Do you still use a 32bit DAW?

[jamcat]

By this point in human history, most people using audio software have never even seen a 32-bit DAW.
Why not ask about cassette tapes while you're at it?

Instead of "No. I already changed to 64 bit," as an option, it should just say, "No, I live in the current year, grandpa."

No "change" needed.

[AdvancedFollower]

Been using 64-bit for at least the past 10 years..

You might be shocked to know that I no longer use MS DOS either.

[jancivil]

harsh but not entirely unfair

[THE INTRANCER]

Reasons Rack is 32 Bit

[licasto2]

If you prefer a 32bit rig it is most likely because it is rock solid and just works so you are not gonna wanna install new plugins to possibly bring down your system. If you can't afford to upgrade to a 64bit system how are you gonna pay for audio plugins? Seems to me the OP's question answers itself.

[cthonophonic]

I use Jeskola Buzz because I like the workflow. Sure, this is partly out of habit/stubbornness on my part, but what of it? I can do many of the things I want more quickly in Buzz, which is pretty much the beginning and the end of the argument in my view. Polac's VST adapter bridges 64-bit plugins fine, aside from some that are affected by a bug in JUCE (that has apparently been fixed for new plugins anyway).

My main issue with Buzz right now is that it doesn't handle recording/editing of MPE data very well. So I use Bitwig for that.

[jancivil]

actually Cubase being 64-bit is probably not all that earth-moving to me. It was 32-bit in late 2011 at the end of the life of 5.53 on Mac anyway, and I was using it for 4 more years. I've been using VE Pro since it came out, seems like late 2009 (before that VE not-pro for their instruments) and I absolutely need 64-bit because I'm samples-reliant and very few of these are very small libraries, but I would only rarely push that RAM limit in Cubase itself (it meant A LOT of audio and inserts). I mean once, maybe twice.

I tended to be a slow adopter of new OSes or updating, now I'm not so much but the whole situation is very different. I made my whole album in 2017 on 6 and 8GB RAM very old MBPs. 4GB, yeah no. EDIT: oh, that's right, t'was a 2GB limit wasn't it. I'm remembering the MacPro I used as a master, I didn't stock with more memory since I wasn't using VE Pro on it. So once I do recall pushing Cubase itself past that and it became unstable.

[AKJ]

Microsoft and Apple do not longer support 32 bit operating systems. We developers need to know if there is still demand on 32-bit versions

If you are a developer you should know that 32 bit plugins and 32 bit DAWs also run on 64 bit operating systems (at least this is true for Windows, for MAcOS I do not care because they break compatibility so often). I use both 32 and 64 bit DAWs because some older but great plugins are run better unbridged. For some applications I still use a 32 bit DAW which was long time back discontinued (Project5) but which just has the best workflow for the applications needed. What is more, I really cannot see any true advantage of 64 bit plugins (for DAWs maybe more memory which can be allocated).

[chk071]

If properly coded, 64-bit software will run faster. If you want to accept that or not. Especially on OS's where 32-bit needs to be emulated.

Just read up on it here: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/troubl ... bit-system

Frankly, quite tired of having to repeat that for the hundredth time, but, hey...

[Markus Krause]

Microsoft and Apple do not longer support 32 bit operating systems. We developers need to know if there is still demand on 32-bit versions

If you are a developer you should know that 32 bit plugins and 32 bit DAWs also run on 64 bit operating systems (at least this is true for Windows, for MAcOS I do not care because they break compatibility so often).

We developers are of course aware of this. But creating an additional 32-bit version means additional effort for distribution, testing an maintenance. That's why we need to know it.

[Markus Krause]

If properly coded, 64-bit software will run faster. If you want to accept that or not. Especially on OS's where 32-bit needs to be emulated.

Just read up on it here: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/troubl ... bit-system

Frankly, quite tired of having to repeat that for the hundredth time, but, hey...

The difference is around 5% in my experience. The main disadvantage of 32bit software is the 2GB RAM limit. You can exceed this easily when you use lots of samples.

[chk071]

The difference is around 5% in my experience.

If you could optimize your plugins so that they use 5% less CPU, would do it, or would not do it?

Apart from that, I doubt that you can say that generally. I don't know much about coding, but, some software all of a sudden started lightning fast, after the developers released the 64-bit version.

[Passing Bye]

If you ditch bit bridge, of course it will start faster...

[chk071]

What are we discussing here then?

[Passing Bye]

You are trying to make a point that 64 bit plugins are much faster because they are 64 bit, I was pointing out there’s more in that equation, if you used that same plugin bridged all this time in 64 bit DAW and than ditched bridging with native 64 bit, ditching bridge is enough of an improvement, even if there’s not much difference in other aspects… or suddenly using 64 bit DAW or whatever…