17th of march.. AND Boston ? surely a lot of the city will be closed down pretty much ;-)

17th of march.. AND Boston ? surely a lot of the city will be closed down pretty much ;-)

 
I never realized that McDonald's shamrock shakes were that popular.    
 

guitardood

JonD

guitardood

 

Personally, I do believe that the whole move to 64-bit is hype.  From a DAW perspective.  Does anyone really have any projects, "without memory-starved soft synths", require more than 2gb of RAM?  As a programmer, I would find that very hard to believe.  This is the reason I asked the question the other day about being able to run BFD2 or Machfive 64-bit versions under 32-bit Sonar.  Would get rid of the whole flaky bit-bridge on 90% of my plugins and allow my two memory pigs to operate in 64-bit (found out this is possible with jbridge but haven't tried yet).


I mean seriously.  I had multiple 75+ track projects using tons of both native and UAD plugs and NEVER ran out of memory under Sonar 7.


Best,

 
Huh?  You just gave yourself as a contradiction to your own argument...

Why do "you" need BFD2 and Machfive in 64-bit versions?  Answer honestly, and you'll have the answer to the question why others need their "Memory-starved soft synths" too. (You "need" your BFD2 and MachFive. Others "need" their Omnisphere. Kontakt, etc...).

Given that, how is it all hype?   (I honestly don't get your point).

After typing 12 responses that were in ALL*CAPS, I decided to try and mind my tone.  My whole point was that Sonar, in and of itself, is an extremely streamlined application that, in and of itself, has no direct need for 64-bit.  Neither do EQ's or Compressors or delays or gates or even the 20-40%-Better-Super-Deluxe convolution reverb of the week.

The only need for 64-bit, IN A DAW APPLICATION AS STREAMLINED AS SONAR, is for the memory-starved synths.   Can anyone possible disagree with that statement and keep a straight face?   My point is that is the ONLY reason for needing 64-bit.   And pardon my forgetfulness as I was only coding assembler instructions yesterday, if you can dig up some x86-64 specific op-codes that do some special special 64-bit voodoo that no other programmer is aware of when the processor is in 64-bit mode other than the ability to access more memory, I'l eat every computer in my office (talk about when good sentences go bad).

The bit-bridge solution has caused quite a few crashes, FOR ME.  So ME-MYSELF-AND-I don't like it!  I have plugs for which I paid good money that are rendered useless by bit-bridge bugs.  My point was that the jbridge solution allows the 64-bit synths to be 64-bit  and use all the memory that you can throw at them, without the requirement that every-freaking-thing else in my DAW system be 64-bit as well, or glued together with the bit-bridge solution which has turned my monitor a lovely shade of white glow on more than a couple occasions, in the middle of a creative spurt.  If it works for you, wonderful!!!


I believe that a lot of people are believing that their 64-bit low-memory-usage-apps are running better, only because the overly-bloated Windows receives the most benefit from it being in 64-bit and that if you were to subjectively benchmark the same apps 32-bit-version-vs-64-bit-version there would actually be NO DIFFERENCE in performance.  But I've only been programming for 30 years, what do I know about these complex bit-banging-fluter-hickies?

It would be nice, however, if you could limit your personal attacks to yourself.


Best,

 
Wow.  I asked you this because I wasn't clear on what you were arguing. 
 
Personal attack?  Certainly not my intent.  My apologies, if you felt that way.
 
It seems bad moods abound here lately.  Time for me to take a break from this place for awhile.

JonD

guitardood

JonD

guitardood

 

Personally, I do believe that the whole move to 64-bit is hype.  From a DAW perspective.  Does anyone really have any projects, "without memory-starved soft synths", require more than 2gb of RAM?  As a programmer, I would find that very hard to believe.  This is the reason I asked the question the other day about being able to run BFD2 or Machfive 64-bit versions under 32-bit Sonar.  Would get rid of the whole flaky bit-bridge on 90% of my plugins and allow my two memory pigs to operate in 64-bit (found out this is possible with jbridge but haven't tried yet).


I mean seriously.  I had multiple 75+ track projects using tons of both native and UAD plugs and NEVER ran out of memory under Sonar 7.


Best,

 
Huh?  You just gave yourself as a contradiction to your own argument...

Why do "you" need BFD2 and Machfive in 64-bit versions?  Answer honestly, and you'll have the answer to the question why others need their "Memory-starved soft synths" too. (You "need" your BFD2 and MachFive. Others "need" their Omnisphere. Kontakt, etc...).

