Hey guys!

Love the article, has some nice and juicy insights that helped me out a ton while I was picking components :)

Now I'm wondering, did I do a good job doing that?

Here are my specs:

Motherboard: MSI MAG Z690 TOMAHAWK WIFI DDR4

Processor: Intel Core i7-12700K 3.6GHz 12-Core Processor

RAM: Corsair 32GB DDR4 Vengeance LPX 2666MHz CL16

Power Supply: EVGA 210-GQ-0650-V1 650 GQ, 80+ GOLD 650W

Storage:

1. SAMSUNG 870 EVO Series 2.5" 2TB SATA III
2. Samsung 980 Pro 1 TB M.2-2280

Cooler: be quiet! Dark Rock Pro 4

Case: be quiet! Silent Base 601

Would majorly appreciate a quick review/check-up -- do I need to make any changes before I pull the final trigger and buy all of the components?

Thanks in advance!

Tym

Assuming this is a pure audio production (and general browsing) PC, then you've done a great job!

But if the system is also intended to do other hardware-intensive tasks, such as gaming, video editing, or 3D rendering, then you'll likely want to add a discrete GPU. For only audio production, the iGPU of the 12700K ought to be enough though.

Also, you might need an adapter kit to ensure compatibility between the Dark Rock Pro 4 cooler and the LGA 1700 socket.

Yup, pure audio as of now. Perhaps some really low-level graphics design stuff but that's gonna be so basic that it will probably be fine with the iGPU.

I can always get a GPU later down the line :)

Just filled in the form, thank you for making me aware of that!

Two questions on the productivity monster build. First - since Thunderbolt could be a really helpful connector with audio, do you have a recommendation for a Z790 DDR5 motherboard that has Thunderbolt - or at least has headers and a compatible Thunderbolt option card? Second, some reports seem to suggest that the Kraken Z73 can be a bit noisy - is that your sense, and wouldn't that be a problem for a rig that should be quiet?

To the first question, the answer is that every motherboard in this article (and just about every motherboard from the past decade) is compatible with thunderbolt expansion cards! All that is required is a compatible PCIe slot. Now, it is also possible to simply opt for a mobo like the MSI MEG Z790 ACE that has native USB-C thunderbolt ports, but they are still an upgrade option for any user (and an expansion card would still be needed if a different Thunderbolt standard is desired/needed).

To the second question, any big cooler can be a source of unwanted noise, and the Kraken Z73 is no exception to this. But for the workloads of audio production work (provided 'smart' fan settings are enabled in the BIOS), fan noise should not be a significant factor; and for what fan noise does occur, the silent-style case should keep things at a low enough level to be well within the purview of even minimal noise reduction in a DAW.

Thanks Daniel! Really helpful. Two last questions. How would the MSI MEG Z790 ACE compare with say the ASUS ProArt Z790-Creator WIFI, which seems more targeted to creators (including music/audio) than gamers? That looks like a lower price point with native Thunderbolt 4 ports.

Finally, as for the case, do you think it matters whether you get the Be Quiet 802 with a glass side or a metal (dampened) side, or should they perform similarly -- especially if recording in the same room?

Either of those motherboards should be fine options! Realistically, motherboard choice is usually not going to be the most impactful part of a build. It's an important part, but once a system is in use it becomes one of the least noticeable. Provided it is compatible with one's processor, RAM, and case choices; has (or can acquire) all of the connections a builder requires; and is of reasonable quality---any mobo should work!

Because that Asus board suits your needs and you like its price, I'd say go for it! Asus is a good component brand.

As to the case question, it might matter. As a general rule, for folks recording near their machine we'd recommend favoring solid cases over windowed cases if possible. The difference is measurable, though not huge. It also depends exactly what a person is recording, and where in the room. Recording a single-person podcast or voiceover on the opposite side of the room may make the difference between those two cases completely negligible, whereas recording a more complicated interview or musical track close to the machine could make it more of a factor.

Anecdotally, I record narration for my YouTube videos directly near a normal (non-silent) windowed case, containing a system with specs somewhere in between the 'home professional' and 'productivity monster' builds. Yet because of the simplicity of the recording and the consistency of the machine noise, conventional noise reduction is totally sufficient to eliminate the PC from the track.

Unfortunately, both bookshelf and tower speakers have been removed on Reddit. Do you guys plan on adding a new speaker recommendations list?

