the creative tool in
| which the GarageBand instruments are designed and prototyped.
| SllX wrote:
| I think killing off Aperture was as much a strategic focusing
| move as anything else. Prior to developing the current Photos
| app (Mac and iOS share a codebase), Apple was developing and
| maintaining Mac iPhotos, iOS iPhotos, Aperture and the old iOS
| Photos app (Pictures? I don't even remember).
|
| Reducing it all to one cross platform codebase allowed them to
| make the bundled app a bit more full featured, double down on a
| few headline mass market features like photos sync and
| theoretically add more features that are missing from Aperture
| over time. That said, they'll probably never duplicate it all,
| probably don't want to duplicate it all and they seem to have
| focused more of their photography effort on iPhone
| computational photography. Not to mention when Aperture was
| first released, Pixelmator, Acorn and Lightroom didn't exist
| (on the market at least) yet.
|
| Contrast with Logic where there still isn't a lot like it and
| part of how you get to be a billion dollar business is by
| maintaining those hundred million dollar businesses. There's a
| lot more YouTubers, DJs and Podcasters out there now, not just
| musicians and one thing they all have in common is they're all
| dealing with audio production.
| earthnail wrote:
| It's great for their brand. Apple has always used musicians to
| brand itself as a creative brand.
|
| Musicians are way more visible as creatives than photographers.
| Becoming a rock star is a thing, becoming a rock star
| photographer is... uhm... yeah well no, not the same as a real
| rock star.
| ueueshitashita wrote:
| > Becoming a rock star is a thing
|
| Not really in 2020.
| tpush wrote:
| Look at someone like Billie Eilish and her Apple Music-
| exlusive content. Obviously not literally "rock", but
| becoming a global star is still very much a thing.
| mapgrep wrote:
| In this Rolling Stone video she and her brother walk
| through how they made "Bad Guy," I don't know audio
| software enough to know if this is Logic but I'm sure a
| Logic users would recognize it in some of the shots if
| so:
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpx2-EMfdbg
|
| --
|
| correction! rolling stone not nytimes. edit
| packetslave wrote:
| yeah, Finneas uses Logic Pro
| shlom22 wrote:
| Billie Eilish is our Lennon, Elon Musk is our Tesla and
| Donald Trump is our JFK.
|
| What a mess we are in culturally.
| brookside wrote:
| This is, of course, the far-too-common "appeal to
| antiquity" fallacy.
| mm89 wrote:
| Just wait until January when Elon replaces Trump in the
| Oval Office.
| Krustopolis wrote:
| Lennon, Tesla, and JFK were deeply flawed human beings
| living in a different time, with far less media coverage
| than today. I suspect your view of the past may be
| unfairly rosy due to the effects of time.
| rosstex wrote:
| Yeah, it's all about that neo-soul, 90's R&B rebirth jazz
| fusion wave that we're blessed to be riding.
| shlom22 wrote:
| Na it's all about mumble rap and frying our brains out in
| late stage western society
| p_l wrote:
| It's the perception. It might not be "rock" star anymore,
| but genericised "music superstar", yes.
|
| Like many other things involved in this decision, it's the
| perception that matters, not facts.
| ueueshitashita wrote:
| > It might not be "rock" star anymore
|
| That's the point, the "rock" stars aren't making any
| money in the industry like other pop acts anymore -
| they're mostly doing their own thing on Patreon and
| streaming on Twitch.
| chipotle_coyote wrote:
| If they're recording music, they can certainly still use
| Logic to do it, and Apple wants to give them reasons to
| keep doing so. It's hard not to notice that Apple has
| been courting YouTubers really heavily over the last few
| years.
| SeanLuke wrote:
| > That's plausible but AVID Pro Tools is even more prestigious
| than Logic and AVID's market cap is only $250 million[0].
|
| In no universe is Pro Tools more prestigious than any of its
| competition.
|
| I think Pro Tools is viewed as The Thing That All Studio PHB
| Managers Purchased At Some Point So It's Reasonable For Studio
| Techs to Be Trained For. Kind of the "nobody ever got fired for
| picking IBM" of the music industry. In my opinion, AVID does
| not have a reputation for making innovative products. See what
| happened when they acquired Sibelius
| (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKx1wnXClcI).
