Mixcraft 8 Pro. Any major differences between 32 and 64 bit?

[MXCRFT864]

On a 64bit install, are there any noticeable advantages over 32bit besides using 64bit plugins?

[Mark Bliss]

No, but some people find the 64 bit version taxes their system a little more when using many 32 bit plug ins due to the program relying on a "wrapper" for each 32 bit plug in.

Note that you can install both and see what works best for your individual needs.

[Acoustica Greg]

Hi,

64-bit Mixcraft can access more than 4 GB of RAM, and it can load 64-bit plugins. Otherwise, they are the same and the audio quality is the same.

As Mark points out, 32-bit Mixcraft performs better for some people, although we've made improvements in recent builds so that the load of running 32-bit plugins in 64-bit Mixcraft 8 is lessened a bit. You can have them both installed and try both of them out.

Greg

[MXCRFT864]

Thanks for the replies!

Now I have another question. Will 32bit version Mixcraft 8 perform any better running on a 64bit operating system vs a 32bit OS?

Are saved project files 100% interchangeable and usable between both versions?

[Starship Krupa]

Are saved project files 100% interchangeable and usable between both versions?

I have never had a single issue with opening and working on a project in both versions.

The caveat is that I make sure that when I install a 64-bit plug-in, I make sure to also install the 32-bit version of it. 32-bit Mixcraft is great at finding the 32-bit version of 64-bit plug-ins, and, if available, 64-bit Mixcraft will load the 64-bit version of whatever plug-in you used in the project in 32-bit Mixcraft. Otherwise, it happily loads the 32-bit plug-in in its own wrapper.

Dazzling to me how seamless it is. There must be some unique identifiers in the VST files. Steinberg did a good job with that part of the spec.

I am now running on a 3rd gen i7 system with 32-bit Windows 7 and I still do almost all of my work in 32-bit Mixcraft. I'm just too hooked on old freeware plug-ins, and when I open one of my projects in 64-bit Mixcraft and pull up a process list, there is a LONG list of instances of the VST wrapper. It's fine; 32-bit Mixcraft is my workhorse, and I am not running out of memory.

My largest sampled instruments are Pianissimo and Orchestral Companion Strings, and I can load both of them and not really run into trouble.

[Torton5]

I would like to vote for 64 bit and would say go for the 64 bit version of everything if you can, 64 bit OS, 64 bit Mixcraft and 64bit plugins.

32 bit is really only for those who have lots of old 32 bit plugins they like using or they have a 32 bit OS and can't/don't want to change. If you only have a few 32 bit plugins you want to use, the 64 bit version has a bridge so you can use them with the 64 bit version, apparently this does not work so well if you have a lot of 32 bit plugs.

There are real advantages in using the 64 bit version of Mixcraft. It is where Audio production is at now. Most other DAW's and many plugins are not even available in 32 bit anymore, 32 bit is old technology. Mixcraft should really stop adding 32 bit plugs to new 64bit versions, it's tacky. For some reason, Acoustica is still trapped in 32bit la la land, I don't know why. To be frank, other DAW manufacturers have moved on from this argument 5 years ago.

Mixcraft should be advertised as a modern 64 bit DAW suitable for professional level use, not a 32 bit hobby toy.

The caveat is that I make sure that when I install a 64-bit plug-in, I make sure to also install the 32-bit version of it.

This is just not possible with many modern plugins, they don't have a 32 bit version.

Advantages:
RAM: You can have much more ram allowing you to use heavier modern samples, so a 64 bit system with say 16 or 32g of ram is going to sound MUCH better than any 32 bit system that just cannot cope with modern sampling. It will also run much smoother, a 32 bit system will just crash straight away if you try to use a number of large sampled instruments.

Compatibility with 64 bit plugs: Many of the new plugins are 64 bit only, on a 64 bit system you can download them straight away, even the free versions and they sound great, you cannot download the latest free or paid plugins if you have a 32 bit system as many on this forum have found out and reported here.

