Xref: utzoo rec.music.synth:17874 comp.sys.next:10798
Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!cunixf.cc.columbia.edu!cunixa.cc.columbia.edu!garton
From: garton@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Bradford Garton)
Newsgroups: rec.music.synth,comp.sys.next
Subject: Re: NeXT audio vs. Mac w/ sound tools
Message-ID: <1990Dec17.143306.6744@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu>
Date: 17 Dec 90 14:33:06 GMT
References: <13210@asylum.SF.CA.US>
Sender: news@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (The Daily News)
Organization: Columbia University Electronic Music Center
Lines: 21

In article <13210@asylum.SF.CA.US> langz@asylum.UUCP (Lang Zerner) writes:
> 	I am considering picking up either a mac II ci w/ digidesign sound
>tools or a next .What are the smpte and midi lock capabilities of the next and
>more importantly how expensive are they vs the mac digidesign package . Is any
>one using the next in a professional audio situation ? responses apreciated ,

Mac is a better choice if he/she wants a "turnkey" system, but the NeXT is
more extensible (and with lots of PD software, too -- csound, cmix, cmusic,
etc.).  I don't know that any SMPTE sync systems currently exist for the
NeXT, but I do know of two guys (Andy Milburn and Tom Hajdu, aka tamandandy,
inc.) who are doing extensive commercial work with a couple of cubes.  They're
the guys responsible for "BUZZ" in MTV, plus a lot of the fast-cut glitzo
MTV-style commercials on the tube (I think Reebok and/or Nike are some of their
clients).

NeXT gives you more, price-wise (DSP, faster processor, disk space, etc.)
but doesn't have all the MIDI software the Mac does.

Brad Garton
Music Dept.
brad@woof.columbia.edu