Jump to content


Please note: You can easily log in to MPN using your Facebook account!

I do not fully understand this 64 bit buisness...


zahush76

Recommended Posts

Ok. I understand it's wiser to make the change and install windows 7 64 bit. What i don't fully understand is running 32 bit programs in a 64 bit envoirement.

To explain: i wanted to know wether all the plugins in komplete 7 are compatible with win 7 64bit. This is what the FAQ says:

 

Most current Native Instruments products (hardware and software) are fully compatible with Windows Vista and Windows 7 64-bit editions. The only exceptions from the current product range are KORE 2 and REAKTOR 5.

 

Though KORE 2 and REAKTOR 5 are still 32-bit programs, they can be used on Windows Vista and Windows 7 64-bit systems as long as they run in standalone mode or are being integrated as plugin into a 32-bit host software.

 

I didn't get the part where you're running reaktor 5 on a 32 bit host. If i'm to install cubase 5 as a 32 bit version - what's the point of having win 7 64 bit?

Vermona Perfourmer mkii, Nord Stage 3 76
Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Replies 32
  • Created
  • Last Reply

The point is software that can support a 64-bit environment will be able to take advantage of the larger memory addressing possible under a 64-bit OS. This is helpful for example with large sample libraries (can stuff more in RAM).

 

The reality is that we (music software consumers and developers) are in a transition period between 32 and 64 bit, so you just have to deal, or perhaps try bridging software:

 

http://jstuff.wordpress.com/jbridge/

 

I'm still happily in 32-bit land. I'll make the jump when everything I use works in a 64-bit environment.

 

-John

I make software noises.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every time there has been a transition in number of bits, the operating system software designers have written "bridging" software - primarily because there is a period of time, sometimes considerable, when customers are running a mixture of the old and the new. This happened way back in the 8bit to 16 bit days, then the 16 to 32, and now the 32 to 64.

 

The primary advantage of larger bit numbers in computer processing is the ability to address a larger memory space contigously. Programming tricks can be used to "page" memory so that a processor can operate in a larger memory space than it natively supports; but such programming tricks always lose some efficiency.

 

In the case of Windows, the particular software layers that allow 32-bit programs to run inside the 64-bit processor are called "thunking" (no idea why). They designate a specific area of the 64-bit map that can be used by the specific program.

 

For a very large majority of the people who purchase PCs - 64-bits is overkill - but _marketing_ creates the idea that it is new, it is better, same old same old - as is the job of marketing.

 

For certain scientific applications, large number crunching applications, and musical applications such as storing very large sample sets totally in RAM, where they can be accessed more quickly - the 64-bit operating system is helpful, even necessary. However, every single piece of the puzzle must be in place. Example: I have the EWQL Gold Pianos library - and I am running it on a 64-bit processor with Windows 7 Pro 64-bit. However, the hardware motherboard that I am using can only hold 8 G of RAM. As a result, I can still not load the entire set of samples for one of the pianos into RAM, so that I can stream them directly from RAM (it would take about 24G or a bit more RAM to handle the OS, DAW software, Play engine, and samples to do that), so - for all practical purposes, I am only using about 2.5 G of the 8G RAM on the system.

 

Problems - during the transition period, a lot of hardware devices never have driver software written for the 64-bit - and older devices may NEVER have 64-bit drivers written. This makes the device obsolete. Another problem is that very old software won't work at all - the 64-bit versions of Windows cannot operate any 16-bit programs (I still have my old Windows XP DAW that I keep running just for a couple of old plug-ins that won't run on the new one - in one case it is because of the program being 16-bit, in another case, it is because the newer Windows 7 OS no longer supports some of the copy protection needed to install the software). Even though the software is old, it still gives me certain useful sounds and effects.

 

Within a few years, most of the software availabile will be 64-bit (of course, by then, the companies will be coming out with 128-bit processors, most likely).