While the content may be a bit outdated as the posts were made a few years ago, I have at least restored access to the charts by swapping the links over to archived versions. Thanks for pointing that out!

I should have known better---I've been trying to pull a rabbit out of hat with a 5 core processor and not nearly enough of everything else as I originally thought. However, the laptop I have, which is less than 2 years old cant handle DAW's ---and the latency/skipping/buffering is killing me, BUT ---I did purchase the laptop before Arturia's AudioFuse Studio was available on the market. Thanks guys---this is great! Back to the drawing board.

This guide was most recently updated just about 5 months ago, and there have been only a few notable GPU releases---and no notable CPU releases---since then. What updates are you hoping to see?

Last year built a PC with AMD Ryzen 7 3800x, ASRock A320 MOBO, 32G RAM 3200 (overclocked), (2) 1 TB SSD, GTX 1650 OC (overclocked), EVGA 500w PSU 80+, case coolers galore! Tascam US-322 USB interface with NI Maschine as only DAW. Have various third party synths and effects. This is a BEAST for my daily music production and plays older games (FC5, Metro Exodus) with ultra/high settings at 60fps (1080). Hope this helps!

I've been coming back and forth to this page to see if I want to take the plunge to build. My big question is with the Productivity Monster Audio Workstation Build ($2700). You've nailed the comp[onents and pricing but I'm able to configure the exact same build through Dell for the same price. What am I missing? I definitely don't want to go with Dell but if I could get it for the same price without the headache of building it my self I would do it. Thanks for the help. Sorry I left something out. I compared the other builds on your list and they come in at a lot cheaper price than to have a Dell build them. That's why I'm asking about the Monster production.

if you aren't able to get better components then from a big brand build. Then there it doesn't make any financial sense.

"It is the colder, denser air, that acts upon the warmer air. Not the other way around. Cold air Sinks" -Me

Would the Dell configured machine have the exact same components as the build above? If so, frankly, I'd go with the Dell. Here at Logical Increments, we generally favor building a PC because it boasts many virtues, such as better component balance, better component quality, and better customization options. But if Dell is offering the exact same parts (even for "unexciting" vital components like the motherboard, power supply, and RAM) for exactly or nearly the same price, then it makes total sense to us for you to go with that (in order to skip the step of building the computer).

Since my last post I've done 2 months of exhaustive research and I'm not ashamed to say I was terribly wrong in my last assessment. Dell's motherboard, case, power supply etc. are no where near the same specs. It just has the same processor crammed in a poorly designed and ventilated case. So my next big question refers to the obvious graphic cards problem. I noticed that the MSI Pro Z690-A has intergraded graphics. Can one go with that and wait out this whole supply chain issue with graphics cards if we don't game at all. I do some video editing for small graphics to use on Twitch but never at the same time I produce.. Thanks again for this resource.

So, while you would hook up your monitor's video cable to the I/O panel of the motherboard in order to use integrated graphics, the integrated graphics processor itself is on the CPU, not the mobo. In the case of the i9-12900K in our current 'productivity monster' example build, the iGPU is the UHD Graphics 770. For an audio production build, you should certainly be able to get by with that iGPU until an appropriate discrete GPU becomes affordable/available. Heck, depending on your workflow (and other goals for the system), it's conceivable that you could find you don't need the discrete GPU at all.

Hi,
Thank you so much for your great article! I’ve been using it as a reference to assemble a PC.
I’m currently using a vintage 2011 iMac and an external RME Fireface audio interface (USB 2.0B)
My budget is around USD2300.

My config:
CPU: Intel i7 12700K
Graphics Card: GTX 1660
Motherboard: Asus Prime Z690M-Plus D4
RAM: 32GB (4 X 8GB) DDR4-3200
Storage 1: 500GB M.2 NVMe SSD (2x M.2 SSD Support?)
Storage 2: 1TB SATA SSD (Crucial)
Power Supply: EVGA 650 GQ
CPU Cooler: Fractal Design Celsius S24 or NZXT Kraken X53?
Case: BeQuiet Silent Base
Chassis fans: BeQuiet Silent Wings
Operating System: Windows 10 Home 64 bits
Optical DVD/CD Rewriter
Additional space for future SSDs

1. Appreciate if you could help to see if what I configured above makes sense and is better than the Home Professional Audio Workstation model in terms of specs?
(I need something in between)

I am intending to use:
Storage 1: 500GB M.2 NVMe SSD for system operations
Storage 2: 1 TB SATA SSD for project files
and
Additional Storage: 1 TB SATA SSDs for sample libraries.

