VC64 is locked, it only works in SONAR even tough it's a vst thus the error message. Did you try the Opcode error option with the Fabton and ARX plugs?

I use jBridge exclusively. It seems to keep a degree of stability  in SONAR not present when using Bitbridge or both.

Because I also use Presonus Studio One 2 and it doesn't have internal bridging, jBridge does universal duty in my 64 bit world.
no real evidence for that statement except it seems so with my own system.

why ? A good programmed "Tool "would not make problems ...imagine stuf flike this WOULD be in aircraft ?
starting to  get my point ?
FLAWLESS software --is possible ...with alot of work only though
 
 
can you do it also ? I realy use alot of plugs ,and they all should work in sonar 64bit
  But anyways ....good to read ....I now know what the issues are in X2 on my system ; P
 

Heroics


why ? A good programmed "Tool "would not make problems ...imagine stuf flike this WOULD be in aircraft ?
starting to  get my point ?
FLAWLESS software --is possible ...with alot of work only though
 
 
can you do it also ? I realy use alot of plugs ,and they all should work in sonar 64bit
  But anyways ....good to read ....I now know what the issues are in X2 on my system ; P
 

Just a couple of thoughts to add...


- If it were developed for use on an aircraft it would be a LOT more expensive.  It would be developed under very controlled processes and practices and undergo extensive testing.  You won't find this level of development/testing rigor in a consumer product.  It is way too expensive and takes way too long.  The marketplace has determined what is acceptable.  This is not a bad thing.  If a DAW were developed under the same rigorous controlled conditions as that for the aircraft (medical, military, ...)  industry it would be outrageously expensive and I doubt that many of us on this forum would have a copy.  Again, the marketplace has determined what is acceptable.  It is a balancing act.  Too expensive = it won't sell.  Too buggy = it won't sell.  There are companies that go broke with either scenario. 


- Keep in mind that even with all of the controls and rigorous testing of NASA software there have still been several notable and extremely expensive software bugs.  I am quite sure no expense was spared during the development and testing phases but there were still problems.  When dealing with complex systems it is extremely difficult to guarantee that there are no errors.  Development tools and processes have improved tremendously over the years.  For a simple system the tools/processes can guarantee no errors.  Unfortunately for the complex systems (such as a DAW)  that complexity makes it virtually impossible to deliver a 100% bug-free product .  It has however made it possible to develop reasonably bug free products that can be sold at a reasonably inexpensive price that even a hobbyist can afford.


I don't want to start another endless debate over the possibility of creating bug-free software.  I have never shared my thoughts on this in a forum before but thought I would chime in this time.  Not to say anyone else is wrong but only to share my personal experience of almost 30 years of experience in software/hardware development.


We live a wonderful time for consumer toys.  New software and devices that are inexpensive and fun (and sometimes when we are lucky even incredibly useful) are showing up at a rapid pace.  The marketplace will determine when things need to slow down a bit and there needs to be an increased emphasis on quality.  We see signs of that everytime there is a fumble by Apple with a new iPhone release or there is a huge recall.  My 2012 Nissan Quest just had a recall to have new software loaded due to a bug where it would stop running under a certain set of conditions.  Just a software bug.  But it got through the development and testing processes.


Don

+1 to don4777

well said; i agree that we should all consider us lucky to have such powerful tools (or toys, depends on usage I reckon) available at such affordable prices.

I spent years in a different engineering world, one where software licenses for a single engineer are in the range of 200K $. You would expect much superior performance from such programs; yet they didn't deliver it. It was good for the usual 97% of the work, but power users always struggled with the same bugs which never got sorted ... sounds familiar, doesn't it? let's be happy that at least we're living in a different price gap.

Furthermore, a 'growing' software does become more complex and with key people leaving, it may get very hard to maintain. I think Cake did a great job redesigning / rewriting Sonar; X2a is pretty stable (apart from certain peculiar situations and hardware configurations) and hopefully maintaining market share. I've seen companies trying similar revamps of their product but went down with it ...