 

For the time being, with Reaktor, you may have to see if a dual install is possible, or live within the 32-bit limitation. I use a low end version of Sonar that is 32-bit only, so I don't have that particular problem. EWQL is installed as a 64-bit application, but they provide BOTH a 64-bit and a 32-bit VST (in different directories).

Howard Grand|Hamm SK1-73|Kurz PC2|PC2X|PC3|PC3X|PC361; QSC K10's

HP DAW|Epi Les Paul & LP 5-str bass|iPad mini2

"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."

Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not going to get a mac, that's for sure.

But i'm buying a new computer and getting into the cubase buisness from zero. So i figured if i'm strating from scratch - and not continuing an old system - it's better to start from 64 bit in the first place. I don't have any old plugins that i'm used to work with.

But still, as you can see in the case of NI Komplete - i won't be able to enjoy all it's features if i make the choice towards 64 bit, but won't be able to enjoy the full capabillity of the computer if i don't (intel i7 950, intel x58 motherbord, 6 gb of ram).

So i'm trying to figure out what's the way to go.

Vermona Perfourmer mkii, Nord Stage 3 76
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cubase 5 will give you the option to install both 32 & 64bit versions.

Cubase 64 has something called VST bridge which will attempt to run 32bit plugs, with varying degrees of success. Someone else mentioned JBridge, which is an add on app that apparently works much better. I have it, but have not installed it yet.

You will still see a performance improvement in Cubase 32 in a 64 bit system. I have 8g of ram, and Cubase 32 is much snappier than it was in XP, where I used only 4g ram.

 

You will be able to run most of your Komplete package in 64bit, except as I understand, Reaktor. You can still run Komplete in Cubase 32 mode if you absolutely have to use Reaktor.

Worst case, you could do your Reaktor track in 32bit, save it as a wav file, then load up your song in Cubase64 to have the ram for your other 64bit plugs.

 

What I'd like Propellerheads to do is to make Rewire 64bit. I can't sync Acid & Reason to Cubase anymore because Rewire is only 32bit.

There's always workarounds however.

What we record in life, echoes in eternity.

 

MOXF8, Electro 6D, XK1c, Motif XSr, PEKPER, Voyager, Univox MiniKorg.

https://www.abandoned-film.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Zahush,

 

On Windows 64-bit the system gives 32-bit programs more memory (more precisely: a bigger address space) than on Windows 32-bit. This comes into account if your system has more than 4 Gigabyte of RAM available.

 

The reason is that Windows 32-bit itself can only use 4 GB of RAM, as this is the max. possible 32-bit address space. Also, Windows itself uses some part of it, so that there is usually less than 3 GB left available for applications in total.

 

On Windows 64-bit the available address space is 16 Terabytes. If you run a 32-bit program it may use the full amount of the 32-bit address space which is 4 GB. Also, if you run multiple 32-bit programs, each of them may use its own 4 GB address space.

 

For Cubase 32-bit this means that you have 4 GB available instead of usually less than 3 GB on 32-bit Windows, which may make a difference if you use plug-ins that use a high amount of memory.

 

In addition, you may use a plug-in bridging technology such as the Cubase built-in VST bridge or the 3rd-party jbridge utility. Using this, a bridged 32-bit plug-in runs in its own process context and therefore may use its own 4 GB address space. So even if you use Cubase 32-bit and only use 32-bit plug-ins, using a bridge may make sense on Windows 64-bit.

 

As 64-bit plug-in and driver development still appears to be transitional and quite a few plug-ins or drivers are not yet available in 64-bit or still have stability issues, my impression currently is that using Cubase 32-bit on Windows 64-bit is the preferred way to go at the moment. Of course, YMMV :)

 

Hope this helps,

Roland

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would email NI and ask how long before they release 64bit version of Reaktor and KORE2.

 

Not sure you'd get a useful answer. :)

 

To the OP: again, we're in transition times here. You can go with 64-bit and deal with the stuff that's not quite there via a bridging solution or live without.