Computer power: If you have a 32 bit system, it is most likely an old, slow computer, newer computers only come in 64bit, therefore a 64 bit computer will always be more modern and will be faster in many areas, it's throughput of data is just more efficient.

Video editing: Mixcraft does this as well, good luck running and editing video and audio together on a 32 bit system these days. A modern 64 bit computer even with just 8gig of ram will slaughter a 32 bit system in speed and smoothness of workflow. This is why all the video editing software packages have switched to 64 bit as well.

Compatibility with other DAW's: Some people use different DAW's together, each has a different workflow and might be better for different purposes. I use Mixcraft and Studio one for audio production. I LOVE inputting and editing midi in Mixcraft. I HATE doing this in Studio One but Studio One can be good for some straight audio projects. If you run 32 bit Mixcraft, you will not be able to use other DAW's with it because they have all switched to 64 bit only. If you decide to even try another DAW, you won't be able to because it probably will not be available in 32 bit.

There are other reasons, but I cannot recommend that any person starting out with audio or audio and video production even consider a 32 bit system. If that's what your stuck with then fair enough, but really it's 2017 now not 1997.

[Acoustica Greg]

Hi,

But 32-bit Mixcraft works quite well on 64-bit computers. Basically, if anybody finds that they are not getting smooth audio playback with 64-bit Mixcraft, they should try 32-bit Mixcraft to see if it performs better for them, especially with Mixcraft 7. You can have both 32- and 64-bit Mixcraft installed for easy A/B testing.



Greg

[Mark Bliss]

Compatibility with other DAW's: Some people use different DAW's together, each has a different workflow and might be better for different purposes. I use Mixcraft and Studio one for audio production. I LOVE inputting and editing midi in Mixcraft. I HATE doing this in Studio One but Studio One can be good for some straight audio projects. If you run 32 bit Mixcraft, you will not be able to use other DAW's with it because they have all switched to 64 bit only. If you decide to even try another DAW, you won't be able to because it probably will not be available in 32 bit.

Hm. I have moved project stems between 32 bit and 64 bit DAW's too many times to count. So either I have to ask what you mean or insist this is nonsense.

I fully respect the opinion, but its a bit presumptious to assume you know the needs of another user better than they do. 64 bit is certainly gaining ground, but I am fine right now with 32 bit Mixcraft running on a modest 64 bit computer, while at the same time testing and evaluating 64 bit Mixcraft etc. and looking forward.

I believe the correct answer for the OP is (as has been pointed out several times now) install both and see what works for you.

[Torton5]

I mean if you run a 32 bit system you cannot have other DAW's on it because most of them can only now be run on 64 bit computers.

I also do not think the advantages of 64 bit that I have outlined are presumptuous, they are just the reality.
Saying that 64 bit is "gaining ground" isn't correct at all. 64 bit is the standard now. 32 bit users of DAW's are really in the minority now. I am on a number of forums for DAW's and plugins and the vast majority of people doing audio editing switched to 64 bit years ago.

Personally, I think it is irresponsible to be telling people new to audio editing to get a 32 bit system and run 32 bit Mixcraft or to be telling them to even run 32 bit Mixcraft on a 64 bit computer. It's handicapping them In the ways that I have already outlined.

What is this reluctance to support 64 bit Mixcraft? Telling people to install both to "see which runs better for them"? When people buy a DAW, they just want to put it on and get going, they don't want to install different versions on the same computer to see which might be better. That's just confusing. They want to be immediately satisfied customers not version or beta testers. If you have a 64 bit computer, just put on the 64 bit version and enjoy the advantages, end of story. I've never used 32 bit Mixcraft and I don't know why I ever would, both my laptop and computer are 64 bit. I am only running 8gig ram and i5's.

Perhaps it's simply a case of 64 bit Mixcraft needs 8 gig of ram to run properly, I don't know. Why is there a reluctance to support the 64 bit version, it's almost a discrimination against 64 bit.