|
| My limited experience with the industry suggests that Ableton,
| Bitwig, and Logic are the Cool Tools for Producing Music, that
| Cubase (Steinberg) is particularly popular with composers, that
| FL Studio is the cool low-cost leader among students, and that
| Reason is The Outsider. Notice which software is not in this
| list.
| kitotik wrote:
| There's also the legacy of pro tools and logic.
|
| For many years pro tools was the only game in town for
| serious non-linear _audio_ editing, and did not support midi
| at all.
|
| Around the same time period Logic was the only game in town
| for serious _midi_ work and didn't support audio at all.
| petard wrote:
| Maybe a mix of marketing value and organizational inertia?
| Music software allows you to do the famous musician uses Mac
| sell which Aperture does not. People probably can name you
| their favorite musician but not so much photographer.
| phlakaton wrote:
| I don't ask questions; I just gratefully take the cheap Logic
| updates as they come!
| crazygringo wrote:
| To be more specific, and in response to your reply:
|
| Together with Final Cut Pro, Apple wants to have _Mac-only
| exclusive software_ that is aimed _specifically at cool
| creative professionals_ to build up the image that trendy
| creatives use Macs (and you therefore have _no choice_ but to
| use a Mac, otherwise you won 't have the software you need).
|
| Aperture couldn't really compete with Adobe's whole workflow
| (since Apple didn't have a full-fledged Photoshop competitor).
| But also, movies and music are "sexier" in a way.
|
| AVID Pro Tools works on Windows so it doesn't do anything for
| Apple. The whole point is awesome software that works _only_ on
| Macs.
|
| The day that every single program creatives use runs as Windows
| as well as Macs, is the day it becomes a lot harder for a lot
| of people to justify buying a Mac. It's that simple.
|
| (So it's certainly not about any profit from the software
| _directly_ , and it's also not _just_ a marketing "halo".)
| Razengan wrote:
| > _The day that every single program creatives use runs as
| Windows as well as Macs, is the day it becomes a lot harder
| for a lot of people to justify buying a Mac. It 's that
| simple._
|
| As long as Macs are the best way to escape from Windows,
| people are going to buy Macs. It's that simple.
| clairity wrote:
| > "(So it's certainly not about any profit from the software
| directly, and it's also not just a marketing 'halo'.)"
|
| along these lines and in the absence of other evidence, in
| these kinds of peripheral situations it's always a good guess
| that the peripheral product supports the profits of the
| parent product, and it's value shows up not only in it's own
| profits but in the parent products' as well, that it's a
| flanking product meant to protect the primary.
| jasode wrote:
| _> But yeah, AVID Pro Tools works on Windows so it doesn't do
| anything for Apple. _
|
| Before Apple bought it, Emagic's Logic ran on _both_ Windows
| and Mac. After Apple acquired Logic, they immediately
| discontinued the Windows version. Can 't Apple hypothetically
| run the same playbook and discontinue Pro Tools for Windows?
| crazygringo wrote:
| Oh wow, I didn't know that.
|
| I mean, that seems like a pretty shitty thing to do to an
| existing userbase.
|
| I guess they could, but risk generating a lot of ill will.
| I'm curious how discontinuing Logic was received. Seems
| very risky.
| djaychela wrote:
| Music Tech teacher here... when it was discontinued, I
| was working (part time) in a couple of schools who used
| Logic on PCs, as well as working for a few people who
| used it in their own studios.
|
| In the case of one of the schools and a number of the
| clients, I was the one who broke the news to them -
| generally greeted by disbelief initially, and then once
| they had checked up on it, absolute fury. If the
| intention was to get people to buy Macs so they could
| keep running Logic, in most cases it backfired
| spectacularly, and made life-long Apple enemies of those
| users - many of which either stuck with their old version
| of Logic for a number of years, or who jumped ship to
| Cubase (in the case of the schools, software cost would
| have been dwarfed by hardware cost when you have labs of
| 30+ computers, let alone trying to persuade a Windows-
| oriented ICT department to support Macs in any way, shape
| or form).
