I must say my first few weeks living in the 64bit Cubase world have mostly been pretty good. Not really any problems and as I have a new system with 12g ram its nice to let the thing stretch its legs. The only drawback I guess has been VST bridge for 32 bit software.
The only crash I’ve had, or system problem has been with the VST Bridge. I have an up & coming 64 bit collection of VSTs shall we say. But I still have a load of VST’s/FX plug-ins which use 32 bit. I guess id hoped in C6 the bridging technology would have improved and it wouldn’t be a problem. Well that’s not quite as i had hoped.
I think i think that if J Bridge can do it, surely those guys down at Steinberg can out perform this guy? And shouldn’t all this be a priority around the time of launching and pushing toward a 64bit existence.??? Having 32bit plug-ins, even the big names, be so unreliable, well it surprises me ; and strikes me as a considerable flaw in an otherwise well executed new product at the time of its release.
Don’t mix and match. 32 bit for 32, 64 for 64. You don’t have to go 64 and if you bought software you haven’t got the memory for (3.5-4gig in 32 bit), well. Why?
Count yourself lucky they deigned to make a bridge otherwise we’d still be bridging back to 8 bit.
You have to stop demanding as a right what was a charity donation in the first place. Steinberg didn’t have to do that. And it was free.
Simply surprised that this hasn’t been overcome by now. It would surely be ideal for 32bit to work within the 64bit platform. Which, might i add, Steinberg themselves claim to already offer with the VST Bridge. Just it doesn’t work all the time.
And you can only use 4gig tops at 32bit where he wouldn’t need any 32 - 64bit bridging.
I agree the VST bridging is the weakest link. For good reason. There really shouldn’t be a bridge at all and it is a great bit of wizardry that there is. If the VST makers kept up with developments properly nobody would have to jump thru hoops accomodating them and getting flak for it.
If your VSTs were too memory hungry at 32 bit why have them? They obviously didn’t work properly at 32bit, now they don’t work properly at 64bit (without a bridge they don’t work at all) somehow it’s Steinberg’s fault.
Wrong, you can use as many gigs as you like with a 64bit plugin bridged into a 32bit host using an external bridge such as jbridge. So the 32bit host limit isn’t an issue. The OS would have to be 64bit as well.
Just to chime in
I believe he lack of a better bridge in C6 (as compared to Jbridge)
has to do mainly with Steiny wanting to stay cross platform. (pc/mac)
I’m sure they could have bought,stolen,developed the JBridge tech by now
but since it does not work on macs, SB has kept the current Cubase model.
Their take on this is probably:
It won’t take long (maybe1- 2 years or sooner) and every plug
will be 64 bit and this topic will be moot.
Then we will want/be complaining about 128-256-512- etc bit.
If the VSTBridge worked perfectly, then there would be much less incentive for many plugin developers to put the effort in to convert their plugins to 64bit - remember they usually don’t charge for those updates, so it’s a tricky choice for them to choose between that conversion and writing new plugins that they can charge for.
But on the other hand, if the bridge worked perfectly, we wouldn’t really even need the developers to convert existing plugins to 64bit unless they really needed the extra RAM… so I dunno…
If your VSTs were too memory hungry at 32 bit why have them? They obviously didn’t work properly at 32bit, now they don’t work properly at 64bit
The SINGLE VI would work fine…no single plug needs more than 4gb…the problem is running multiples in an instance of C/32 doesn’t work. The reason you have them is because they sound better. Duh.
Here’s the thing with the bridge. Only thing I have that doesn’t bridge perfectly is BFD2. So, I bought JBridge…BUT…you know what? It takes about 20 times the CPU it takes to run BFD2 in 32bit Cubase. So, it allows me to work with it, but what ran fine on an ancient P4, I now have to get where I want it and freeze it.
Now, obviously, there are more plugs that don’t bridge…but, has anyone found AUDIO plugs that don’t bridge well? I would think their focus would be to make sure audio plugs bridge–because audio has NO reason for 64bit. That’s what lags…the RAM hungry VIs I own (outside of BFD2) have had 64bit available for YEARS–I’ve been waiting for Cubase to catch up. I’m pretty happy with it. The older and newer 32 bit audio plugs I have bridge fine…I can finally use the 64bit versions of my VIs. Only BFD2 is a problem.
