Magic Russ

abacab

Magic Russ

kennywtelejazz
I'm wondering aloud over here ...What brick walls are folks here hitting while using P 5 ?
 

I would like to be able to load Addictive Drums and Scarbee Rick Bass and one of the Scarbee Electric Pianos into a project.  I get memory issues when I do that in P5.

Project 5 is a 32-bit application, subject to user-mode virtual address space for each 32-bit process of 2GB.
 

Yes, and to make matters worse, jBridge was not helpful.  It is capable of allowing you to run 64-bit plugins in 32-bit applications, each with its own memory space, but I had run into enough issues and annoyances to rule it out as  a solution for me..
 
The original question was "what brick walls are you hitting?", and for me, the 2GB limitation is very much a brick wall.
 
 

This seems like a good place to start ...sure I understand the 2 GB limitation ....
The thing is I loved P5 when I was using Win XP on a P4 w only 2 GB's of ram ...
When I went from Win 8 64 to Win 10 64 HE , I was very happy to find that I got much better performance using P5 on a modern machine .
Part of that has to do with the fact that much of what I had gotten in X3 PE made the trip over ...plugs / synths ...
Just so you know , I'm just riffing over here talking out loud and I can't say I know whats right for anyone else
In my case I've never had a super optimized for DAW use only computer ...I'm sort of used to having to work around things ...
I'm looking at the clock and I don't have enough time to finish writing my post , I'm gonna come back later on when I have the time and pick up where I left off ...
 
OK have been back for awhile and I messed around again w P 5 rewired into SPlat 64 bit ...I used the same plug / work around that was in the video I had linked to this thread ...
I'm getting used to using P 5 all over again in rewire mode ...it is working very good so far ...my feelings are real simple on this ...
P 5 to me is still a valid place to come up with and work out new creative ideas ..
I'm actually very surprised this works  having P 5 rewired into SPlat 64 bit ...
For some people it may not be worth the trouble ..in my case it's not a trouble at all ..
P 5 is still so much quicker than the SONAR Matrix view ( for me ) and it has features that is still not easy to do in SONAR 
I'm gonna do what I have always done ..I'm gonna use P5 to get my Ideas down , then I'm gonna let SONAR do all the heavy lifting
 
 
Kenny

OK. So I finished re-installing Project5 2.5 on my DAW today.  I had left it off when I migrated to Windows 10 x64 and Platinum x64 last July.  Wanted to avoid the 32-bit world for a while, if possible.
 
So really, no point in nit-picking this thing that's over 10 years old, and will still run on Windows 10.  No point trying to load this up like a full blown DAW either.  But for a musical scratchpad, or a groove machine, it still works 
 
I have $1000+ worth of other software that did not make the trip over at all (stuff that ran OK on Win XP & Win 7).
 
Taking it for what it is, and not expecting it to be something it's not, it's really a fast, light, synth workstation.  The matrix view and clip browser is very well integrated.  The workspace is still clean and uncluttered, and doesn't seem outdated at all.  I can also load up many of my 3rd party instruments (that didn't exist 10 years ago).
 
It runs with a fairly low latency on my ASIO drivers, between 5.8 and 11.6 ms (256-512 samples), depending on how I load it with instruments.  With 6 or more instruments stacked, I need to bump it up to 512, but that is still usable.
 
The main thing I observed is that this is a single threaded application, so the internal CPU meter is reflecting the single thread, not the computer total.  Probably got to watch out that you don't hit the ceiling, but so far I haven't been able to. No memory issues here either, but I run more synths than samplers, so my memory footprint is usually low.
 
I tested it with the sample content project, "You Are That Man (Grandpa Mojo)".
 
This project is scattered over 20 tracks (4 MIDI and 16 audio).  The CPU never went above 11% during playback.  Project5 is showing RAM use of about 400MB with this project loaded.  That song sure brings back some old memories of the first time I installed P5 back in the day
 
It still is what it was.  But it actually runs better on today's hardware.  And that ain't bad at all!!!