| dfee wrote:
| Tough (sincerely), and congrats on finding a gig that
| rewards you daily with passion and enthusiasm.
|
| But at the same time, I have little sympathy for people
| who hate Apple for a move like this - regardless of the
| optics and whether it was intentional.
|
| No one has to use a Mac, but frankly, there's a reason
| why the creative crowd does. And, it's beyond just brand
| image. They have a clear and complete vision for their
| software (which yes, breaks at the edges), but overall
| provides the best foundation for the markets they cater
| to.
|
| Apple doesn't want to be hamstrung by people running
| Windows on shoddy devices for premium software and thus
| exited that market. They also don't want to make software
| for shoddy Android devices, so are conservative where
| they do.
|
| It's not an attack on users, but a refocus on the golden
| path.
| saagarjha wrote:
| Apple buying a company and axing their products for other
| platforms is all too common and has nothing to do with
| "people running Windows on shoddy devices". They kill all
| the projects for other platforms, strengthen theirs, and
| hurt users in the process. It's that simple.
| dfee wrote:
| > has nothing to do with "people running Windows on
| shoddy devices".
|
| You don't really believe that. This is specifically the
| reason Microsoft introduce their flagship device: the
| Surface Pro... and Google introduce theirs: the Pixel.
|
| These companies don't suck, but their licensing model
| causes frustrations for even them!
| wlesieutre wrote:
| More recently, Dark Sky is in the process of being killed
| for Android
| WalterSear wrote:
| It was clear back then that they didn't want Logic in
| order to improve it, as being evidenced here by with this
| hodgepodge of 'catchup' features.
|
| Tbh, I'm surprised they hadn't dropped the product
| already.
| timthorn wrote:
| Not only that - the next version of Logic was due
| imminently, with the engineering work done.
|
| It was at that moment that I grew a strong dislike of
| Apple, having been a real cheerleader for most of the
| Macintosh's existence.
| pier25 wrote:
| Apple could buy all DAW companies (Steinberg, Ableton, etc)
| for peanuts and destroy music production on Windows if they
| wanted. Heck they could even buy Adobe without much effort
| and make it mac exclusive too.
|
| They don't do it probably because that would be considered
| a below the belt move and not worth the trouble since the
| mac is only 10% of its revenue.
| giancarlostoro wrote:
| They would probably be sued for being anti competitive if
| they bought out all the DAW companies and did that.
| vmception wrote:
| For decades creatives and even non-creatives were able to be
| convinced that "Macs were better for audio, video, photography"
| without any analysis of benchmarks, hardware differences,
| performance.
|
| This thought pattern transcended the PowerPC processor, to the
| off-the-shelf Intel processors that the competitors used, to
| the ARM processors the mobile devices used.
|
| Apple continuing that perception with at least software updates
| can continue to cement their hegemony amongst the minds of
| people.
|
| They're also good machines without the fluff! But merely
| showing support for that perception can help retain the premium
| pricing when even artists across the entire socioeconomic
| spectrum (heavily weighted to one side) will still prioritize
| getting Apple devices over other expenses, or at least aspire
| to and talk about those dreams.
| billjings wrote:
| In my experience, musicians and other creative types care
| first and formost about getting results. So that means they
| need a toolchain that is flexible and rich enough to yield
| great results. Performance is a factor there, inasmuch as it
| constrains results.
|
| The toolchain part is pretty broad: this includes OS services
| (audio routing!), outboard hardware, DAWs and video editors,
| and third party plugins.
|
| When comparing macOS vs. Windows for audio, macOS wins for
| most people on those axes. Apple wins on OS services (audio
| routing is super annoying on windows) and on outboard
| hardware (USB3 works okay, but Thunderbolt is better, and
| it's a pain to get configured on a Windows machine). DAWs is
| mostly a wash with the exception of Logic, and third party
| plugins is a total wash.
|
| Even given that, Logic plays a strategic role in that
| ecosystem for Apple. As the more expensive option, Apple
| always runs the risk of being the secondary platform for
| application authors. Without Logic, other DAW vendors could
| be free to neglect their offerings on Mac. That ecosystem is
| healthy right now, but Logic is a key hedge.
