Topic: A new PC question

64-bit Windows emulates all 32-bit software as far as I’m aware. Unless you have a poorly coded custom piece of software from 1998 or something, I’m pretty sure you’ll be fine. 32-bit works on 64-bit just fine. If you’re using 16-bit software (that isn’t software that works with 16-bit audio, but actually coded in 16-bits, in other words very likely nothing you’re using) THEN you will need 32-bit.

I haven’t had a single problem with any software I run in Win 7 64-bit. And almost all software I use is still, of course, stuck back at 32-bit, either because the devs are too lazy to code it for 64-bit, or more likely, there’s no real gain to be had, until systems start dropping 32-bit (that will be some time away).

Win 8 will be operating the same as Win 7 specifically in this regard (all other controversies aside).

You’ll still be able to use your 32-bit audio software just fine on 64-bit. I’ve never heard of a single problem. That doesn’t mean they don’t exist; but I know tons of people who finally jumped ship, as I did, from XP to Win 7, and went to 64-bit … with no problem at all. Vista was the concern, and that’s past history.

Good luck with it!

Hi Alex

I found this article which might help you: 32 bit vs 64 bit

http://www.ilsoftware.it/articoli.asp?tag=32-bit-vs-64-bit-le-differenze-tra-le-due-architetture_6524

It’s in Italian, so I’ll try to translate and summarize the most important parts:

1. The 64-bit versions of Windows require 64-bit device drivers . This means that 32-bit drivers will not work.
2. The 32-bit applications will run as if they were running on an x86 system. It’s called WOW64 (Windows On Windows 64-bit), the subsystem can run seamlessly for 32-bit applications on 64-bit operating system from Microsoft. WOW64 is able to guarantee good results, except for those programs that attempt to integrate with the Windows shell (security software, utilities, …).
3. With more memory, 32-bit applications are faster. With more than 4 GB, a Windows x64 can facilitate a more rapid implementation of 32-bit applications. More physical memory available it means a greater amount of data that can be stored simultaneously in RAM. The consequences are obvious: reducing the time spent to load the data and to switch from one process to another.
4. The 16-bit applications do not work on Windows x64. The 64-bit versions of Windows no longer support the implementation of the obsolete 16-bit applications.

If I wrote something wrong it is not my fault!

Just to add, 32-bit applications can never access more than 2gb of RAM. But I think that’s on a process level. So, for example, if the host places the plugin in its own thread or process (? I’m way out of programming so please excuse me if I get the wrong terms), then that plugin will have access to up to 2gb of RAM. But the host could access a different 2gb of RAM as well. So that’s sort of 4gb, but on the other hand, the plugin couldn’t hold a 3gb sample pack in memory entirely, as it can only access 2gb by itself. But you could load an almost 2gb sample pack in the plugin, and have almost 2gb of samples or whatever else in the host, and that would be fine.

This is in 64-bit Windows.

If you were using 32-bit Windows, I think it would be more limited.

As moving to 64-bit in most cases makes very little difference (in my experience it hasn’t been an advantage or a disadvantage, it’s the same), I wouldn’t expect to see things operate better or worse, and wouldn’t worry about the transition a whole lot. It looks like you’ve already researched things that may not work and have an answer for one thing, so the chances are you won’t notice the difference (possibly excepting that one thing you found).

I may/will/should/ go to x64 when every one — ALL — of the plugins I know and love and others I might ever want go to x64. Some of the most popular and very best plugins are still not being offered in 64-bit.

Of all DAWs, only REAPER will let you run mismatched, and even then it is not 100% safe and guaranteed. I use REAPER too, but, sorry, that’s just not good enough for me.

There actually are ways you can coax more memory when using 32-bit, but it can be risky. It requires messing/hacking into your software programs in question. It does work. I have both seen it and done it. It is not 100% safe. So it’s really not true what they always say about this, BUT I WILL NOT DO IT again. (And it really is not worth the effort.)

I use a 64-bit machine running ALL 32-bit for audio. It works fine — no, it works perfectly, no crashes now or memory issues in 6+ months — and I’m sticking with it until the entire audio world is 64-bit (see starting comment above).

J-Bridge is a great idea but will crash everything maybe a minimum of 10% of the time (depends on what software we are talking about). I suggest it ONLY if you absolutely must use some odd plugin and no other recourse. I don’t even have a copy of it anymore (I think).

IF you want real improvement overall, do this: Get a really powerful machine and use the 96kHz rate whenever you can. Not because of just finer sampling and making music only dogs can hear; it’s about the NyQuist frequency boundary fold-back and things like there is a trade-off when plugins have to convert to 96k internally (as many do these days), then deconvert to 44.1k or whatever. It would take me a whole 3 pages to explain the three main factors, but too much work. You can, however, research this yourselves. There are some gains to be had, but they are not huge IF you are careful about your levels and everything else you do when recording. I am careful; I don’t need 96k yet. Perhaps someday . . .