 

Posters here raise a more important point though: will your audio interface work with 64-bit!?! That's a pretty key component!

I make software noises.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posters here raise a more important point though: will your audio interface work with 64-bit!?! That's a pretty key component!

 

Any half decent company should be providing a 64bit driver for their audio card.

My Delta66 is 10 years old, and M-Audio has a 64bit driver.

What we record in life, echoes in eternity.

 

MOXF8, Electro 6D, XK1c, Motif XSr, PEKPER, Voyager, Univox MiniKorg.

https://www.abandoned-film.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posters here raise a more important point though: will your audio interface work with 64-bit!?! That's a pretty key component!

 

Any half decent company should be providing a 64bit driver for their audio card.

My Delta66 is 10 years old, and M-Audio has a 64bit driver.

 

Alas, my EMU1212 is much younger than that, and EMU has stated they will NOT write W7 drivers of any sort for it, never mind 64-bit drivers.

 

Fortunately, the legacy software still WORKS in W7, though I occasionally have to "restore default settings" on it to fix a bungle.

 

But I definitely won't be buying EMU when I build my new system, if this is how they respond to legacy customers.

 

Worst part is, they still MAKE the EMU1212 - but as a PCIX card, apparently with a completely different driver set.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

eMu beta drivers for Windows 7 and Vista:

http://connect.creativelabs.com/emu/default.aspx

 

released 10/11/2010 for the PCI or PCIe cards, also released 10/17/2010 for the USB eMu products. 32 or 64 bit Windows. Seems like these beta drivers "expire," don't know if they quit working then or just won't be available after then; but it does show that they are working on Win 7 support.

 

I must admit that I am still using the Vista released drivers, using a 1212M in this very computer running dual-boot Win 7 Pro, 32 bit at the moment, but I can boot to 64 bit. Also running a 64 bit Win 7 Pro DAW with an eMu 1820M.

 

Howard Grand|Hamm SK1-73|Kurz PC2|PC2X|PC3|PC3X|PC361; QSC K10's

HP DAW|Epi Les Paul & LP 5-str bass|iPad mini2

"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."

Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

eMu beta drivers for Windows 7 and Vista:

http://connect.creativelabs.com/emu/default.aspx

 

released 10/11/2010 for the PCI or PCIe cards, also released 10/17/2010 for the USB eMu products. 32 or 64 bit Windows. Seems like these beta drivers "expire," don't know if they quit working then or just won't be available after then; but it does show that they are working on Win 7 support.

 

I must admit that I am still using the Vista released drivers, using a 1212M in this very computer running dual-boot Win 7 Pro, 32 bit at the moment, but I can boot to 64 bit. Also running a 64 bit Win 7 Pro DAW with an eMu 1820M.

 

I'm still using my 1212M in 32bit W7 - but when I went to their support forums, the mods stated they were not going to release 1212M drivers for W7, nor would they write 64-bit drivers for 1212M.

 

I'm not trying to talk shit about EMU, I'm just going on what their people stated directly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still 32-bit, and still Windows XP for me. For my money, it's the still the best option for my needs. I've got XP stripped down so much that, even though I'm only accessing 3.5 GB of RAM, it's been more than enough because my XP uses so little. I do some pretty intensive stuff too. I'm sure I'll upgrade to 64-bit at some point, and maybe even upgrade to Windows 7, but that'll only happen if and when I have to replace any hardware and they've stopped supporting XP.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

eMu beta drivers for Windows 7 and Vista:

http://connect.creativelabs.com/emu/default.aspx

 

released 10/11/2010 for the PCI or PCIe cards, also released 10/17/2010 for the USB eMu products. 32 or 64 bit Windows. Seems like these beta drivers "expire," don't know if they quit working then or just won't be available after then; but it does show that they are working on Win 7 support.

 

I must admit that I am still using the Vista released drivers, using a 1212M in this very computer running dual-boot Win 7 Pro, 32 bit at the moment, but I can boot to 64 bit. Also running a 64 bit Win 7 Pro DAW with an eMu 1820M.

