64-bit audio engines are on the way !

[maoinhibitor]

This may have been already stated, but I don't think there is anything in that Steinberg statement that indicates they will have a 64-bit audio engine. I find it more likely that in reference to Vista they are refering to a 64-bit application, which is an entirely different thing. Sonar currently has both capabilities.

There is a difference between a 32-bit and 64bit audio engine. I can hear it. But in many common use applications it's not obvious.

64-bit mixing gives you more dynamic range, which means the noise floor is lower. So you will hear it as more definition on the tail ends of sounds, perhaps a reverb tail, the sustain of an acoustic guitar note, etc.

A friend of mine who is a grammy winning engineer explained to me another benefit of 64-bit mixing is that this lower noise floor provided by 64-bit mixing allows him to keep individual tracks at a lower level, or further away from 0 dB. What that means is that this extra space keeps him from having to use as much compression in mixing, and he feels the result is a more pleasant or natural sounding mix

You also find more improvements in the summing bus. Aparently as someone previously stated when you work with 24-Bit audio in a 32-bit mix engine there is almost no room for gain staging, so errors are introduced in your audio. So 64-bit mixing will help keep your mix integrity when you mix down large projects.

Lastly, the whole argument as to wether the added CPU hit is worth the benefits is a moot point. I personally don't use the 64-bit engine until I mixdown. In SONAR it's a simple checkbox. I turn it on before I export, and I feel the final quality of my mixes sound better. The added CPU hit doesn't affect my creative process because I wait until mixdown to use it.

[tony tony chopper]

There is a difference between a 32-bit and 64bit audio engine. I can hear it.

I can't hear the tooth fairy. But you know why? In belgium it's a little mouse!

[nollock]

It's unfortunate but all talk about "bitness" can not be set just to one thing.

As i understand it has always specificaly meant the size of the general purpose registers on x86.

- a FPU (always 80bit since 8087)
- memory bus (64bit since Pentium1, 128bit since dualchannel)
- vector unit (64bit since MMX, 128bit since SSE)
- datapath to caches (???? but probably wider than 128bits)

32 bit on Athlons iirc, 64 bit on P4s, 64 or 128 on Athlon64 depending on which you get, and 128 bit on Core2s.

chris

[Radek]

It's unfortunate but all talk about "bitness" can not be set just to one thing.

i understand it has always specificaly meant the size of the general purpose registers on x86.

And it's not a bad idea but there might be someone what will assume that because Core2 is so much faster (due to improvements in SSE vector unit and cache) that's because it got 64bits...

There was a similar controversy when Pentium1 showed - it has 64bits wide memory bus and it confused people too.

It also depends what exactly is an aplication doing with data.

[audiojunkie]

Hello,

You already know that Sonar 6 has a native 64-bit audio engine (which works on 32-bit operating systems).

But, soon it will not be the only one...

I just received a reply from Steinberg France about native 64-bit audio engine in Cubase/Nuendo.

Here is a translation of what they said to me :

Good morning,

Well, it's planned, but we are waiting for Windows Vista to be released, to finish the development of our 64-bit engine.

Cheers,
Steinberg France

So, my thought is that Nuendo 4 will be released with the new 64-bit audio engine and we'll have to wait for an update to have it in the Cubase 4 .

I also think that Digidesign's Pro Tools will follow this way, but in my view not in a 7.x update, but in the 8.0 version which is in development.

Believe it or not, it was n-Track Studio that was the second to run 64bit natively. I just thought you should know.

--Sean

[audiojunkie]

Just to get back on track and all...

--Sean Ercanbrack

[Kingston]

64-bit mixing gives you more dynamic range, which means the noise floor is lower. So you will hear it as more definition on the tail ends of sounds, perhaps a reverb tail, the sustain of an acoustic guitar note, etc.

All the differences happen substantially below -110dB, which means you cannot possibly hear any difference, since you can't even buy a DA-converter capable of it.

I turn it on before I export, and I feel the final quality of my mixes sound better.

Bingo! Even your wording proves you're imagining things.

placebo at work.

[Jason Brian Merrill]

There is a difference between a 32-bit and 64bit audio engine. I can hear it.

I can't hear the tooth fairy. But you know why? In belgium it's a little mouse!

awww, gol thats so cute

[Stupid American Pig]

are you sure it isnt this guy?

[kritikon]

Now that is truly and utterly scary. That little man is getting nowhere near my teeth. Not even when hell freezes over.

[BONES]

There is a difference between a 32-bit and 64bit audio engine. I can hear it. But in many common use applications it's not obvious.

Who cares? When you down-res it to CD audio there will abwolutely, completely and utterly no difference whatsoever. Mind you, I think you're kidding yourself anyway.

64-bit mixing gives you more dynamic range, which means the noise floor is lower.

But not as low as 128bit so it could be better. The fact is that in a practical sense its of no consequence, the noise floor at 32bits is already beyond the range of human hearing.

A friend of mine who is a grammy winning engineer explained to me another benefit of 64-bit mixing is that this lower noise floor provided by 64-bit mixing allows him to keep individual tracks at a lower level, or further away from 0 dB.

The same is true of 32bit which, as I explained yesterday, has virtually infinite headroom. I doubt your grammy award winning engineer knows much about computers, beyond what he reads in music magazine advertisements.

Lastly, the whole argument as to wether the added CPU hit is worth the benefits is a moot point. I personally don't use the 64-bit engine until I mixdown. In SONAR it's a simple checkbox. I turn it on before I export, and I feel the final quality of my mixes sound better. The added CPU hit doesn't affect my creative process because I wait until mixdown to use it.

So your mixdown sounds different to your working mix, to your ears anyway. Is that really a good idea?

[tony tony chopper]

What's with the 'I have a grammy award-winning/engineer friend who..' lately?

[Kingston]

What's with the 'I have a grammy award-winning/engineer friend who..' lately?

obvious attempt at putting credibility on bullshit.

It's version 2 of the older "I heard it from a friend of a friend who's a real pro". Instant feel-good credibility when people know jack shit.

Of course an intelligent person will rather explain technical facts, or just admit it's their personal opinion.

Or at times, just admit one knows f**k all about anything.

[defjamm]

What's with the 'I have a grammy award-winning/engineer friend who..' lately?

or

'post your music at the music cafe. as long as you don't, i won't believe you'

or

'do you make money with music?'

[Improv]

'do you make money with music?'

I played piano in a Kansas City whore-house for 5 years-does that count?