Korg updates its Legacy Collection with a new Arp Odyssey emulation

[VST_Now]

I can't see any point of continued support for 32bit in 2018. Seriously, what's the point

+1 Time to move on.

I don't think they should include 32 bit with the updated plugins, but I do think they should allow the old plugins to be available for people that may need to install them for legacy reasons.

This is the real issue, many companies are taking away the ability to access older versions of software which can be a real problem for existing users.

[braj]

I can't see any point of continued support for 32bit in 2018. Seriously, what's the point

+1 Time to move on.

I don't think they should include 32 bit with the updated plugins, but I do think they should allow the old plugins to be available for people that may need to install them for legacy reasons.

This is the real issue, many companies are taking away the ability to access older versions of software which can be a real problem for existing users.

So I encourage anyone that wants Korg to keep 32 bit installer versions of their older synths to send them a message, the link is in my sig, and tell them what you need. Heck, I'll do it too, just for you guys. The more they hear it is an issue, the more likely it will be addressed.

EDIT:

Here is my message to Korg regarding this:

Please include 32 bit plugin support for the Korg VST plugins that have had these since the Korg Collection plugins were released. MAny people have old projects that rely on these versions. If new updated plugins are 64 bit only like the Odyssey, please make the old installer still available to users and able to be used.

I'll post back if they respond.

[electro]

Why should they kill 32bit versions that already exist? The old plugins have a different authorization.

I can't see any point of continued support for 32bit in 2018. Seriously, what's the point

+1 Time to move on.

I don't think they should include 32 bit with the updated plugins, but I do think they should allow the old plugins to be available for people that may need to install them for legacy reasons.

This is the real issue, many companies are taking away the ability to access older versions of software which can be a real problem for existing users.

[braj]

Why should they kill 32bit versions that already exist? The old plugins have a different authorization.

I can't see any point of continued support for 32bit in 2018. Seriously, what's the point

+1 Time to move on.

I don't think they should include 32 bit with the updated plugins, but I do think they should allow the old plugins to be available for people that may need to install them for legacy reasons.

This is the real issue, many companies are taking away the ability to access older versions of software which can be a real problem for existing users.

I think the issue is if they release new versions and don't make the old installers available. Of course, people should back up these, but many won't and will blame Korg when they can't install them, and Korg did just migrate to a new authorization system, so they could still make it impossible for people anyway.

[T11]

(Haven't read the whole thread)

Korg ARP Odyssey in standalone mode on Win10 seems to have problems switching to ASIO for some users.
It causes the app to crash.

How many here have experienced this?

UAD Apollo FireWire and RME Fireface are among the affected.

RME Fireface FF400 to be exact.

So could this be a Odyssey + firewire-issue?!

If you have a firewire-card and Win10, please try this out and post result here.

Hand up if you are a Win10 user with a firewire audio interface

[braj]

OK, so here's what I heard back from Korg regarding 64 bit support going forward:

Hello,

Thank you for contacting us.
We are sorry for the inconvenience.

KORG Collection series supports only 64bit environment.
Please use KORG Legacy Collection when using in 32bit environment.
KORG USER NET license reissue will continue to support.
Please use KORG Collection when migrating to the 64bit environment in the future.

Best regards,
KORG app team

So:
1. New plugins (I'm assuming the upcoming updates as well) will be 64 bit.
2. The 32 bit plugins will still be available if you own them, so you can open your old projects and use them with 32 bit hosts.

[Stefken]

Bones, maybe you should keep one of those old pcs as a dedicated 32bit archive computer for your old projects.

+1.

When you make your new 64 bit computer, don't throw away your old 32 bit computer. Keep an image of your computer and a backup of the installers ( i actually have 3 copies of all my data).

For my computer I specifically chose to go 64 bit all the way.

[Harry_HH]

I think we just agreed 2 pages ago, that no more 32/64 bit stuff in this thread. Now this is going on and on. Some have goldfish memory...