2. Is it better and faster (speed) to combine the Project files and Sample libraries into a single
Storage 2: 2 TB SATA SSD instead?

Thanks in advance!
Regard,
Wei

1. Yes, that list makes sense, should be compatible, and will constitute a more powerful build than the 'Home Professional' example build above. And either of those CPU Cooler options should be perfectly fine; feel free to go with whichever has a design or price that you prefer. But also make sure that you're checking the LGA 1700 compatibility on whichever you pick. You'll likely need a separate kit from the manufacturer to ensure compatibility there. The relevant kit for the Fractal Design cooler is linked alongside the cooler in the 'Home Professional' list. Now, all that being said, along with your CPU upgrade, I'd recommend bumping up the PSU to 750 Watts. It's not strictly necessary, but PSUs run more efficiently at lower percentages of their max load, and that will leave plenty of headroom for upgrades and additions (as well as the possibility of overclocking).

2. There should be no speed difference between having those operations all on one drive versus having them separate (unless there is a speed difference in the specs of the drive options being considered, of course). But if you prefer the organization of having two drives, or if you prefer the overall storage price of having three drives, feel free to go with that preference.

Hi Daniel,
Thanks for your prompt reply. Really helpful.
Just wondering if I use NVMe SSD for Storage 2 instead of SATA SSD, will there be a significant improvement in the speed or not much?

Realistically, not much. I'd recommend reading this blog post of ours, which explains (among other things) how the vast majority of real-world scenarios are not significantly aided by the speed of NVMe drives---despite them having far superior speeds, and thus far superior theoretical performance.

Daniel,
Thanks again for all the info.
Really appreciate it!

Hi, I asked something for motherboard audio realtek is important? Like ALC897 or ALC1220
What if I chose low end mohterboard with ALC897 and added external audio interface or mixer? It's worth it?
Thanks~

If you'll be using an external DAC/Amp or an internal sound card, it doesn't matter which codec is on the motherboard. But if you'll be running an interface/mixer directly out of the motherboard, then I'd recommend aiming for ALC1220.

Hi, what a great article.
I have questions:
- Which of these would be better: Intel i9-12900K (16 cores) or AMD Ryzen 9 5900X (12 cores)?
- I want 128 GB of RAM, is it better to have 8x16 or 4x32?
Thanks

Thank you for your kind words about the article. To your questions:

- Those are both terrific CPUs, but for this situation we'd currently recommend the i9-12900K. It has a faster top speed, more cores, and the same number of threads.

- Technically, it is slightly better to go with 8x16---but in practice, the difference between those two options would be incredibly small, if not negligible (because either arrangement would run with the same CPU-defined count of memory channels), and you'd have to be careful to select a motherboard option that supports 8 sticks of RAM (the board in our top-tier example build in this article doesn't).

Hi! Great article! I'm going to build a PC and I'll use this as a reference!
I have one question though. The current problem I have now is that the VSTs usually take a long time to load, so what's the difference between SDD and HDD and which one should be used to store the VST libraries? What if in the future I'll need more storage for more VSTs? Will a standard external drive work?

If load times are an issue, moving all relevant programs and files to SSD space should be prioritized, as SSDs are significantly faster than HDDs. If you need more storage space in the future and speed is important, then I would recommend adding an additional internal drive to the system at that point (probably a SATA SSD)---as an external drive will be limited by the speed of the port through which it operates (usually USB).

I want to build a PC with the following specs:

i7-9700kf
16GB DDR4 2133
1TB SATA SSD for Windows and Reaper
1TB SATA SSD for samples
1TB HD for recording sessions

Here's an example of what I plan to do:

Spitfire Studio Strings (up to 15 tracks)
Omnisphere (up to 3 tracks)
Keyscape (one or two tracks)
Superior Drummer 3 (one track)
Damage 2 (one or two tracks)

The songs will also have one or two guitars, one bass and up to three vocal tracks.

Will the PC handle it?