 

I'm still using my 1212M in 32bit W7 - but when I went to their support forums, the mods stated they were not going to release 1212M drivers for W7, nor would they write 64-bit drivers for 1212M.

 

I'm not trying to talk shit about EMU, I'm just going on what their people stated directly.

 

I had not checked in a while (being of the theory that if something is working OK, leave it that way). Sounds to me like someone corporately above the mods changed their priorities - like maybe somebody up higher realized that there might just be lawsuits if they were still selling 1212's and the product did not run on W7. I'm not biased toward emu, just that I have a bunch of their audio devices already, and want to keep using them as long as I can - 1-1212M, 1-1820M, 1-1820, 1-1616M, and 3-0404.

 

The actual files were not linked on the page referenced, just a way to register to get them. I might just check it out - some of the functionality in Windows is not there in the present Vista/W7 drivers that was in XP. My biggest trouble at first was not realizing that both the eMu and Windows MUST be set at either 44.1 or 48 for things to cooperate.

 

I still run Emulator X on the older DAW, almost totally for occasional use of some of the retro sounds and the Planet Earth world sound bank (which I don't have any other source for).

 

Howard Grand|Hamm SK1-73|Kurz PC2|PC2X|PC3|PC3X|PC361; QSC K10's

HP DAW|Epi Les Paul & LP 5-str bass|iPad mini2

"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."

Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All this tech talk gives me a headache. All this stuff is just another example of how much time musicians waste on setting up, tweaking, hair pulling, crashing, cursing, and spending (money) on all this computer crap. That time could be better spent PLAYING MUSIC. :cry: Not to mention that money could be better spent (or saved) too.

 

 

Mike T.

Yamaha Motif ES8, Alesis Ion, Prophet 5 Rev 3.2, 1979 Rhodes Mark 1 Suitcase 73 Piano, Arp Odyssey Md III, Roland R-70 Drum Machine, Digitech Vocalist Live Pro. Roland Boss Chorus Ensemble CE-1.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That time could be better spent PLAYING MUSIC. :cry:

 

Mike T.

 

I agree, Mike.

 

I do.

 

Guilty as charged.

 

Having said that, I'll tell ya that both music and technology really make my neurons fire. Itza natural thing and I can't help myself.

 

Nevertheless, there are times I - we - should just shut up and play.

 

Happy Holidays to ya, Mike!

 

Tom

 

"Music expresses that which cannot be put into words and that which cannot remain silent." - Victor Hugo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All this tech talk gives me a headache. All this stuff is just another example of how much time musicians waste on setting up, tweaking, hair pulling, crashing, cursing, and spending (money) on all this computer crap. That time could be better spent PLAYING MUSIC. :cry: Not to mention that money could be better spent (or saved) too.

Mike T.

 

I agree, but you still have to choose a medium to record that music you're playing.

Nobody hates phuking around wasting time with computers more than me, but my 64bit system is a beautiful thing at the moment, after a few weeks of hair pulling and computer trebuchet contemplating.... :laugh:

What we record in life, echoes in eternity.

 

MOXF8, Electro 6D, XK1c, Motif XSr, PEKPER, Voyager, Univox MiniKorg.

https://www.abandoned-film.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok. I understand it's wiser to make the change and install windows 7 64 bit.

 

I'm going to challenge this assumption; what was it that was not accomplishing your goals in a 32-bit environment?

 

:snax:

 

Well, like i said before, i didn't have any environment of any kind before. I'm building my daw from scratch. And i guess that the question isn't what was it that was not accomplishing my goals in a 32 bit environment - but rather what would be the situation 2-3 years from now.

 

As for the question about the soundcard compatibility - that's where i'm a bit worried.