If you’re going for a weakest link…I’d rather see them give the mix buss more headroom. Coming from an Akai 56bit fixed, I have to continually trim things down at the channel level to keep the master from popping. It’s getting to where I just START with everything padded 15db so I don’t have to start messing with trims once I have the overall balance going. But, I digress…
That’s very true. From previous conversations with João, I do know that he is working on a Mac version. The platforms are so different though, it takes learning a whole new programming language… and really getting the feel for it does take some time (I can say that at least 'cause I’m a web programmer).
I am on the fence about whether Steiny should have focused more attention on the VST bridge. Both sides of the “battle” have valid points. I think that Steinberg would / should have put it a little higher in the priority list though. The end result is what Curt says, we are definitely in transition. But technology is moving so fast that we will always be in some kind of transition. Therefore it makes sense to have at least functional backwards compatibility.
Regardless of what Steinberg is doing, companies that aren’t pushing for 64 Bit versions of their plugs / VSTi’s, are both lazy and stupid, and lack of planning in a business sense will put them behind the competition. There is a sense of “take a peek at what everybody else is doing” in the business world. But when you rely heavily on that, then you eventually lose to the companies that are innovative and progressive.
This actual forum is a good example. Steinberg is actually assisting people here on a semi-regular basis… product and dev staff, marketing and oversea support… I have seen posts from quite a few different Steiny people and associated admins. That is progressive thinking and good business sense. This is the way tech is moving. Companies that hang on the coattails of others will eventually fade in their influence and no one wants that. Even though Steiny is a big player in the DAW world, companies that get their next development stages from some kind of flowchart… with absolutely no forward thinking are usually the last ones I look at when choosing a product.
But back on topic. The VST Bridge IS definitely the weakest link. I totally agree with that. I don’t use it, I’m all JBridge (and use BFD2 quite extensivly with it). However, Steiny has promised improvement with the VST Bridge in the upcoming update. I’m not expecting golden horseshoes to fall out of their @ss when it is released, but I would like to see a functional improvement where I can once again implement the VST Bridge.
And wrong again (now I can feel superior ). If you used 32 bit plugs IN A 32 BIT OS that needed more than 4gig of memory (because everyone complaining about the Bridge seems to have bought them then, otherwise there would be no problem) they would not have worked properly in the 32 bit systems either.
All the studios I work with that use Cubase stayed well back from the upgrade rush I see here. The ones that are going just now to W7 / C6 64bit use the two side by side while they learn and find uses for the new investments and look at forums occasionally to see what the bugs and developments are until things settle down. They don’t use bridges and I don’t see them here having problems.
Proper background research, preparation, forward planning and budgeting means you don’t ever get a problem with stuff like bridging in the main.
Bridges are temporary and there for getting the odd job done where it can. What I see here is people expecting too much of a quick fix.
If patients in hospital started demanding that as well as a plaster cast on a broken arm they also wanted full mobility in the broken arm I know what the doctor would say. “DNR!”
lol! soooo predictable. you people are never going to learn.
Conman and Brains are making you guys look silly simply because you take the bait every time… consider them the same person with multiple licenses, then stop taking the bait.
Stop telling lies. We’re not the same at all. The object is not to make people look silly (nobody even has to try to make anyone else look silly in this forum) but to help them understand their equipment and it’s limitations. But what is silly is that common sense leads to personal accusations like this.
It is attitudes like this that leads to the forum degenerating into a “complaints only from the ones who always complain” forum and puts people with genuine greivances off asking proper questions of a technical nature and also and, more importantly, puts off any experts with some time on their hands from chipping in with solutions.
That’s not just my opinion. This forum is rightly denigrated in most other music related forums if you care to look.
And the rest of the “guys” in this thread certainly don’t look silly to me. Which says more about your mind than mine. Anyone can choose the wrong method of using any aspect of a complex program like Cubase. Yes, even the great ME myself has difficulties. Anyone can also have a different point of view.
They are entitled to it.
And so am I. So stop trying to shut me up by saying who I’m not and telling others that I make them look silly.
(now I can feel superior 