KVR Audio

Ichad.c · Post by **Ichad.c** » Thu Oct 11, 2012 1:51 pm

http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/synt ... sage/48768

Now starts the tricky bit - name 5x custom modules that you can't live without!

tenshin111 · Post by **tenshin111** » Thu Oct 11, 2012 2:08 pm

Kudos to Jeff for making this happen!

JediMind · Post by **JediMind** » Thu Oct 11, 2012 3:32 pm

Wow, this is really great news!

I can't wait for a stable release. Meanwhile, there's a lot of testing to do...

Ichad.c · Post by **Ichad.c** » Thu Oct 11, 2012 6:23 pm

Yeah, all the beta-testing is gonna be insane - SE1.2 32bit & 64bit. Think that the 64bit version might also have/get an option to use VST2.4 or VST3. The faster that we get SE1.2 32bit out the beta stage - the more time Jeff will have time to focus on 64bit. So I implore any SE users that are reading this - to test 1.2 and post a bug-report! The oversampling seems to atleast be stable now!

Andrew

Jeff McClintock · Post by **Jeff McClintock** » Fri Oct 12, 2012 1:55 am

Ichad.c wrote:Think that the 64bit version might also have/get an option to use VST2.4 or VST3.
Andrew

I was just looking at the VST3 SDK, seems to have a wrapper to support VST 2.4 automatically. i.e. if you make a VST3, you get a VST 2.4 for free.

kx77free · Post by **kx77free** » Wed Dec 19, 2012 4:47 pm

Hi,

I uploaded in the yahoo forums (the templates are on the SDK forum) some 64 bits SEM, built with codeblock and the GNU compiler TDM-GCC which can compile in 32 or 64 bits.

That will be great if some SE users will test them on theirs Seven 64 bits...

Xavier

Burillo · Post by **Burillo** » Wed Dec 19, 2012 4:53 pm

i presume that implies we have a chance of getting native x64 plugins by bootsie. this alone is worth the wait.

(please don't tell me x86 plugins sound just as good - i know that, it's not about the sound)

Ichad.c · Post by **Ichad.c** » Wed Dec 19, 2012 7:55 pm

Burillo wrote:i presume that implies we have a chance of getting native x64 plugins by bootsie. this alone is worth the wait.

Bootsie uses Synth-Maker - not SynthEdit.

EvilDragon · Post by **EvilDragon** » Sat Dec 22, 2012 7:54 pm

This is awesome. OP-X II in 64-bit? Elektrostudio in 64-bit? HG Fortune stuff in 64-bit? SimulAnalog in 64-bit (it only uses FLOAT2MID.SEM - perhaps that would be easy to port?)?

Fingers crossed!

twoifbysea · Post by **twoifbysea** » Sat Dec 22, 2012 10:05 pm

Fantastic News!!!

WOK · Post by **WOK** » Sat Dec 22, 2012 10:20 pm

EvilDragon wrote:This is awesome. OP-X II in 64-bit? Elektrostudio in 64-bit? HG Fortune stuff in 64-bit? SimulAnalog in 64-bit (it only uses FLOAT2MID.SEM - perhaps that would be easy to port?)?
Fingers crossed!

As it is early alpha and many third party module developers might not update their modules, maybe this is the better option than this

kx77free · Post by **kx77free** » Sun Dec 23, 2012 12:47 pm

Hi,

WOK wrote:
EvilDragon wrote:This is awesome. OP-X II in 64-bit? Elektrostudio in 64-bit? HG Fortune stuff in 64-bit? SimulAnalog in 64-bit (it only uses FLOAT2MID.SEM - perhaps that would be easy to port?)?
Fingers crossed!
As it is early alpha and many third party module developers might not update their modules, maybe this is the better option than this

Yes, the first quality of SE with many external SEM is also its limits...

So, I will normally to recompile my 32 bits modules in 64 bits but that will be hard for me.

Because my main modules (more than 50) are built with the SDK2, so I must make them now with the SDK3, verify if I can replaces them just by using the same ID and pins, if not I will must reconnect them manually...
And after I will recompile them in 64 bits, not with the MSV2005 compiler but with the TDM-GCC compiler.

I prefer that someone do a free vst 32 bit wrapper for the 64 bits because the 64 bit changes nothing about the sound quality, it's a big B... S... compatibility issue.

Xavier

mztk · Post by **mztk** » Wed Jan 02, 2013 9:35 pm

WOK wrote: As it is early alpha and many third party module developers might not update their modules, maybe this is the better option than this

yeah... as necessary as it is to keep the technology moving onwards,
i'm not convinced that an OS should just DUMP any prior programming.

why can't 64bit take onboard 32bit, and 16bit, and even DOS programs?
why should we have to buy a new machine, buy new software, and upturn
working methods? why can't it all be retro-compatible?

as someone said above, 'it isn't about the sound', so what is it about?
superior processing, MORE plugins? greater stability? so why not take
on plugins that take less CPU?

RunBeerRun · Post by **RunBeerRun** » Wed Jan 02, 2013 11:57 pm

I agree on using what's already proven to work, I use SE 1.017 because it doesn't crash like 1.1 does, my video games are designed for Win 98/ME,

I don't go out and buy 64-bit and liquid-cooled video cards.

mztk · Post by **mztk** » Fri Jan 18, 2013 8:10 pm

1.1 crashes? on what sort of things?

i'm trying to dual install, and have totally separate
modules lists - and i'd like separate recent files lists
too - seems there will be only one registry folder for
both setups, so not yet possible. waiting for tips on
this. it would be good if he took a bit of time out
of 1.2 development to go back and fix a couple of things.

i find 1.017 easier to look at.

SE is going 64bit!