I bought a TC Electronic "Twin Impact". It has a 64 bit driver in addition to the 32 bit driver. But i've read in more than one forum that users have had crashes and glitches working with this soundcard in a 64 bit system - but it works perfectly in a 32 bit environment. Some said that other components could be the cause - such as the firewire card.

 

So all these considerations leave me with these pros and cons:

 

1) Thinking 4-5 years ahead, it's wiser to build a computer that could handle whatever's coming next. There for a strong computer (in my case, i7 950 with 6gb of ram) is the way to go - allthough some people told me this is too much and that great music could be made on a core 2 duo computer with 2gb of ram just as well. Don't know if they're saying this while considering that thing called "future".

 

2) If i'm getting a strong computer, installing a 32 bit system won't enable me to make use of all it's strengths and advantages.

 

3) On the other hand, there are lots of companies that didn't yet make the change towards 64 bit and theur plugins can't be used in a 64 system (some of them can be "tricked" into working in a 64 enviorement, but not without the occasional glitches).

But who knows. My guess is that most companies will offer the same products in 64 bit in the near future.

 

4) The soundcard i have might not work well in a 64 bit system - according to some of the experiences of users who own it.

 

5) Installing a 32 bit windows now, and all the plugins accordingly - but changing that to 64 bit in the fiture will be a pain for sure.

 

So still left with the dillema...

 

Vermona Perfourmer mkii, Nord Stage 3 76
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Make sure you get the latest and greatest drivers. If there are glitches, reputable manufacturers usually fix them. Its not in TC Electronics best interests not to.

 

I agree a 64 bit system will last longer. Its in nobody's interest in developing new software and have it not work on current hardware. You could add enough drives to allow you to dual boot both 32 & 64 bit OS. After the transition to 64 bit is complete by all your apps, format the other drives for more space.

Boards: Kurzweil SP-6, Roland FA-08, VR-09, DeepMind 12

Modules: Korg Radias, Roland D-05, Bk7-m & Sonic Cell

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still 32-bit, and still Windows XP for me.

 

An interesting article: KLONK

 

Yeah, if I used the internet or some of those other features on this particular laptop, I'd be running Windows 7, but it's strictly studio only. My laptop is less than a year old, so it actually came with 7 installed (which I later ditched in favor of XP). I liked it, and if this was just a general-use computer, I'd have kept it. The fact is, though, as I said in my previous post, XP is much lighter on resources (especially if you've stripped it down to bare bones as I have), and it's seemingly far more stable when it comes to the specific realm of audio.

 

In my case, it's "if it ain't broke..." It runs so well, I'm hesitant to to mess with it. The only change I foresee in the relatively near future is possibly upgrading to the 64-bit version of XP. If and when XP stops being fully supported, I suppose I'll have little choice, but at least I have until 2014.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

by ITGITC:

 

Happy Holidays to ya, Mike!

 

Coming back at you Tom! Happy Holidays to ya too brother Tom! You add a LOT of cheer to this Forum 365 days a year! I do like yankin' your chain sometimes, but that's how I get my kicks. (At my age, "kicks keep getting' harder to find") Hmm....I think that line has been used before. :bor:

 

 

Cheers!

 

 

 

Mike T.

Yamaha Motif ES8, Alesis Ion, Prophet 5 Rev 3.2, 1979 Rhodes Mark 1 Suitcase 73 Piano, Arp Odyssey Md III, Roland R-70 Drum Machine, Digitech Vocalist Live Pro. Roland Boss Chorus Ensemble CE-1.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Starting fresh, 64 bits sounds like the way to go. Like others here, I'll be waiting a bit myself.

 

This happened way back in the 8bit to 16 bit days, then the 16 to 32, and now the 32 to 64.
No, there was no 8-bit to 16-bit operating system transition. I know, I was there. ;-)

 

The primary advantage of larger bit numbers in computer processing is the ability to address a larger memory space contigously. Programming tricks can be used to "page" memory so that a processor can operate in a larger memory space than it natively supports; but such programming tricks always lose some efficiency.