Given that, how is it all hype?   (I honestly don't get your point).

After typing 12 responses that were in ALL*CAPS, I decided to try and mind my tone.  My whole point was that Sonar, in and of itself, is an extremely streamlined application that, in and of itself, has no direct need for 64-bit.  Neither do EQ's or Compressors or delays or gates or even the 20-40%-Better-Super-Deluxe convolution reverb of the week.

The only need for 64-bit, IN A DAW APPLICATION AS STREAMLINED AS SONAR, is for the memory-starved synths.   Can anyone possible disagree with that statement and keep a straight face?   My point is that is the ONLY reason for needing 64-bit.   And pardon my forgetfulness as I was only coding assembler instructions yesterday, if you can dig up some x86-64 specific op-codes that do some special special 64-bit voodoo that no other programmer is aware of when the processor is in 64-bit mode other than the ability to access more memory, I'l eat every computer in my office (talk about when good sentences go bad).

The bit-bridge solution has caused quite a few crashes, FOR ME.  So ME-MYSELF-AND-I don't like it!  I have plugs for which I paid good money that are rendered useless by bit-bridge bugs.  My point was that the jbridge solution allows the 64-bit synths to be 64-bit  and use all the memory that you can throw at them, without the requirement that every-freaking-thing else in my DAW system be 64-bit as well, or glued together with the bit-bridge solution which has turned my monitor a lovely shade of white glow on more than a couple occasions, in the middle of a creative spurt.  If it works for you, wonderful!!!


I believe that a lot of people are believing that their 64-bit low-memory-usage-apps are running better, only because the overly-bloated Windows receives the most benefit from it being in 64-bit and that if you were to subjectively benchmark the same apps 32-bit-version-vs-64-bit-version there would actually be NO DIFFERENCE in performance.  But I've only been programming for 30 years, what do I know about these complex bit-banging-fluter-hickies?

It would be nice, however, if you could limit your personal attacks to yourself.


Best,

 
Wow.  I asked you this because I wasn't clear on what you were arguing. 
 
Personal attack?  Certainly not my intent.  My apologies, if you felt that way.
 
It seems bad moods abound here lately.  Time for me to take a break from this place for awhile.

No worries.  I'm very sorry as well.  My fuse has been a bit short and I probably read too much emotion in your post and probably over reacted.


Again, Very Sorry.
Best,

guitardood

Freddie H

Bub

Freddie H

Pro Tools HD - a DAW that has lived under a rock the last 15 years.... Only DAW that only works on Windows 95 and XP32. Only DAW on the market that are still in x32bit only 2013 and have no new technology functions and totally outdated.
The latest features were non destructible faders and record and working with 32 bit files? All other DAW has had that since the late 90ths.
today you can't find any functions that Pro Tools do better then other DAW. Actually it's the opposite. all other DAWs do it 10 times better.

It just goes to show what kind of damage marketing hype can do. Referring to the whole 64-bit debacle.

So 64bit is a "hype" to you?
....Bub...this is just getting worse.. 
 

Personally, I do believe that the whole move to 64-bit is hype.  From a DAW perspective.  Does anyone really have any projects, "without memory-starved soft synths", require more than 2gb of RAM?  As a programmer, I would find that very hard to believe.  This is the reason I asked the question the other day about being able to run BFD2 or Machfive 64-bit versions under 32-bit Sonar.  Would get rid of the whole flaky bit-bridge on 90% of my plugins and allow my two memory pigs to operate in 64-bit (found out this is possible with jbridge but haven't tried yet).


I mean seriously.  I had multiple 75+ track projects using tons of both native and UAD plugs and NEVER ran out of memory under Sonar 7.


Best,

Yes.

I run EWQLSO Platinum and loading any more than about 14 instruments / 20 or so articulations and that was the limit for a 32 bit system.

on 64 bit I can load 50 instruments, about 100 different articulations and my RAM usage is about 9Gb

Bristol_Jonesey

guitardood

Freddie H

Bub

Freddie H

Pro Tools HD - a DAW that has lived under a rock the last 15 years.... Only DAW that only works on Windows 95 and XP32. Only DAW on the market that are still in x32bit only 2013 and have no new technology functions and totally outdated.
The latest features were non destructible faders and record and working with 32 bit files? All other DAW has had that since the late 90ths.
today you can't find any functions that Pro Tools do better then other DAW. Actually it's the opposite. all other DAWs do it 10 times better.

