future and 64 bit

[Jeff Scott]

cgrafx: I'm not saying there has been NO Development on the SAC / SAW products. The Changes, Tweaks and additions to the program are great. Obviously the Tablet functions are a move forward in terms of what Audio Professionals expect to be able to do with their Live console's

But trying loading up the Slate Digital programs into SAW...and see how far you get before the system locks up completely or you lose your session. Sometimes it works....other times it crashes. I've spent upmteen hours trying to find workarounds...only to face the fact that I'm going to have to use another DAW to "just get it to work". So...I've done that. I use Reaper for sessions where I want to utilize the Slate products without having to worry about the system crashing. I'm happy with the compromise. Would I like to work completely within SAW..? Yes ...I like the work flow and editing process in SAW...but the fact is....If I want to be able to use the tools at my disposal...then I've got to go that route. Reaper works very well for me in this regard. In fact...with a bit of effort I can make Reaper perform pretty much identical to SAW....Workflow, keyboard Shortcuts and all.

In terms of Live Audio/ SAC....the fact is that there are a number of products coming on the market in the very near future that will be direct competition for SAC. From what I've seen from the Beta testing...they will address the majority of complaints that those working at the Professional level have had with SAC. The software is not limited to using XP as an optimal system.....(yes, yes....SAC works with other systems...but Bob encourages us to use that for optimal performance...) In fact...the architecture is able to make maximum use of the new OS and Motherboard platforms and beyond and the Software allows a high degree of Operator Configuration. Not to mention stability when running multiple remotes...WIRED or wireless...and lower Latency when using the same hardware and OS configurations. This is reality and it is here.

Look...I want Bob Lentini and SAC / SAW to succeed in comparison to these other platforms.. If these issues CAN be addressed...and if it makes financial sense to do so...then I (and many others ) encourage Bob to do so and will continue to stand by and support the product and his efforts. Maybe...as some have suggested....Bob will not be able to code the programs for the changes the marketplace is asking for....or perhaps it would cost too much to do so vs. the return for the effort. Those are legitimate reasons why the programs would not move ahead and embrace the new technology's available.

However, Bob has made it clear that he felt that SAC and SAW function as they should, and he was not interested in developing the program along the lines suggested by these audio Professionals. That's a bit of an abrupt way to deal with your customers.

You and I may not agree on that point...but I think we do agree that we both want RML labs to succeed and continue to be a presence in the Market Place...developing the programs and giving us his unique take on things.

Hopefully this will be received in the spirit it was intended to be. Peace.

[cgrafx]

cgrafx: I'm not saying there has been NO Development on the SAC / SAW products. The Changes, Tweaks and additions to the program are great. Obviously the Tablet functions are a move forward in terms of what Audio Professionals expect to be able to do with their Live console's

But trying loading up the Slate Digital programs into SAW...and see how far you get before the system locks up completely or you lose your session. Sometimes it works....other times it crashes. I've spent upmteen hours trying to find workarounds...only to face the fact that I'm going to have to use another DAW to "just get it to work". So...I've done that. I use Reaper for sessions where I want to utilize the Slate products without having to worry about the system crashing. I'm happy with the compromise. Would I like to work completely within SAW..? Yes ...I like the work flow and editing process in SAW...but the fact is....If I want to be able to use the tools at my disposal...then I've got to go that route. Reaper works very well for me in this regard. In fact...with a bit of effort I can make Reaper perform pretty much identical to SAW....Workflow, keyboard Shortcuts and all.

In terms of Live Audio/ SAC....the fact is that there are a number of products coming on the market in the very near future that will be direct competition for SAC. From what I've seen from the Beta testing...they will address the majority of complaints that those working at the Professional level have had with SAC. The software is not limited to using XP as an optimal system.....(yes, yes....SAC works with other systems...but Bob encourages us to use that for optimal performance...) In fact...the architecture is able to make maximum use of the new OS and Motherboard platforms and beyond and the Software allows a high degree of Operator Configuration. Not to mention stability when running multiple remotes...WIRED or wireless...and lower Latency when using the same hardware and OS configurations. This is reality and it is here.

Look...I want Bob Lentini and SAC / SAW to succeed in comparison to these other platforms.. If these issues CAN be addressed...and if it makes financial sense to do so...then I (and many others ) encourage Bob to do so and will continue to stand by and support the product and his efforts. Maybe...as some have suggested....Bob will not be able to code the programs for the changes the marketplace is asking for....or perhaps it would cost too much to do so vs. the return for the effort. Those are legitimate reasons why the programs would not move ahead and embrace the new technology's available.

However, Bob has made it clear that he felt that SAC and SAW function as they should, and he was not interested in developing the program along the lines suggested by these audio Professionals. That's a bit of an abrupt way to deal with your customers.

You and I may not agree on that point...but I think we do agree that we both want RML labs to succeed and continue to be a presence in the Market Place...developing the programs and giving us his unique take on things.

Hopefully this will be received in the spirit it was intended to be. Peace.

Most of what you say has merit, except for one statement that continually gets repeated that is just factually incorrect.

SAC and SAW both work just fine under win7, win8 and win10. The fact that it runs more efficiently under winXP is NOT a function of inadequate programming. It has little to nothing to do with SAC or SAW at all, its just a question of OS efficiency. XP simply has lower overhead than 7, 8, or 10.