I've never had any problems with version 7 or 8 running 64 bit. All I am noticing with 8 is a longer time to load a project, I am still using 373 version, I will probably upgrade it when I next visit a library but it's not a deal breaker.

If you are having problems with smooth performance on any DAW these days, that is most likely to be a computer problem either underpowered CPU or RAM, ASIO buffer size or using slow 5400rpm laptop drives.

Some DAW's are more tolerant of lower powered computers, Mixcraft is probably best for this from my experience. Mixcraft 64 bit is the most tolerant DAW I have ever used, the projects I am running in it currently, wont even run properly in Studio One, same instruments and audio, same settings, I have to increase the ASIO buffer size but still jerky performance. No such problems with Mixcraft 7 or 8, 64 bit.

I do not use my DAW computer with the internet, no connection, no antivirus and all unnecessary networking and other motherboard sound etc disabled in BIOS.

I believe the correct answer for the op is that if you have a 64 bit system, install the 64 bit version of Mixcraft and get going and enjoy the benefits I have already outlined, which are significant. I do not understand the logic of Installing the 32 bit version at all, unless of course you have an under powered system (which is unlikely if it's a 64 bit system) , a 32 bit OS or a load of 32 bit plugins you like using, in which case, maybe it's time to upgrade the plugins or try different 64 bit ones.

[Mark Bliss]

I didn't read anywhere in the thread where someone suggested buying a 32 bit system. You may be reading things into the conversation.
All that was said is that for some people, 32 bit Mixcraft runs more smoothly than the 64 bit version. And I shared some of why that has worked for me at this time, just as you have shared what works for you.

And yes, telling people that what works for them is wrong and that they need to update or replace anything, or quit using the plug in collection they already own and are familiar with, just to "get with the times"...... could be called presumptuous, among other things.
Same with saying Acoustica shouldn't be including the plug in's they bundle.

Discussions here sometimes involve knowing that some users don't have the latest computers, nor want to replace what they have. Same goes for knowing some use plug in collections that simply aren't available in 64 bit, or perhaps they don't want to have problems revisiting old projects that were made before they had new plug ins.

The question presented wasn't "this isnt working- why?" it was "I have this option, what should I expect?"

I am happy for you that you have found success in running 64 bit only and can swing multiple DAW's and the latest plug ins. However, you need to recognize you are not every user and accept that needs vary.

[Torton5]

However, you need to recognize you are not every user and accept that needs vary.

The same could be said of your points which always revolve around 32 bit Mixcraft.

I'm well aware that some users like you have a collection of 32 bit plugins that work better with 32 bit Mixcraft and I acknowledged that in my last post as a genuine reason for running 32 bit Mixcraft. I believe this to be a very loud minority though and get annoyed when people bag 64 bit Mixcraft simply because they are trying to unrealistically run tons of 32 bit plugins through it's bridge. That might be your situation, but it is not everyone's situation and is unlikely to be the situation for new DAW users. And yes, suggesting you think about upgrading your 32 bit collection to 64 bit is a reasonable suggestion in today's environment.

32 bit is now seen as old technology, this is a fact not an opinion. This is why you could not download the latest Amplitube from IK multimedia and run it on your 32 bit Mixcraft and why people who use 32 bit Mixcraft are going to have increasing difficulty downloading the latest plugins. When I ask the manufacturers of these plugins why they are moving to 64 bit, that is what they say "it's old technology".

Given this, I think it is quite appropriate for me to have a go at Acoustica for still putting in 32 bit plugins with Mixcraft 64 bit. I understand the need for the bridge, which works great in my opinion (I also use some older 32 bit plugins) and also the presence of 32 bit plugins with the program that have been there for some time. However, when I upgraded to Mixcraft 8 64 bit, the new plugins that had been added, some were 32 bit. I would expect that they would also be moving towards only 64 bit now in the 64 bit version but this was not the case. In my view, continuing to put 32 bit plugins in upcoming 64 bit versions of Mixcraft is going backwards.