While I don't have hands-on experience with some of those programs, I am confident that the answer should be 'yes.' Between the 16GB of RAM and the 8 cores in the (up to 4.9 GHz) CPU, I see no reason for projects with 20-30 total audio tracks to be a problem. I suppose if any of those auxiliary sources or plugins are particularly CPU-heavy, then it could cause problems when you have a large number of them in a single project, but even then I suppose you should be able to work around that by selectively freezing tracks while working.

Thanks for the article!

In deciding on a CPU, it's hard to compare between different models. More cores and threads and faster clock speeds seem like they'd be objectively better but when I look up benchmark tests, it seems like that's not always the case. Any advice for deciding between different CPU's?

Also, noise is important to me. I'm not confident I can pick the right parts and assemble everything correctly to keep things quiet - some of what I'm finding says that even liquid coolers can be noisy if you get the wrong model. So I'm looking at going with a custom build site that specializes in low-noise workstations (Thinkmate is the top contender at the moment). However, these sites don't always have a lot of reviews so it's hard to know how reputable they are. Any tips on making a good decision about this?

Thank you!

(FYI I'm looking at a high-end build comparable to the third option in section 1)

Well, your instinct is generally right---that more cores is better than less, and that higher speeds are better than lower. But there are other factors, such as thread count, cache type/size, and TDP. At any rate, for audio editing, whether higher core count or higher speed takes precedence can vary from program to program and plugin to plugin. Involving a dedicated PC building service can make things simpler, but with the tradeoff of making the system either a little or a lot more expensive. The only service of that kind that we regularly recommend is Puget Systems. We're not affiliated with them in any way; we just know they're very well-reviewed, and that their recommendations often align with ours.

As for noise levels, you'll notice that both the 'home professional' and 'productivity monster' example builds in the article above feature dedicated quiet cases, and that none of the example builds have HDDs (only SSDs). These are both great choices for noise-conscious users. As for cooling, though, that's always going to be tough; there is no completely silent way to effectively cool a modern PC, so the best someone can usually hope for is to only use cooling hardware with fans that have been benchmarked with low noise levels.

Thank you Daniel - this is very helpful and much appreciated!

Just a suggestion, can you add Midi Keyboards on the list?

Not a bad idea! It's definitely something that may be of interest to readers. That said, unfortunately, the author of this guide has much lower availability for us than he used to have (as he has secured a new job elsewhere), so it's unlikely that we would be looking to add a new section or completely new content to this guide any time soon. For now, we'll continue to be focused on keeping the material that is already in the guide up-to-date.

I think the article is great. However, for people with ears deaf of karaoke bars, I prefer doing BandLab. It will take slight tech saavy in virtulization of android on PC to take full advantage of features for vocal recording. It's a perfect compliment and total replacement of Audacity while having many toys to play around with. Handles 16 tracks on 8 core. I have the 3400G after that, because this CPU performs so well, upgrade to a 3700x or 5900x or there really is no MAJOR benefit in creativity.

3400G really is not praised for the mini monster it is. Learn how to eek and squeeze out all the performance because when you know how to make low quality parts sing, your larger investments will have Hi Quality and Smoothness of Flow. I taught myself many things to push the CPU to my mental limits and another year..I'm still not brainy enough...I will be ready to upgrade.

When you are making money from your investment and you find yourself grumbling at the loading, and your CPU isn't keeping up with your imagination, that's when it's time to upgrade. As for now, most problems are fixed with doubling my ram and switching to a larger SSD nVME if possible. $200 investment.

Correct me if I'm wrong but If I get an external USB interface, I don't really need a sound card in the computer. The interface is the sound card right? I'll just be using this for recording and won't need surround sound capabilities.

That's exactly correct. An external DAC/Amp or a dedicated external audio interface will handle all of your needs, and would make a sound card effectively redundant.

Is there a difference in quality from the Intel CPU or the Ryzen AMD for audio work? Can I connect a thunderbolt three audio interface such as the universal audio Apollo to the motherboard? Or do I have to purchase a PCI e-card in order to make my interface work with the system?