|
| Oh, and lock-in is a big thing, too. Logic users may be a
| minority, but they're firmly locked into the Mac in a way
| that Reaper users aren't.
|
| Video is different. Many video creatives have made the switch
| to windows. There were two key reasons they have jumped:
|
| 1. Hardware. The Mac Pro was neglected for years, and third
| party graphics card support has always been better on
| Windows. Performance isn't paramount, but it does matter.
|
| 2. Final Cut Pro X. This completely changed the editing model
| from under a lot of pros, requiring them to completely
| rethink their workflows. Since this happened at the same time
| that hardware support was really bad, a lot of pros thought,
| "Well, if I'm going to have to rethink my workflow anyway..."
| It loosened lock-in at a time when the other parts of the
| platform were pretty weak.
| Spooky23 wrote:
| For things that require stability, Microsoft has an
| advantage because they have needed to support things for a
| long time. You can still run a supported version of IE 11.
| Apple is mercurial and increasingly disruptive with
| updates.
|
| As Windows 10 leads us to the subscription based computer
| that exists to apply updates as a primary function, that
| distinction may disappear.
| Macha wrote:
| I'd be curious to see what OS audio routing support you're
| talking about. Maybe I'm just done, but I've not seen
| anything with the capabilities of voicemeter for Windows or
| Pulse or JACK for Linux.
|
| Specifically I'd like to have application A and B play to
| speakers, and have an output I can record that has
| application A and my microphone, without sending
| application B to that output or my microphone to my
| speakers.
|
| At least to me, this is what "audio routing" implies, so
| it'd be great if this feature was there and I'd just missed
| it.
| TheOtherHobbes wrote:
| It's not in the OS - deliberately, because being able to
| record an audio stream you're playing makes it easy to
| copy.
|
| But you can pay money for apps that make it happen, and
| you can also Homebrew free options like BlackHole.
| (SoundFlower used to do this, but the more recent MacOS
| security updates seem to have nuked it.)
| nonsapreiche wrote:
| You can route the audio with soundflower
| whatok wrote:
| It really is incredible how badly Apple screwed up video.
| robertoandred wrote:
| Have you ever actually compared audio capabilities of Windows
| with macOS? (Or Android with iOS?) There's more to a computer
| than the clock speed of its processor.
| pier25 wrote:
| My guess is that Apple knows a lot of people need to keep on
| buying macs to use Logic and Final Cut.
|
| Look at the price of Logic compared to other DAWs. Apple is
| _almost_ giving it away for free. It only costs $200 but in
| contrast comparable DAWs cost many times that. Ableton Live
| Suite costs $750. Nuendo costs $1000. Etc.
|
| AFAIK Aperture never had such a hardcore following and didn't
| offer such a unique product. The photography market is clearly
| dominated by Adobe anyway.
| DaiPlusPlus wrote:
| > AFAIK Aperture never had such a hardcore following and
| didn't offer such a unique product. The photography market is
| clearly dominated by Adobe anyway.
|
| At the time, sure - but none of my friends and contacts who
| do part-time and professional photography have anything good
| to say about Adobe Lightroom - the move to Lightroom CC left
| a bad taste in everyone's mouth, as have the many Cloud-
| related SNAFUs (apparently a couple of years ago Adobe
| screwed-up Lightroom's non-destructive edit files and caused
| a load of people to lose all their Lightroom work - and times
| when people are unable to authenticate with Adobe so they
| can't even open the program). Apple would be on to a sure-
| winner by re-launching Aperture, especially if they give it
| the visual indexing features present in Apple's existing
| photo-management products.
| jseliger wrote:
| I have switched to Capture One, which is overly expensive
| and has less-intelligent defaults, but I can also buy a
| perpetual license.
| slezyr wrote:
| Bitwig 400$, expensive, but closer to the goal and it seems
| that it provides more content.
| pier25 wrote:
| Bitwig is amazing, specially now with The Grid.
|
| But it's still the underdog. If it becomes more popular I'm
| sure the price will go up at some point.
| whatok wrote:
| I wouldn't really compare the two. They target much
| different markets.