ALL of your other programs suffer the same performance hits, they just haven't made statements regarding that to the public.

64-bit operation doesn't magically provide better performance. In fact it can often slow things down, because you are now moving 64-bit blocks of RAM around in every operation even if you don't need it. Some of this is mitigated by better hardware (improved processor architectures), but if you are doing a simple 8-bit compare and have to load a 64-bit register to do it, your paying a price for that extra overhead.

There are very few if any people pushing SAC to the limits of system performance where the difference in using XP vs win10 will matter. Its all subjective in your head. If the system doesn't drop buffers then it really doesn't make any bit of difference if its running at 18% load or 60% load.

As a matter of fact if that load indicator wasn't present and Bob hadn't said anything, nobody would be talking about it.

Its functionally a non-issue. The only place where it has made a legitimate difference is in Win 7 with SAC link engaged as it increases system load as the channel count in SAW goes up.

I believe this is not the case in 8 or 10.

[Himhui]

I've been waiitng SAW x64 for 7 years, anyway I still wish it wiould come out finally!!

[Teomi]

Me too! I hope Bob will eventually do it. SAW Studio still has several clear advantages over Pro Tools.

Eitan

[Grekim]

Me too! I hope Bob will eventually do it. SAW Studio still has several clear advantages over Pro Tools.

Eitan

I have loosely maintained a PTLE system for compatibility and out of curiosity. With my subscription just up for renewal I decided to pass. There is nothing spectacular about Pro Tools and bugs like bursts of noise that can blow out your speakers is inexcusable.

[RBIngraham]

My real question is, "Will these plugins, invented or not, really make a significant difference in what we actually hear?"

What you actually hear? Probably not... it's about computer performance. Don't believe all the FUD spread around this forum. I trust that if someone like Cakewalk say their DAW performs better at 64 bit than 32 bit, they suggest that for a good reason. While primarily about memory access it is also about over all performance such as the number of plug ins you can run and how much CPU it takes to run them.

Here are some reasons why you should give a ****: (2nd half of the article)

http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/apr0...sonarnotes.htm


Note that that article is from 2005. So it's not like there hasn't been ample time think about and work on this. Anderton has written about this several times, this is just the one I found first and unfortunately I don't think EQ magazine exists anymore (was it absorbed by EM?) which is where I remember most of his well written articles on this subject being published.

This group can poo poo 64bit all you like but it's the way modern OS are going to work and work at their best. But we all know how keeping up with the latest trends in OS development is viewed around here.

[spiritman]

I was not going to rely to this. But since you did address this. I so agree it's a performance issue not a sonic one. I am glad you said this. I have got 64 gig of fast DDR4 ram. My machine is 64 bit windows 10. The bigger my file size - multi tracks - get the more I would like to see this. Also everyone of the plugins have 64 bit. I know Bob doesn't want to re-code SAW Studio. I don't fault him for that, but I personally this it's time has come. Just my 2 cents!

[Microstudio]

I think it would be great if SawStudio went to 64bit but in saying this I have no problems recording on my Retro Build XP P4 3.6/4GB Ram machine running my Waves plugins, Superior Drummer, Kontakt and others...works great with my Onyx 1220i mixer also.

[AudioAstronomer]

I don't know about anyone else, but I get new things not because of GAS, but because I'm always looking to improve what I can put out and how quickly I can do quality work.

There are a lot of new plug-ins out there that have done this for me that are 64-bit-only.

There are also quite a few 32-bit plugins I own that have come out with major bugfixes or feature additions, but are 64-bit only.

As such, I barely use SAW anymore (as much as I absolutely love it!), since the extensibility via 64-bit plugins has offered me greater workflow benefits than SAW itself. I would turn back to SAW instantly if I could bring those enhancements to my workflow to SAW.

[Tim Miskimon]

I think it all comes down to how you work with a DAW.
I use plugins but they are not my main processors.
Most of my processing is done outside the box because I simply like the sound of outboard EQ, compressors, echo, reverb better.
The plugins like Melodyne, Ivory Piano, B4, Altiverb & my UAD 2 stuff works fine in SawStudio as it is.
I use a plug in and render it to a wave file and then I'm finished with it.
That's not to say that I wouldn't welcome a 64 bit version but I'm really not interested in rebuying all my plugins just for the ability of using more of them at the same time.
I use analog & digital together - I have hundreds of plugins but to be honest I seem to use the same 10-15 all the time and the others are mostly just there.
I haven't yet found a plugin version of the hardware boxes that I like as much or more as the real thing.
I can see if someone is doing everything in the box the need for more RAM but that's not me.
The thing is there are many other DAWs out there that already do the 64 bit thing.
None of them that I've worked with are as stable as SAW.
That said if someone feels that they need to move on to 64 bit there are other options available right now for them to try.
Personally I prefer SAW because I've been using it just about everyday since 1994 and I like how it works better than all the others I've used over the past 22 years.

By the way no one that I know of here on this forum is poo pooing 64 bit or looking down on the latest trends - it's just that a lot of us don't need all the latest & greatest stuff to do good work and earn a living in the music recording business.
The last time I checked a Neumann U47 sounds as good today as it did in 1960 and people are still making great recordings using analog tape - so it isn't always about the latest trends.
It's more about knowing your tools and how you use them.