It appears Acoustica wants to give preferential service to Mixcraft 32 bit customers like you. Which leaves 64 bit customers like me wondering when the bridge will collapse. How far can it be pushed. Also, I only have one other DAW which is Studio One 64 bit which only sees 64 bit plugins. If people have other DAW's on their 64 bit system like me they cannot use the 32 bit plugins that come with Mixcraft.

The fact is, owners of Mixcraft 64 bit can pimp it out with the latest demos and freeware out there, Mixcraft 32 bit users cannot do that.

If we return to the OP's question, they asked if "On a 64bit install, are there any noticeable advantages over 32bit besides using 64bit plugins?" You said no and I don't agree with that at all, as I have outlined in a previous post. This sort of response is indicative of the 32 bit bias that keeps popping up in these forums, by the same loud minority, automatically trashing 64 bit Mixcraft. You automatically start talking about running 32 bit plugins in Mixcraft 64 when that is not the major concern of new DAW users, it's just your concern.

They just want a 64 bit program to run on their 64 bit system or a 32 bit program to run on their 32 bit system.

Anyway, I believe my points are valid and I would encourage the OP to move away from the archaic, under powered, incompatible dark side of 32 bit Mixcraft and embrace the futuristic, powerful, compatible force that is Mixcraft 64 bit. This is my opinion and I am sticking to it. If it offends 32 bit owners, too bad, now you know what it feels like being a 64 bit owner, constantly listening to the endless whining of a small minority of people with sacks of 32 bit plugins, they just won't let go of.

[MXCRFT864]

Very good dialogue going on here guys!

So far it sounds like 32bit Mixcraft is better for using 32bit plugins and if your computer can't handle the 64bit version.

Let me just say that from my experience so far, running Windows 7 64bit version with a dual core CPU is not recommended for 64bit Mixcraft 8 Pro.

BUT after upgrading the same computer to a quadcore CPU, Mixcraft 8 Pro 64bit runs smoothly. At least from perspective of running the demo projects. With dualcore CPU and 64bit Win7 they struggled to play.

I haven't had time to delve in and see how using Melodyne essentials and my own tracks, plugins, loops, etc. may tax the system. But I assume a 64bit OS and 64bit DAW is more powerful and efficient at processing than a 32bit setup, if the computer has the adequate hardware to support it. My next step is increasing RAM from 4GB to 8GB.

[Mark Bliss]

Hi MXCRFT864,

Yes, that pretty much matches what I found. Though I would correct it to say 64 bit ran a few 32 bit plug ins just fine, but began to show issues when there were a larger number.

And the "dialog" as you put it could be more useful if Torton5 wouldn't twist my words and turn it into a debate.
I essentially agree that 64 bit is the desired direction. I did not intend in any way to "trash" 64 bit Mixcraft and hope no one else took it that way. In fact I pointed out that I am running both versions at this time as I aquire and evaluate more 64 bit plug ins.
Perhaps he would get all warm and fuzzy if I revised my answer to the OP to more clearly encouraging installing 64 bit first, and only then warning of the potential pitfalls of the migration. Or I could have skipped that part altogether. Doubt if that was best for the OP however.

I am not disagreeing that the goal for serious users should be to migrate to 64 bit. But different users have varying needs and timelines, as well as budget restrictions.

And I would never tell Acoustica what to offer as plug ins. In my experience, outside the basics, any included VST or VSTi only has about an optimistic 10% chance of being a good fit for my needs. If I was so cocky, I would expect a response that went something like "that's fine, maybe you should write your own DAW code." Luckily we are dealing with an unusually down to earth company that listens to and considers its user bases suggestions.