| pier25 wrote:
| True, and neither is Ableton Live, but look at all the
| new features in Logic blatantly copied from Live.
| whatok wrote:
| It's definitely a good way to branch out on their current
| user base and probably makes a lot more sense for people
| starting out to buy Logic than base Ableton. Ableton
| Suite just doesn't seem like a great value vs Logic
| unless you absolutely need something in Ableton.
| pier25 wrote:
| The value of Live is in the workflow which is very
| different from Logic or any other classic DAWs. It's much
| more creative and streamlined. The Suite version includes
| Max which opens up the creative possibilities way beyond
| anything Logic can do.
|
| Of course this is only attractive to a smaller part of
| the DAW market. People working in recording, mixing and
| mastering will not find any value in those things.
|
| Also people working in media composing have tended to
| prefer Cubase or Logic because the arrangement view in
| Live was pretty bad up to version 10.
| whatok wrote:
| I know how Live works, I've owned it for way too long
| now. I'm talking in relation to features Logic has lifted
| from Live, if you are just starting out and don't really
| know what's going on, it's a very hard ask to spend
| double on base Ableton (3x? for Suite) vs Logic
| especially when Logic comes with more stuff.
| pier25 wrote:
| OTOH you need to have a mac and there are cheaper Live
| versions to get you started.
|
| Also if you buy a midi controller in many cases you get a
| free version of Live which is plenty for people getting
| started.
| whatok wrote:
| Yeah, I'm thinking of the person who either fell for the
| Mac propaganda or already had one. There still is a
| sizable advantage to knowing that things will probably
| work out the box on a Mac laptop vs random PC laptop but
| the price gap is unreal. Live Intro is definitely enough
| for most people to get a feel for things.
| robenkleene wrote:
| The reason Apple keeps Logic is they generally have a strategy
| of trickling down features from big pro apps to smaller
| consumer apps. Logic -> GarageBand, Final Cut -> iMovie, Xcode
| -> Swift Playgrounds.
|
| The AVID idea doesn't make much sense as Logic and Final Cut
| are already integrated into their product lines. I think
| there's a certain amount of truth to the brand prestige
| argument, but I think the more important point is that these
| capabilities are actually core to Apple's product strategy,
| they just manifest themselves in unintuitive ways. E.g.,
| Apple's AUv3 strategy would never have worked without
| GarageBand and GarageBand _is_ Logic.
| mm89 wrote:
| In this case, many of the features appear to be improvements
| upon features originally introduced in Garageband iOS, so the
| features are trickling backwards consumer -> pro.
| whatok wrote:
| It doesn't really make much sense from a $ perspective and
| really only serves as a lesser (and rapidly diminishing) halo
| effect for the rest of the brand. Logic is one of those
| programs that keeps people on Macs. I'm sure I don't need to
| explain this to a Logic owner but audio engineering and
| production was strictly a Mac-only affair in the past and that
| has rapidly changed over the past decade. Macs have gotten
| increasingly difficult to work with due to constant OS updates
| breaking everything and have only gotten more expensive with
| less options for actual professional users who need real I/Os.
| Keeping Logic fresh is important to keep people from switching
| as everything else they do on a more macro level is pushing
| people in that direction.
|
| Someone somewhere in Apple decided that holding onto this
| market was worth it for probably solely the halo effect. I
| can't think of any other reason and makes no sense from a
| strictly financial perspective.
| henriquez wrote:
| I agree with you wholeheartedly on the halo effect point.
| Without Logic and Final Cut, there's no reason to not run
| Protools and Adobe Suite on a cheaper PC workstation.
|
| I'm curious about your statement that professional-grade
| audio software had historically been a Mac-only affair. Is
| that really true? I was using some pretty serious audio
| production software in Windows as early as 2003. What kinds
| of software were Mac-only at that point?
| whatok wrote:
| As another reply took issue with, strictly was probably a
| bit overstated. Software support was a secondary issue vs
| hardware support. You simply did not have Windows drivers
| for many of the top audio interfaces or you had major
| stability issues that vendors would blame on Windows. Macs
| were really plug and play hardware-wise and putting
| together properly specced PCs to run hardware on a stable
| basis really made the cost of advantage of a PC
| questionable.
