Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Mac Studio Display Choices - Where is 'Overkill'?

G

GrievousAngel

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Apr 10, 2022
17
1
For those out there using a Mac Studio or a mini Mac in a DAW-like recording setup, in terms of display performance and cost, where is the point of overkill?

Apple displays are typically fantastic but typically expensive. IMHO, there is a direct correlation between display size and useful resolution and cost. In DAW setups 27", wide-screen or dual monitors are often used. This also depends on the other apps you may be using on the same computer. In this case it is dedicated to a recording studio setting. So, the question arises. What display do I need?

So . . . What displays are y'all using with 'Happy Smiles'? Please don't limit to Apple displays.

Cheers,

B. Johnson
 
ct2k7

ct2k7

macrumors G3
Aug 29, 2008
8,382
3,439
London
I'm currently using LG UltraFines 4k (pre-refresh). I don't do any reference media work; I'm currently ok with my setup.
 
enricoclaudio

enricoclaudio

macrumors 6502a
Jun 5, 2017
869
1,344
I'm currently using a pair of LG 32UN880-B with my Mac Studio but they are soon to be replaced with a pair of ASD VESA Mount that are on the way. For Pro Tools and Logic Pro, the pair of 32" LG displays are great as I have one of them configured in portrait mode where I have my Pro Tools Edit window and on the one set horizontally, the Mix window. However, after being spoiled for so many years by my iMac 5K Retina resolution, I have to go with the ASDs to get back my Retina resolution as I also do media, photo editing and lot of text/emails so sharp text is very important for me and my eyes would appreciate that extra sharpness that 5K Retina brings. I won't be loosing any screen real state as I run my 32" LG displays at 2560 x 1440 which is the Default Retina resolution for the iMac 5K and ASD. Any ways, if you don't need the sharpness of the ASD, then a 32" 4K display would work really well with Pro Tools and Logic Pro X or any other DAW.

IMG_1305.jpeg
 
J

JayKay514

macrumors regular
Feb 28, 2014
181
161
GrievousAngel said:
For those out there using a Mac Studio or a mini Mac in a DAW-like recording setup, in terms of display performance and cost, where is the point of overkill?
Click to expand...

Honestly you can always use more screen real estate, when dealing with different UIs for the mixer, tracks, plugins, file browsing, CPU meter etc. It does depend on your track counts of course; if you're doing very layered work for soundtracks or Foley work for picture etc, you'll likely want to have more visible at any one time. If you're doing a podcast with just a few participants and/or a soundtrack, you will need less screen real estate.

The other thing is pixel density. If you have a 4K+ Retina type display you get more flexibility to either run it at a standard scaled resolution (with sharper text), or run it at true 1:1 resolution which means the UI becomes tiny, but you get TONS more effective screen real estate. (I tried this for a while, and I don't really recommend it as it causes eyestrain.)

I currently use two Dell P2415Q 'UHD' displays which are not true 4K but very close, with a very high pixel density. I use one in landscape and one in portrait mode. Vertical is really useful if you use things like Reason as a plugin because you can see the whole Rack. If I were in a serious production studio situation I might go for triple displays for tracks, the mixer and then plugins / system UI stuff etc.

For home studio needs, if I were to start fresh, I think I might swap the dual monitors for a single 5K2K display like the LG Ultrafine or the new Studio Display.

I would steer clear of those curved ultrawide monitors, though, because they tend to be for gaming use and actually have an effective lower resolution with lower pixel density - they're meant to be viewed at a distance.
 
Sirmausalot

Sirmausalot

macrumors 65816
Sep 1, 2007
1,135
320
GrievousAngel said:
The LG Ultrafine has been mentioned several times at other Forums. Thanks
Click to expand...
The LG is a good way to go. But I do miss my old 5k iMac screen and I'm considering the studio monitor as a primary display (instead of a second LG) Since the monitor will last 10 years +, maybe it's worth it?
 
Apple Knowledge Navigator

Apple Knowledge Navigator

macrumors 68040
Mar 28, 2010
3,677
12,836
How you use a display is just as important as the specs it offers.

Something that frustrates me when people review units like the Studio Display is that they set it to max brightness in an unlit room and complain about the backlight. Or they cry about the fact that it's not mini-LED, despite there being almost no 27" 5K mini-LED displays on the market or similar - and those that are cost upwards of $4k.

The Studio Display may not or may not represent value depending on your point of view, but what can't be denied is that the panel itself is beautiful. With the correct lighting and environment (and I'm talking about 300 nits in an evenly lit controlled setup), you'd be pushed to see an advantage for mini-LED.
 
  • Like
Reactions: illitrate23
G

GrievousAngel

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Apr 10, 2022
17
1
I purchased

LG HDR 4K 43"

Resolution: 3840 x 2160 (2160p/4K UHD 1 - Ultra High Definition)

UI Looks like: 1920 x 1080 @ 60.00Hz

I am a little disappointed in the apparent screen detail. Is this due to the large screen size? Maybe I should have purchased the $1500 model!

Later
 
Pressure

Pressure

macrumors 603
May 30, 2006
5,166
1,531
Denmark
GrievousAngel said:
I purchased

LG HDR 4K 43"

Resolution: 3840 x 2160 (2160p/4K UHD 1 - Ultra High Definition)

UI Looks like: 1920 x 1080 @ 60.00Hz

I am a little disappointed in the apparent screen detail. Is this due to the large screen size? Maybe I should have purchased the $1500 model!

Later
Click to expand...
If you are sitting at normal monitor distances a PPI of only 102 is very bad.

I personally think for the best viewing experience a 4K resolution shouldn't be on anything larger that a 24" panel at normal viewing distances.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: jdb8167
MajorFubar

MajorFubar

macrumors 68020
Oct 27, 2021
2,167
3,793
Lancashire UK
A 43" 4K display is going to look a bit pixellated at close viewing distances.
I don't see the point in a display that large unless it's so far away from you that you can still comfortably view it corner to corner without having to swing your neck. And at that distance away from you, you probably wouldn't notice the lower PPI.
 
Fishrrman

Fishrrman

macrumors Penryn
Feb 20, 2009
29,177
13,225
Pressure wrote:
"If you are sitting at normal monitor distances a PPI of only 102 is very bad."

Apparently you never used an AppleColor 13" [Trinitron] Display with 640x480 resolution.

I still have mine up in the attic, along with a IIci.

Back in the day, they were thought of as one of the best displays to be used with a Mac.

They cost $999, and that was 35 years ago...!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gr1f, b.k.jackson and illitrate23
R

Ryan0751

macrumors regular
Nov 4, 2013
184
164
My Dell U4021QW is the best purchase I’ve made in a while. 40” ultra wide, slight curve, 5K2K resolution (has the same PPI as a 4K monitor, but is wider).

it has a built in KVM and Thunderbolt, so it’s easy to switch my setup between my MBP and the Mac Studio.

Downsides are that it was very expensive, and the HDMI input is only 2.0 (but I’m not even using it). Due to the resolution, it’s only 60Hz.

But its gorgeous. Huge amounts of screen real estate. And while not “retina” (of which, there only apple and the old LG to choose from), it’s higher PPI than other displays of similar size.
 
C

cdf

macrumors 68020
Jul 27, 2012
2,256
2,583
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom