Logic 9.1 is 64-bit now.... hello MOTU, are you listening?

[Frodo]

I think the real useful returns on 64 bit technology for virtual instruments are going to be in the likes of tightly coordinated hosts like VE PRO and Bidule.

Certainly, that will be among the eventual benefits. Don't know about Bidule at this point where 64-bit mode is concerned, but VE apparently remains among the AUs negatively effected.

Oh, why do I smell a DP8 Wishlist thread in the works?

[KEVORKIAN]

I think the real useful returns on 64 bit technology for virtual instruments are going to be in the likes of tightly coordinated hosts like VE PRO and Bidule. At some point you can only expect so much from one piece of software (with relatively limited development clout and resources) that has to reliably integrate all of the existing and constantly changing elements from so many other developers.

I agree completely.... I think that the VE PRO and Bidule model is a really strong way of managing memory resources and also granting a degree of portability between hosts to projects as well. You raise a good point about loading and saving projects when that much ram is being accessed.

[newrigel]

64 bit... Yeah, more $$ and more headaches! It's great Apple did this (it was inevitable) to put some fire under some asses he he... I still think the Mac will be the first box to have an elegant implementation of the 64 bit kernel though... what I mean is a transparent user experience while in the 64 bit kernel. I just hope that the AU developers are getting ready for the recode (hello) so we don't have to wait like the PC users have had to do (for how long now?) I don't think they even have a full 64 bit solution without bridges and wrappers... I can wait.
By the way... look @ post #43 here he he: http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=847714
These guy's act like Apple came in with some thugs and held a gun to their heads and said upgrade he he...

[NazRat]

Okay-- in celebration of Logic's entry into 64-bit world this month, we also see some SERIOUS compromises:

No AAF import or export
No OMF import or export
No MP3 conversion
No Eucon support
No Automap of control surfaces
No REX support
No ReWire support
No VSL tools
No Logic Nodes

... among others.

These days Apple seems to be in a 'rush to market' mode to marginalize the competition. Most of the recent products introductions and announcements have been ahead of major trade shows and competing product introductions - i.e Snow Leopard ahead of Windows 7, the rumored iSlate 'major event' ahead of the Consumer Electronics Show, and now Logic 9.1 ahead of NAMM. There are others. They are stealing a little thunder from competitor announcements. Plus, this will be major buzz at the NAMM show. I'm sure everyone at competing DAW booths will be sick of hearing 'Logic is 64 bit, why aren't you?'. This stuff will all probably be fixed within the next couple of updates.

[n2mpujack]

Okay-- in celebration of Logic's entry into 64-bit world this month, we also see some SERIOUS compromises:

No AAF import or export
No OMF import or export
No MP3 conversion
No Eucon support
No Automap of control surfaces
No REX support
No ReWire support
No VSL tools
No Logic Nodes

... among others.

These days Apple seems to be in a 'rush to market' mode to marginalize the competition. Most of the recent products introductions and announcements have been ahead of major trade shows and competing product introductions - i.e Snow Leopard ahead of Windows 7, the rumored iSlate 'major event' ahead of the Consumer Electronics Show, and now Logic 9.1 ahead of NAMM. There are others. They are stealing a little thunder from competitor announcements. Plus, this will be major buzz at the NAMM show. I'm sure everyone at competing DAW booths will be sick of hearing 'Logic is 64 bit, why aren't you?'. This stuff will all probably be fixed within the next couple of updates.

There's really only a couple of major players that aren't yet publically announcing 64 bit versions: DP and PT. Logic's gone 64 bit, ditto for Sonar (on the PC), Cubase is 64 bit (at least on the pc not sure about the Mac). I think Reaper is 64 bit. I wouldn't be surprised to see DP announce 64 bit at NAMM. Don't think we'll see ProTools announce 64 bit - they're just getting out support for SL and wrestling with that.

[newrigel]

There's really only a couple of major players that aren't yet publically announcing 64 bit versions: DP and PT. Logic's gone 64 bit, ditto for Sonar (on the PC), Cubase is 64 bit (at least on the pc not sure about the Mac). I think Reaper is 64 bit. I wouldn't be surprised to see DP announce 64 bit at NAMM. Don't think we'll see ProTools announce 64 bit - they're just getting out support for SL and wrestling with that.

They use savy ways of being 64 bit... they aren't TRUE 64 bit. They use bridges and wrappers to trick the 32 bit stuff to work within the kernel. Like I said, the Mac will be a true and elegant 64 bit before PC's will. Too much money in the mac circles to not do it. How LONG has windows been supposedly 64 bit and they don't have a NATIVE complete 64 bit solution yet!
You'd think that since PC's are so wide spread they would be there... but they're not because too many things involved... OS, APPS, Plugs and drivers... Apple can make it all happen because their in control of all aspects. They just trickle it out to make $$ and tease people. If they throw out all their cards @ 1 time, who would keep buying anything? Apple has a fully functional 64 bit (native 64 bit) studio in their labs and are laughing about it. They have the power to do it... the others don't!

[rodger1811]

This is going to take a bit more patience overall. For a few years I've predicted the day Logic goes full 64-bit would be an important road sign. So, we've passed that landmark as of today. What does that mean?

3-4 years ago, those of us with late-model G5s were hoping for new life to come to those machines sporting 8GB+ RAM. No such luck. Steve Jobs announced that there would be no support for 64-bit frameworks on the PPC--- and suddenly the MacPros appeared. So, I read the sea shells, bones, and runes as best I could and bought a SECOND GENERATION MacPro with the belief that I'd shopped wisely. That was 2007.

Lo and behold, my machine was a 2x Duo Core. Little did anyone know at the time that any old Intel would not work to the extent to which it was promised. Enter the Core 2 Duo.

My point, I guess, is that it doesn't matter what Logic or DP are doing right now. For many of us, we got doubly omitted from the 64-bit equation.

Okay-- in celebration of Logic's entry into 64-bit world this month, we also see some SERIOUS compromises:

No AAF import or export
No OMF import or export
No MP3 conversion
No Eucon support
No Automap of control surfaces
No REX support
No ReWire support
No VSL tools
No Logic Nodes

... among others.

There may be very good reasons why such important features cannot be supported at this time. Whatever those reasons are, MOTU will have to confront those reasons with the reality that Apple couldn't figure these things out first to pass those feature support specs onto third-party developers like MOTU.

Once again, those of you who bought a MacPro (or any Mac with a Core 2 Duo chipset) within the past 24 months are among the lucky ones. G5 users are either licking their wounds or falling asleep on the latest news--- but Duo Core MacPro owners are crying foul out loud-- or are pretending to be altogether disinterested. Those still thriving on G5s might have already been contemplating their next computer purchase. Those who made that purchase before the age of the Core 2 Duo are now faced with having to buy a new machine within months of their last MacPro purchase just to make good on any possibility of running ANYTHING in 64-bit mode.

On that note, if MOTU takes their time with getting DP to full 64-bit, I'm personally okay with that. It's going to pretty much be a complete do-over for me-- a new machine, new (ie: expensive) RAM, etc. Sheesh--- I don't know whether to laugh or cry about all of this.

Given the incompatibilities with Logic 9.1 in 64-bit, I'm quite happy to wait until MOTU sorts out the same hurdles for "DP8".

Let me first say that without question, I am a flag waving soldier for MOTU and more specifically DP. I've been a professional user of DP user since version DP3 and I've been very happy from the first day through this one.

However, a fairly large percentage of my customers are Logic users that prefer to use Logic at my studio for consistency with their projects. Often times the project is far along in their production phase and they're coming to me to track drums, organ etc. They've also got tons of edits which makes it a nightmare to just pull in the audio tracks without spending an eternity lining up those tracks and OMF is a mystery for most of these people! So in order to accommodate them, I did purchase Logic 9 a few months ago.

Since that time I have spent a lot of time sort of getting to know the product so I don't look like a complete idiot in front of the customer. I have to say that there are some things that I do like about Logic, but not nearly enough for me to want to become a switcher. Also, Logic 9 9.02 32-bit is just god awful at memory management which is very high on my list of necessities. So that brings me to today. I updated my instance of Logic 9 to 9.1 last night because there are many reported fixes/enhancements for the 32-bit version even if I chose to not use the 64-bit version. I can report that I am impressed with what Apple has done. I'm still NOT GOING TO SWITCH but they have made some significant improvements.

Switching between 32-bit and 64-bit is really easy Frodo and I have to say that many of the incompatibilities that you've listed are remedied by performing those functions in 32-bit mode. For the record however, your list of non-working functions is accurate if used solely in 64-bit mode. Apple made it really easy to choose which mode you want to launch with a simple checkbox on the applications information page.

For all of the many 32-bit plugins that I own, Apple created what they refer to as a 32-bit Audio Unit Bridge that carves out 4GB of ram outside of Logic 9 for it's use with 32-bit plugins. I was a bit skeptical of this at first, but it actually works ok. I instantiated many of my favorite Universal Audio plugins without an issue. I'm hearing reports that the Audio Unit Bridge leads to nowhere with some plugins however but that's not my experience.

All in all, for what it's worth, I think Apple did a good job for their flagship DAW that I still don't prefer. I think Frodo nailed it as it pertains to this milestone. I expect the other Mac based DAW's to follow suit really soon.

As for me and my house, we're using DP 7.02 all the way!!!

[n2mpujack]

There's really only a couple of major players that aren't yet publically announcing 64 bit versions: DP and PT. Logic's gone 64 bit, ditto for Sonar (on the PC), Cubase is 64 bit (at least on the pc not sure about the Mac). I think Reaper is 64 bit. I wouldn't be surprised to see DP announce 64 bit at NAMM. Don't think we'll see ProTools announce 64 bit - they're just getting out support for SL and wrestling with that.

They use savy ways of being 64 bit... they aren't TRUE 64 bit. They use bridges and wrappers to trick the 32 bit stuff to work within the kernel. Like I said, the Mac will be a true and elegant 64 bit before PC's will. Too much money in the mac circles to not do it. How LONG has windows been supposedly 64 bit and they don't have a NATIVE complete 64 bit solution yet!
You'd think that since PC's are so wide spread they would be there... but they're not because too many things involved... OS, APPS, Plugs and drivers... Apple can make it all happen because their in control of all aspects. They just trickle it out to make $$ and tease people. If they throw out all their cards @ 1 time, who would keep buying anything? Apple has a fully functional 64 bit (native 64 bit) studio in their labs and are laughing about it. They have the power to do it... the others don't!

So Sonar uses a bridge to make 32 bit plugs work - big deal - but that doesn't make it (Sonar) not a true 64 bit application. So it needs help to get recalcitrant non-32 bit plugs inline. The kernel in Sonar 64 (and there's 2 versions of Sonar - 32 AND 64 bit with separate kernels) is 64 bit. It's the program I use on my pc daw.

What, in your opinion, would make for a 'native complete 64 bit solution'?

[newrigel]

There's really only a couple of major players that aren't yet publically announcing 64 bit versions: DP and PT. Logic's gone 64 bit, ditto for Sonar (on the PC), Cubase is 64 bit (at least on the pc not sure about the Mac). I think Reaper is 64 bit. I wouldn't be surprised to see DP announce 64 bit at NAMM. Don't think we'll see ProTools announce 64 bit - they're just getting out support for SL and wrestling with that.

They use savy ways of being 64 bit... they aren't TRUE 64 bit. They use bridges and wrappers to trick the 32 bit stuff to work within the kernel. Like I said, the Mac will be a true and elegant 64 bit before PC's will. Too much money in the mac circles to not do it. How LONG has windows been supposedly 64 bit and they don't have a NATIVE complete 64 bit solution yet!
You'd think that since PC's are so wide spread they would be there... but they're not because too many things involved... OS, APPS, Plugs and drivers... Apple can make it all happen because their in control of all aspects. They just trickle it out to make $$ and tease people. If they throw out all their cards @ 1 time, who would keep buying anything? Apple has a fully functional 64 bit (native 64 bit) studio in their labs and are laughing about it. They have the power to do it... the others don't!

So Sonar uses a bridge to make 32 bit plugs work - big deal - but that doesn't make it (Sonar) not a true 64 bit application. So it needs help to get recalcitrant non-32 bit plugs inline. The kernel in Sonar 64 (and there's 2 versions of Sonar - 32 AND 64 bit with separate kernels) is 64 bit. It's the program I use on my pc daw.

What, in your opinion, would make for a 'native complete 64 bit solution'?

I don't know... maybe complete 64 bit compiled code throughout. Plugs, audio driver (core audio) and the app and OS plus someone who is in control of the whole process from the kernel up.. like what Apple could do... could Steinberg? No, they don't make an OS, or any type of hardware that's configured to take advantage of a specific architecture. They have to be universal and meet the requirements of other hardware vendors so they can't focus in on the strong points of a given hardware architecture like Apple could. Being everything to everyone you fall flat on your face because it's impossible to do so like the PC sector does
Apple can focus in on everything it takes to achieve a true 64 bit DAW.... everything!
Like i said, they have working true 64 bit systems (I mean TRUE NATIVE 64 bit) in labs that are fully functional and are laughing about everyone crying about not getting it... you'll soon see! Myself, I could care less about 64 bit. I don't need over 4 GB of samples and if I did, I have K4 and the KMS to get there so I'm not loosing any sleep or not going to do any music unless I'm in 64 bit. Actually, the scientific sectors are the users who utilize the full potential of 64 bit computing for scenario, and analytic forecast modeling etc. where they need instant access to HUGE amounts of data @ any given second.

[michkhol]

As I already stated in another post, the most compelling reason for Apple to go 64 bit (besides the marketing pressure) is to silence the complaints that the Logic 9 is a memory hog. So I don't understand why it is so much excitement about it. One might think a 64 bit DAW would solve all existing problems only stopping short of composing music all by itself. Opening the 64 bit Pandora box will reveal another bottleneck - the CPU. Throwing gigabytes of samples into a single application on a single machine will inevitably hog the CPU and/or disk I/O. The only balanced solution is the distributed computing which is widely used now in big projects. You don't need a 64 bit DAW for that, only the specialized applications like VE PRO that are indeed 64 bit and can work over the network. Going 64 bit all the way does not make sense, you either have projects too small for that or too big to fit one computer.

[Larry Mal]

I can't really back this up, but I would guess that Logic 9 was always intended to be 64 bit, but was put to market as 32 bit for whatever reason, probably to generate some excitement and sales.

Because Logic 9 was bad at memory use, which is why I was flirting with the idea of leaving it behind. My first thought was Cubase, but it wasn't 64 bit on Mac. I then upgraded to DP 7, and found it to not handle my larger projects much better than Logic 9- a little bit, but not a huge amount.

So I became grumpy. But this update to Logic has so far been a real pleasure. It feels "zippier" from the get go. It's handled projects that I used as a benchmark for what I could expect to be able to do. I'll even go so far as to say, it makes me feel that native processing all the way through, from tracking to mixing, is very much a stable, real possibility without need of any extra signal processing from HD cards or other DSPs.

Bear in mind I've only been using this for a total of a few hours here. But it feels like what Logic should have been the whole time.

Oh, and to sort of answer the question, Logic 9 is a fully 64 bit application, if you only used the instruments in Logic then you would be in 64 bit the whole time, and have no practical limit with RAM. CPU load is still the same, governed by what you ask you machine to do- but it seemed to me the CPUs were outpacing what applications could do, when they were bottlenecking in RAM/virtual memory to a degree. There is always a limit somewhere, but when we're talking the very near possibility of 16-core machines trying to run through 2.8 GBs of real world RAM, well, that was a bottleneck for sure. (That seems to have been about when Logic would crap out.)

It's the third party apps that are 32 bit, and they need to be accommodated in the 4 GB AUBridge, which is the solution arrived at by Cubase and Sonar on PC, and no doubt Digital Performer will have something similar very soon. Tools, I am still predicting, will be the last.

[Frodo]

Switching between 32-bit and 64-bit is really easy Frodo and I have to say that many of the incompatibilities that you've listed are remedied by performing those functions in 32-bit mode. For the record however, your list of non-working functions is accurate if used solely in 64-bit mode. Apple made it really easy to choose which mode you want to launch with a simple checkbox on the applications information page.

Yes, switching between 32- and 64-bit mode is easy if you have a machine that supports it. I just got caught at an odd time between Apple's announcements about when a 64-bit kernel and frameworks would arrive. It started with lots of promise of 64-bit kernels on PPC but that changed. From that point I waited two more years before buying an Intel, then discovered only a few months ago when Snow Leopard was released that had I waited another 6-8 months I might have had a 64-bit bootable machine.

Given that Logic 9.1 is now 64-bit, even with the compromises, my next road signs will be to watch for when the compromises are addressed, to watch for architectural improvements on the next generation or two of the MacPros which will likely bring further genuine improvements in 64-bit mode, and to watch for news from MOTU and third-parties where 64-bit developments are concerned. This is why I mentioned the need for more patience on my part where true 64-bit memory addressing goes. I'll happily be in 32-bit mode for some time, but I continue to watch and wait.

At this point, it *feels* as if the next big road sign will have a little less to do with 64-bit and will have more to do with when 32-bit support will begin to fade, but I've been wrong before.

[carrythebanner]

Yes, switching between 32- and 64-bit mode is easy if you have a machine that supports it.

Are you referring to the ability to run 64-bit applications, or the ability to run the 64-bit kernel?

[Larry Mal]

You can run 64 bit applications in the 32 bit kernel, from what I understand.

http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9595_22-336194.html

Further, Logic can be switched from running in 32 and 64 bit. I don't know how that plays out within a single project, however.

However, most of the computers that only have a 32 bit EFI, are also limited in how much RAM they can hold (my laptop, the 2.16 GHz Macbook Pro as an example, can hold 4 GBs of RAM but can only recognize three of those). These computers thus wouldn't benefit from running anything at 64 bit, since under 32 bits any single application has a upper limit of a theoretical 3.4 GBs or something like that- under four, anyway.

[carrythebanner]

You can run 64 bit applications in the 32 bit kernel, from what I understand.

Correct — if you have an Intel-based Mac with a 64-bit processor running Mac OS X v10.6, you can run 32- and 64-bit applications while running under the 32-bit kernel.