| WalterSear wrote:
| > I'm sure I don't need to explain this to a Logic owner but
| audio engineering and production was strictly a Mac-only
| affair in the past and that has rapidly changed over the past
| decade.
|
| Strictly? Not at all. The crown was lost a lot earlier -
| around the time that digidesign started offering non-hardware
| versions, and for the same reasons.
| whatok wrote:
| Sure, probably a bit earlier but the vast majority of
| [i]real professionals[/i] were stuck with Macs. Pro Tools
| M-Powered for example had to have been a minuscule portion
| of overall Pro Tools market and people still used that on
| Macs. Not having a real desktop solution for a long period
| of time was the last nail for a good portion of users.
| WalterSear wrote:
| It wasn't people following Protools: it was Protools
| chasing the chasing markets that had already started to
| leave.
| whatok wrote:
| Avid is not exactly known for their strategic vision. And
| talk about wringing customers for every possible penny
| too.
| jrochkind1 wrote:
| I'd think it must be to sell laptops, not to sell Logic.
|
| Now, do they _need_ to do this to sell laptops, does it
| actually sell significant laptops, are there more people that
| buy a Mac laptop for Logic than who bought or would have a Mac
| laptop for Aperture? I dunno. It 's also possible they
| miscalculated with Aperture. Or may be miscalculating now with
| Logic. Apple can make mistakes or behave irrationally too.
|
| But it's gotta be to sell laptops. (Which is consistent with
| not charging for the upgrade; it's not about revenue from the
| software at all). And there are definitely at least some people
| buying a Mac laptop for Logic. (In a world with decreasing
| laptop sales in general, as many move phone/tablet only).
|
| Now, with what you say about iPhones... I keep worrying that
| Apple will decide they don't really care about selling laptops
| after all someday...
| ksec wrote:
| Came here to ask the same question and so far none of the
| answer seems convincing to me. It would have made a little more
| sense if they had released this update as Logic Pro 11 and
| charges some upgrade fees. Instead it is free. To put it into
| perspective, Logic Pro X user has been getting free update for
| nearly 7 years running!
|
| I think one possible reason / theory is that the resource
| allocated to Logic is so small ( by today's Apple standard )
| none of the management bother about it, and it is not running
| in direct competition to any of their own Apps ( Aperture with
| Photos ) or their close allies's ( Adobe ). So the name Logic
| dont even pops up into management radar and the team decide to
| keep working on it.
|
| And compared to Final Cut Pro or Aperture against its
| competitors, I think Logic is doing very well for musicians in
| many professional market. ( And they are the ones willing to
| buy Mac Pro https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xNrG2mwt4Uo. And in
| the later video, turns out literally most of his audio kits are
| ridiculously expensive. And Mac Pro isn't even considered
| expensive at all. )
| whywhywhywhy wrote:
| >the resource allocated to Logic is so small ( by today's
| Apple standard ) none of the management bother about it
|
| I'm not really buying that because they've killed plenty of
| other things which would also be tiny investments in the
| grand scheme of Apple. Aperture, Shake and Motion come to
| mind.
|
| Find it very strange they updated it at this point and really
| starting to wonder if the reason it still exists isn't
| something as stupid as by having an offering in the pro-audio
| space it gives executives more excuse to hang around with
| famous musicians. I mean it's pretty obvious Cook is
| celebrity obsessed.
| pier25 wrote:
| Don't worry, Apple gets their money back on the hardware.
| cma wrote:
| Bingo
| C1sc0cat wrote:
| Selling the super high end Mac pros into the audio industry
| probably
| cptskippy wrote:
| Is it possible they keep it around as a pet project for
| developers whom they wish to keep on staff?
| surfpel wrote:
| Doubtful since there's never really a shortage of things to
| work on
| recursive wrote:
| There might be a shortage of cool fun things to work on
| though.
| [deleted]
| gbjw wrote:
| It's the same reason Apple invests so heavily in Pages, Keynote
| and Numbers (all free apps on three different platforms). They
| believe that building software internally (taking hardware into
| account) leads to a better user experience, and sparks an
| intangible 'joy' when using their products--a sense of
| completeness that transcends software and hardware. This was
| the core of Jobs' philosophy and I think still drives the
| entire company.