It just goes to show what kind of damage marketing hype can do. Referring to the whole 64-bit debacle.

So 64bit is a "hype" to you?
....Bub...this is just getting worse.. 

Personally, I do believe that the whole move to 64-bit is hype.  From a DAW perspective.  Does anyone really have any projects, "without memory-starved soft synths", require more than 2gb of RAM?  As a programmer, I would find that very hard to believe.  This is the reason I asked the question the other day about being able to run BFD2 or Machfive 64-bit versions under 32-bit Sonar.  Would get rid of the whole flaky bit-bridge on 90% of my plugins and allow my two memory pigs to operate in 64-bit (found out this is possible with jbridge but haven't tried yet).


I mean seriously.  I had multiple 75+ track projects using tons of both native and UAD plugs and NEVER ran out of memory under Sonar 7.


Best,

Yes.

I run EWQLSO Platinum and loading any more than about 14 instruments / 20 or so articulations and that was the limit for a 32 bit system.

on 64 bit I can load 50 instruments, about 100 different articulations and my RAM usage is about 9Gb

@bristol_jonesey: My statement you quoted above had the caveat of:"Without Memory-Starved-SoftSynths".  Isn't EWQLSO, specifically, a memory-starved-soft-synth?  Sonar isn't using 9gb, EWQLSO is probably using somewhere between 6-8gb.  It may look as though Sonar is using that ram because of the way DLLs get loaded, but I can assure you that Sonar is more than likely only using about 20% of that for everything else other than the Orchestra synth.


Best,

Point is, I could not run it in a 32 bit system.

It would fall over before a quarter of the artics were loaded

Bub

 

Freddie, I think your a great guy ... but if you're really going to sit here and argue about Pro Tools up against a billion dollar studio ... and put it at #20 on your list of DAW's ... well, I think there's no more point in talking about it with you anymore. You're never going to see the forest through the trees.

Thanks,

Bub.

I see the forest and the trees alright!
I have countless of hours behind Pro Tools HD in other studios. I first come in contact with it in 90ths when it was more less a “standard” but not today.

 
Today, many that has never used it or know it, has buy into the big “hype” of a wonder magical DAW that can do all kinds of things and other magical stuff that other DAW s can’t. This can’t be more far from the true. In fact Pro Tools has less functions and less capability the other average DAW: s on the market. Pro Tools are years behind, just facing it; it’s just the naked truth. It don’t even run and work to satisfaction on Windows 7 x64 yet even if it's only x32bit program limit to 3GB RAM? By the way the only DAW program that still is x32bit in 2013. Very “PRO”…not.
 
The other myth that going around is that “ALL PROS” use it and all the biggest studios too! Not true either. 90% has dropped it already and moved to other modern platforms like Cubase, Logic, Samplitude, Sonar that do have x64bit support , Surround 5.1. and other functions. Pro Tools don’t even have 5.1 supports or sync to video.
 
 
 
It’s true that some “icons” still use Pro Tools like Dave Pensado that is by the way a very kind and nice man in person. But if you ask Dave why he still use Pro Tools, it’s not because of it’s the greatest DAW program out there on the planet. He knows all the weaknesses too. No, it’s because he uses audio 99% and has not the strengths to learn something better right now. But if it comes to it, he will do that too.

 
 
So let’s imagine Pro Tools had x64bit today and it worked all fine Windows 7 or 8 x64. Still it would be 10 years behind when it comes to simple functions working with Audio or MIDI inside the DAW.    
I like you too Bub! Have a great one!

Er guitar dood with all due respect you seem to think you are the only developer here. I own a copy of visual studio too and my degree is in computer science. That doesn't make me a know it all or qualify me to judge what you know or do not know. Nothing I said was incorrect in my last statement. You merely expanded it but again neglected to mention that actually some operations and subroutines (not just registers etc) are specifically optimized for 64 bit code. In a lot of instances some of the assembled code can be far more efficient. 64 bit compilers are different to 32 bit compilers. End of.

@ Guitardood

If you are a programmer as you say that you are, I don’t need to explain all the seatbacks when it comes to x32bit calculations. You should know that already. All CPU Memory and chips are in x64bit today so it needs to convert all x32bit calculations to be feed into the binary stream. Takes time and resources.
 
Funny that you say all LOVE about 32bit? All my friends that are programmers are the opposite to you? Love x64bit and actually talk all the benefits about 128bit DSP calculations.