I had a heck of a time getting that tune out of my head.

kennywtelejazz
I'm wondering aloud over here ...What brick walls are folks here hitting while using P 5 ?
 
Kenny

My i7 4790 says, "I'm not running this".  It chokes on it.  I have yet to try it on my FX6300.  I think I have it installed on my Q6600 and an older AMD.  It was a unique app. I think it was meant to compete with Reason but failed.  For some reason the opening template with the FX used 10% CPU.
 It would be interesting of they turned into a VST.  FL can be used as a VST and I think that have another one that is like a sequencer.

kitekrazy1

kennywtelejazz
I'm wondering aloud over here ...What brick walls are folks here hitting while using P 5 ?
 
Kenny

My i7 4790 says, "I'm not running this".  It chokes on it.

Now that's just really weird.  My i3 runs it without breaking a sweat

abacab

kitekrazy1

kennywtelejazz
I'm wondering aloud over here ...What brick walls are folks here hitting while using P 5 ?
 
Kenny

My i7 4790 says, "I'm not running this".  It chokes on it.

Now that's just really weird.  My i3 runs it without breaking a sweat

Ditto with my i5-3350P.  I haven't bothered with the i7-6700.  I'll accept the group's results

abacab

kitekrazy1

kennywtelejazz
I'm wondering aloud over here ...What brick walls are folks here hitting while using P 5 ?
 
Kenny

My i7 4790 says, "I'm not running this".  It chokes on it.

Now that's just really weird.  My i3 runs it without breaking a sweat

An i7 is a quad core.  P5 came out when single core was the norm. It could be that hyperthreading is the issue.

kitekrazy1

abacab

kitekrazy1

kennywtelejazz
I'm wondering aloud over here ...What brick walls are folks here hitting while using P 5 ?
 
Kenny

My i7 4790 says, "I'm not running this".  It chokes on it.

Now that's just really weird.  My i3 runs it without breaking a sweat

An i7 is a quad core.  P5 came out when single core was the norm. It could be that hyperthreading is the issue.

My CPU is a 3rd gen Intel i3-3240 dual core, with 4 threads and hyperthreading enabled.  I'm locked at 3.4Ghz without turbo, so that's the best any singe thread will get on my machine.  I could upgrade to i7, but I haven't run into anything yet that this i3 can't do. I don't need 100 tracks.
 
You should be able to blast that thing with a single thread using your max turbo frequency of 4.0Ghz.  Don't understand why it's giving you crap?

http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=455613
 
The thread is titled "Favorite Discontinued DAWs..." and Project 5 seems to be the most mentioned.

mumpcake
http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=455613
 
The thread is titled "Favorite Discontinued DAWs..." and Project 5 seems to be the most mentioned.

I think that Project5 may have been abandoned too soon.  It offered a simpler workflow for certain things than Sonar does.
 
I still have P5 installed on Windows 10 and it runs fine.  The only drawbacks that I can see is that it is 32-bit, and single threaded.   Back in the day I had P5, Ableton Live 5, and Acid Pro 6 all installed side by side, along with Sonar.
 
Since I primarily work with synths, I think my preference was for Project 5, because it was a killer virtual synth rack.
 
I never cared for Reason, because they did not support VST plugs.  But P5 was open to all.
 
I think that the main reason given for no longer developing P5, was that moving to 64-bit would involve too much work.  That's a shame, because P5 was such a good idea, maybe a little bit ahead of it's time.  It now appears that Live and P5 got together and had a baby.  It's name is Bitwig. 
 
Maybe the best we could hope for in the next Sonar UI update, is that the Matrix view could be better integrated beside the track view, in a horizontal arrangement.  That would be more intuitive IMHO.
 
The obvious question to be answered for any of the current bakers that were not around in the P5 times, is what is still missing from Sonar?  It might appear now that anything you could do in P5 can be done in Sonar.  Sonar has a synth rack, (Groove) Matrix View, and a file browser ...