| saagarjha wrote:
| Apple invests heavily in iWork? That's news to me.
| Occasionally it'll see a couple new features (it's gotten
| better at that recently) but there was a long period between
| 2009 and 2017 or so that it was just worse than the iWork
| suite it replaced.
| freepor wrote:
| One thing that's always been very important to Apple's
| marketing is the sense that the coolest people in the world use
| Macs. The positioning has always been "Well that CEO has a PC
| but that artist with a lot of sexual partners uses a Mac."
|
| Logic is part of the portfolio to preserve that image by having
| as many musicians as possible using Apple hardware and
| software.
| danpalmer wrote:
| Other responses have made great points about why it's worth
| something, but I'll take another tack:
|
| I don't think it costs Apple much to do this.
|
| How much does it cost to keep Logic around? There's
| engineering/product/design costs, marketing, and
| training/selling costs in store. The training probably pays for
| itself and not many staff at Apple Stores are trained anyway.
| There's very little marketing, so it's entirely possible there
| is no dedicated marketing resource for Logic.
|
| As for the product/engineering/design, it's well known that
| Apple is pretty lean on these sorts of things and often has far
| smaller teams than outsiders expect. I could see this easily
| being no more than a team of 5 at this point, maybe less. It
| obviously took a lot more to get it to this point, but with
| very few features over the last ~5 years, it's possible that
| it's been iterated enough to just be easy to maintain in its
| current form (assuming no major changes).
|
| All in maintenance team budget could be <$2m/year (not
| including store training in this). Apple probably spent that on
| door handles in the new HQ, and I can see Logic being as
| important a "halo" project as the HQ door handles.
| sarreph wrote:
| I am incredibly excited to see (from the release notes[0]) that
| they've finally added support for Novation Launchpad controllers.
| As much as I love Logic as my main DAW, a lack of Launchpad /
| Launchkey support meant I often had to lean on Ableton to do live
| "jams". Not sure how well Live Loops will stack up against the
| tried-and-tested Ableton Live, but it's a big step in the right
| direction.
|
| [0] - https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT203718
| nonsapreiche wrote:
| My novation lauchkey 49 works perfectly with logic 10.2
| (control surfaces->setup->new->mackie design HUI and then
| select the input/output port to your lauchkey)
| sarreph wrote:
| Sorry should've clarified. You're right that it works as a
| keyboard controller (w/ sliders and knobs) but I never found
| a way to make the pads useful (at least not in the way they
| so seamlessly integrate with Ableton). To be honest though, I
| always felt that mapping assignments to the Launchkey in
| Logic was quite clunky UX, hopefully this has improved a bit
| in this update.
| nonsapreiche wrote:
| I mapped the pad to the keyboard shortcuts, very useful to
| change the patch plugins ([] on keyboard) or to the
| utrabeat machine to play samples, not quite like ableton
| but you kown... logic was not for live performance and I
| hope it will never be.
| boromi wrote:
| I'd still use Reaper
| [deleted]
| salimmadjd wrote:
| MusicTechHelpGuy on Youtube has summarized all the updates.
|
| If you're new to Logic really recommend his YT channel he has one
| of the most complete Logic training out there and it's all for
| free. His videos are a great place to start for Logic beginners
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-150Nxem5g
| SloopJon wrote:
| The first two things I looked for are the price (free upgrade):
|
| "Logic Pro X 10.5 is available today as a free update for all
| existing users, and is available on the Mac App Store for $199.99
| (US) for new customers."
|
| ... and the system requirements (doesn't require Catalina):
|
| "macOS 10.14.6 or later"
| kitotik wrote:
| Very cool that the Logic Remote apps can actually be used for
| triggering sounds and performance now with the Live Loops as
| opposed to only being useful for mixing / engineering.
|
| I despise having computers in front of me when in the zone, but
| somehow iPads and iPhones don't bother me. This allows setting up
| in a different room and going to town.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2020-05-12 19:00 UTC)