[db3]

I think we just agreed 2 pages ago, that no more 32/64 bit stuff in this thread. Now this is going on and on. Some have goldfish memory...

I have access to more memory thanks to being 64bit

[Stefken]

I think we just agreed 2 pages ago, that no more 32/64 bit stuff in this thread. Now this is going on and on. Some have goldfish memory...

I have access to more memory thanks to being 64bit

[Aloysius]

But it's volatile.

[ENV1]

3 of the biggest DAW's are 64-bit only by now, and that surely doesn't happen based on speculations, they collect usage data, they collect download data. There are a few plugins now which are 64-bit only too, just like the Korg Arp Odyssey. Really, you gotta be pretty deluded to think there's a massive crowd of people still using 32-bit only by now.

So in other words you have no idea yourself, you just assume it 'because'.

And your 'because' is based on the actions of a few developers of niche-software which the vast majority of the world population has probably never even heard of.

Can you at least surmise why some would have a problem accepting this as proof for the alledged '64bit majority'?


And by the way, as we are on the subject. Isnt one of these developers Steinberg, the company that would ditch VST2 today if they had their way? You know, the company that went so far as to remove VST2 from their dev tools in favor of VST3? I suppose when they made that decision it was all based on surveys and user data collection and whatnot too? Because they determined that hardly anyone was using VST2 plugins anymore?

Look man, i have no problem with you. None whatsoever. But you have to understand that youre not talking to a fool here. If you want to tell me that i am wrong and you are right then youll have to do a lot better than throwing a bunch of speculations around and getting testy when i ask you where your proof is. Otherwise we are both wasting our time.

And, to which "reliable source" do you expect me to point you?

What a strange question.

If i knew that, why would i have asked you?

There is no reliable source.

Another speculation?

Or do you know at least that for a fact?

That's an absolute desperate argument. Just take a look around, and use some common sense. I don't know if you're really willed to, though. It appears to me as if you're advocating 32-bit software with an almost fundamentalistic zeal. Just because YOU use 32-bit only.

Desperate is what your reaction to what was an honest request for more info looks like. You sound like somebody who feels backed into a corner, getting aggressive because he doesnt know what to say. But that was not my intention, i didnt ask you this to make you look stupid. I was merely asking you to share, if you can, anything that resembles reliable data, thats all. How am i supposed to know that you cant, i mean thats why i asked, right.

PS: I already said that im not using 32bit only. And if there is any 'zeal' around here then its all this wanting to kill off 32bit only because there is 64bit now too.

[ENV1]

ENV1, you used the phrase "as long as technically possible."

So let me ask you a question. When does it end?

If we adopted this philosophy of backward support from the beginning of time, we'd still be supporting MS-DOS applications right now. Should we?

We have been over this before.

But anyway, when i said 'technically forever' then that was (obviously) just the other extreme, because there is no law that prohibits anyone from doing it if they wanted to.

When i say 'technically possible' i mean just that. If the software would run just fine on at least the most recent 32bit OS(s) then there is no technical reason for not making a 32bit version. Therefore if a dev chooses not to then that is purely by choice, not because the software itself cannot run on a 32bit OS.

And thats really all im saying. Not supporting 32bit because it is technically out of the question is one thing, but to say 32bit should be killed 'just because', i.e. only because some people couldnt care less is something totally different, after all its not as though the release of a 32bit version would deprive 64bit users of theirs.


Anyway, i think everyone has gotten the picture by now. Not that i wish it on anyone, but i think its safe to say that all the people who dont give a damn now will all be whistling a different tune next time something comes up that affects themselves. Maybe then they will revise their phlegmatic attitudes.

[chk071]

Oh no, it's back.

Seriously, dude, don't let anyone interrupt you in further using 32-bit. Just don't pretend you're speaking for anything but a really small minority here. If you're really think you're not, then you're REALLY deluded. But, frankly, the way you're acting, i think you really are.