 

For a very large majority of the people who purchase PCs - 64-bits is overkill - but _marketing_ creates the idea that it is new, it is better, same old same old - as is the job of marketing.

Actually, there is another big difference, because Intel did a smart thing.

 

The processor's programming architecture has been more or less frozen for a long time, so that old programs can run on new hardware. Well, with the 32 -> 64 bit change, there was a big opportunity to add stuff that would have helped all along but wouldn't have actually helped sell hardware. And they did: they added a lot of general-purpose registers, which gives the compiler a lot more room to optimize the code and access memory less.

 

When they upgraded SONAR to 64-bit, Cakewalk didn't expect a performance improvement. Maybe even a reduction, because the programs are bigger for the same amount of code. Surprise: they got a 20 to 40% speedup. When they investigated why, they discovered all these new registers being used.

 

This ends my quibbling over MoodyBluesKey's excellent post.

 

PS: Anyone who says they understand all the issues about 64 bits is either a serious expert or seriously deluded. To complicate matters, there's also the VST interface spec, which supports both 64- or 32-bit plugins, in either compilation model, if I'm not mistaken. That is, we had 64-bit plugin capability before we had processors with 64-bit address space. (The difference is whether floating point values passed were 32-bit or 64-bit ones. Old "32-bit" processors support 64-bit floating point.)

 

Confused enough?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With the glaring exception of having to upgrade my hardware (mLan is not supported on Win 7) I am very happy with Win 7 64bit.

 

Cool avatar!

 

Thanks! That was actually a very early look of my Second Life avatar image, Mr. Biff Zond (RIP), at our good buddy's Nursers Second Life home (Circa Nov 2006).

Steve Force,

Durham, North Carolina

--------

My Professional Websites

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Starting fresh, 64 bits sounds like the way to go. Like others here, I'll be waiting a bit myself.

 

This happened way back in the 8bit to 16 bit days, then the 16 to 32, and now the 32 to 64.
No, there was no 8-bit to 16-bit operating system transition. I know, I was there. ;-)

 

The primary advantage of larger bit numbers in computer processing is the ability to address a larger memory space contigously. Programming tricks can be used to "page" memory so that a processor can operate in a larger memory space than it natively supports; but such programming tricks always lose some efficiency.

 

For a very large majority of the people who purchase PCs - 64-bits is overkill - but _marketing_ creates the idea that it is new, it is better, same old same old - as is the job of marketing.

Actually, there is another big difference, because Intel did a smart thing.

 

The processor's programming architecture has been more or less frozen for a long time, so that old programs can run on new hardware. Well, with the 32 -> 64 bit change, there was a big opportunity to add stuff that would have helped all along but wouldn't have actually helped sell hardware. And they did: they added a lot of general-purpose registers, which gives the compiler a lot more room to optimize the code and access memory less.

 

When they upgraded SONAR to 64-bit, Cakewalk didn't expect a performance improvement. Maybe even a reduction, because the programs are bigger for the same amount of code. Surprise: they got a 20 to 40% speedup. When they investigated why, they discovered all these new registers being used.

 

This ends my quibbling over MoodyBluesKey's excellent post.

 

PS: Anyone who says they understand all the issues about 64 bits is either a serious expert or seriously deluded. To complicate matters, there's also the VST interface spec, which supports both 64- or 32-bit plugins, in either compilation model, if I'm not mistaken. That is, we had 64-bit plugin capability before we had processors with 64-bit address space. (The difference is whether floating point values passed were 32-bit or 64-bit ones. Old "32-bit" processors support 64-bit floating point.)

 

Confused enough?

 

Wanna talk about IBM 370 PSW and how they used a PSW bit when they switched from 16 to 32 bit "extended" (was it bit "24"? I need to check my Yellow Card..)? :)

 

I get it; however, after all I am an old time data processor from waaay back .:thu:

Steve Force,

Durham, North Carolina

--------

My Professional Websites

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...