Question 1 : There is zero difference in quality for audio work between AMD an Intel. Neither companies focus on audio whatsoever. There are specialized pcie acceleration cards for top-tier pro audio work, and those will take workload off your CPU and run specialized plugins. However, much like pcie desktop soundcards, those are kind of outdated, and not needed anymore at all given the performance/price ratio of today's CPUs and APUs (all-processing units with integrated graphics).
The best value in the market right now, is definitely the Intel i510400F. The Ryzen 5 3600 might have a slight edge over it, but it cost 50% more.
However, I would wait until AMD release their newer APU, the Ryzen 7 4700g. Currently only available to companies, it will be released to the public later on this year, probably near the end of april. This is because the demand right now is too high with everyone working from home.
Given most people doing production work have to handle some video editing those days as well, there will hardly a better option out there. Also note that not having a dedicated GPU more the PC more quiet and easier to cool; you want few, big, quiet fans for a studio PC. There is no need for damping material in the case anymore tho.

Question 2 : Motherboards supporting Thunderbolt 3 are few and far between, and most feature high-end tech you don't need in a dedicated audio build at all. I would suggest getting an expansion card. If your case allow it, there is an extremely well-priced pcie interface that comes with thunderbolt 3 and feature multiple card readers, for around 50 bucks on Amazon (I can't recall the name just yet). It effectively replace any optical drive in the same bay. Again, given the variety of recorders out there, a built-in multi card readers is really really good to have IMHO. No consumer want or need it, so the price is low and the quality is good.
Hope this answer your questions :)

Thanks for the information, even though the prices shown above are not eligible with the ones in my country. So I'm thinking about building a PC on my own but I have a question about CPUs. Considering the fact that I have never used beyond 25-30 samplers / synthesizers in a single project with FL Studio, or never used any other DAWs, due to lack of power. I'm thinking about holding those certain hardwares for my setup :
GIGABYTE GeForce GTX 1650
AMD Ryzen 3 3100
CORSAIR 8GB Vengeance LPX Black 3200MHz CL16 DDR4 (x2)
What kind of improvements would you suggest over this, or what's simply the limit of what I can do with this setup?(I know real limits are within our minds). Moreover, should I replace the CPU with Ryzen 5 3500, is the price difference worth it?
And also I highly doubt that a strong GPU is required for music production. Of course you mentioned this fact so I thought some weaker GPUs should be replaced with these setups above.

You've correctly identified that, if you're going to upgrade that system for audio work, then the CPU is the part to focus on. That said, it might not be very impactful just to move from an R3 3100 to an R5 3500. It does have a couple more cores and a slightly higher top speed, but it also has a couple fewer threads. Altogether, the performance increase of that processor would likely be less than 10% in any given test. So if you're looking for better performance, I'd have to recommend saving up for a more substantial CPU upgrade (perhaps to something like an R7 3800X or an R5 5600X).

Uhm... I'm actually low on budget so I might not be able to afford any of them CPUs. What's the best CPU I can buy under $180? Because it's slightly harder for me to buy those components than it seems.

Honestly, with that budget in the current PC hardware market, I'd recommend sticking with the R3 3100 or looking into a build with an Intel alternative like an i3-10100.

You mention the 10900K as being the superior choice to the 10600K - yet the 10600K has a higher base clock speed, which is supposedly much more suitable for single track instruments using CPU intensive patches in Kontakt for example (and Kontakt can only access 4 cores anyway).

Do you think the 10900K would provide a noticeable enough difference with its extra cores for it to be chosen over the 10600K overall (for example having 20 instances of Kontakt open and playing back audio during a large orchestral project) or would the 10600K perform almost the same as the 10900K in that scenario? I'm just trying to get a grasp on whether or not the difference in performance is noticeable/comparable to the difference in price.

The i5-10600K has a native base clock speed of 4.2 GHz, and a native max clock speed of 4.8 GHz. The i9-10900K has a native base clock speed of 3.7 GHz, and a native max clock speed of 5.3 GHz.

In other words, the top speed of the 10900K is higher. Only the minimum speed is lower. But in hardware-intensive situations, a CPU won't usually be running at its minimum speed anyway. So the 10900K should be noticeably better than the 10600K in terms of both single-core and multi-core performance, across all benchmarks and programs.

Okay, cool.

I was assuming you needed to overclock the CPU to reach those higher speeds, which I don't plan on doing because I need constant performance for many hours at a time, so overclocking wouldn't be the healthiest choice in my situation. So what you're saying is that overall the i9 should be running at an average of or slightly higher than the i5's base speed?

That's correct. The native boost clock speeds do not require overclocking (which would raise both the base and boost clocks of each CPU), and will be automatically used when called for by program tasks.

Thank you for the article.. But i bought the 500 dollar set up from the links provided and it ended up costing me about 800 not including an operating system lol