Really, i thought you were a decent fella, but, you're so religiously vehement, and blinded about this, that you don't even want to admit that the 32-bit customer base is a very small one by now, and that work should better be focused on serving a big customer base, than a small one. Ever worked in your life? Well, then you probably know that it's always about serving a big amount of people, rather than a small one, and that economic considerations of course take into account, if effort and work is worth serving the customers, if there's so damn, damn few of them, when you just can sell your work for a large amount of people.

[Harry_HH]

3 of the biggest DAW's are 64-bit only by now, and that surely doesn't happen based on speculations, they collect usage data, they collect download data. There are a few plugins now which are 64-bit only too, just like the Korg Arp Odyssey. Really, you gotta be pretty deluded to think there's a massive crowd of people still using 32-bit only by now.

So in other words you have no idea yourself, you just assume it 'because'.

And your 'because' is based on the actions of a few developers of niche-software which the vast majority of the world population has probably never even heard of.

Can you at least surmise why some would have a problem accepting this as proof for the alledged '64bit majority'?


And by the way, as we are on the subject. Isnt one of these developers Steinberg, the company that would ditch VST2 today if they had their way? You know, the company that went so far as to remove VST2 from their dev tools in favor of VST3? I suppose when they made that decision it was all based on surveys and user data collection and whatnot too? Because they determined that hardly anyone was using VST2 plugins anymore?

Look man, i have no problem with you. None whatsoever. But you have to understand that youre not talking to a fool here. If you want to tell me that i am wrong and you are right then youll have to do a lot better than throwing a bunch of speculations around and getting testy when i ask you where your proof is. Otherwise we are both wasting our time.

And, to which "reliable source" do you expect me to point you?

What a strange question.

If i knew that, why would i have asked you?

There is no reliable source.

Another speculation?

Or do you know at least that for a fact?

That's an absolute desperate argument. Just take a look around, and use some common sense. I don't know if you're really willed to, though. It appears to me as if you're advocating 32-bit software with an almost fundamentalistic zeal. Just because YOU use 32-bit only.

Desperate is what your reaction to what was an honest request for more info looks like. You sound like somebody who feels backed into a corner, getting aggressive because he doesnt know what to say. But that was not my intention, i didnt ask you this to make you look stupid. I was merely asking you to share, if you can, anything that resembles reliable data, thats all. How am i supposed to know that you cant, i mean thats why i asked, right.

PS: I already said that im not using 32bit only. And if there is any 'zeal' around here then its all this wanting to kill off 32bit only because there is 64bit now too.

OK - on the otherhand a computer with a 64-bit processor can have a 64-bit or 32-bit version of an operating system installed. However, with a 32-bit operating system, the 64-bit processor would not run at its full capability.

On a computer with a 64-bit processor, you cannot run a 16-bit legacy program. Many 32-bit programs will work with a 64-bit processor and operating system, but some older 32-bit programs may not function properly, or at all, due to limited or no compatibility.

A big difference between 32-bit processors and 64-bit processors is the number of calculations per second they can perform, which affects the speed at which they can complete tasks. 64-bit processors can come in dual core, quad core, six core, and eight core versions for home computing. Multiple cores allow for an increased number of calculations per second that can be performed, which can increase the processing power and help make a computer run faster. Software programs that require many calculations to function smoothly can operate faster and more efficiently on the multi-core 64-bit processors, for the most part.

Another big difference between 32-bit processors and 64-bit processors is the maximum amount of memory (RAM) that is supported. 32-bit computers support a maximum of 3-4GB of memory, whereas a 64-bit computer can support memory amounts over 4 GB. This feature is important for software programs used in graphic design, engineering, and video editing as these programs have to perform many calculations to render their images.

One thing to note is that 3D graphic GUIs do not benefit much, if at all, from switching to a 64-bit computer, unless the program is a 64-bit program. A 32-bit processor is adequate for any program written for a 32-bit processor. In the case of computer games, you'll get a lot more performance by upgrading the video card instead of getting a 64-bit processor. (to be continued).