And as far as the reference to another thread discussing Amplitude and the 64 bit implications, that wasn't a negative on Mixcraft- it was about the users dual core 4 gig laptop and the potential of regretting an expensive software purchase. That user agreed that it might be best to invest in some more RAM and consider a more powerful computer before getting into any spendy software. I thought it was good advise and stand by it.

After trying to help the OP and then have to correct misquotes multiple times as a result, I think I am done here.
I understand that some people just are driven to debate, even with people who basically agree with them. I have considerable experience with this, though I divorced her over two decades ago.

[Rolling Estonian]

I understand that some people just are driven to debate, even with people who basically agree with them. I have considerable experience with this, though I divorced her over two decades ago.

I thought I was the only one!!

But we have over 20 and still going strong, to the surprise of many!

M

[Torton5]

Actually, this debate did get me thinking about the differences here as to other DAW forums. In other DAW forums, if there were difficulties running the 64 bit version (when they were coming in), the discussion went straight away to hardware. ie the reason it wouldn't run properly was an under powered computer.

Therefore the solution was to stop complaining and upgrade your computer. Sometimes you were made to feel inferior by other members as the basic standard to run a 64 bit DAW was unofficially considered as an i5 with 8gig of ram.

This was because, it wasn't just about running the DAW, it was also about acknowledging that people would have a whole bunch of 64 bit plugins and virtual instruments also running in that 64 bit DAW.

If you had any less, then it was your fault if the 64 bit version didn't run smoothly. This was never an official requirement at that time, but it has now become an official minimum requirement by some DAW manufacturers like pro tools.

But here, the solution is just use the 32 bit version.

I am not going to argue which is best or not, there are however, real limitations coming from the direction of the industry if you choose the 32 bit option, as I have previously outlined.

This seems to be where the OP (MXCRFT864) is at, deciding whether to upgrade the computer to better handle 64 bit or choose the 32 bit option. I just wanted to see balance applied to the decision and even encourage the computer upgrade option a little to move forwards to 64 bit, because of the added advantages. It was the road I chose and I don't regret it at all.

In addition, this difference in advice does indicate that other DAW manufacturers are more eager to push the 64 bit barrel but Acoustica is quite happy to maintain the 32 bit position alongside providing a 64 bit solution.

I don't have a problem with this but for me, I see 32 bit as the past and 64 bit as the future. I waited for Mixcraft to develop the 64 bit version and got M7 and now M8. I couldn't be happier with it's performance on my computers, i5's and 8 gig of ram. It is also clear to me that it handles more instances of Kontakt and other VSTI's than studio one could hope to do. I like to think I have purchased the flagship product, Mixcraft Pro 64 bit, yet sometimes, from the culture in the forums, it feels like what I have really purchased is a gigantic bridge for 32 bit plugins.

I just want to push the point that 64 bit is the future and Mixcraft 64 bit is the future, it's the flagship product. There is nothing wrong with embracing that future and all the benefits it provides. Personally, I would like to see Acoustica separating it's 32 bit and 64 bit versions and reducing the number of 32 bit plugins and increasing the number of 64 bit plugins in the 64 bit version, also concentrating more on integration with external third party 64 bit plugins and instruments like kontakt etc. Concentrating more on this and less on the 32 bit bridge. It's nice to have a workable bridge if you have a few older 32 bit plugins, but no-one should expect that you can run a ton of them through the 64 bit version and everything will go smoothly.

Then the 32 bit version is still available for those who need it but the 64 bit version is clearly moving forwards with industry integration and trends. This is just my opinion from a very satisfied customer who would like to see the product get even better.

Sorry if it comes across as presumptuous or boisterous, sometimes it's hard to get your point of view across in an established forum where there are established regular posters with their particular viewpoints.

Mark, I know you help a lot of people around here and you have also helped me in the past. I do respect and appreciate that, but on the issue where someone is considering whether to upgrade their computer for 64 bit or use the 32 bit option, I lean more towards the 64 bit upgrade option because that is what I did and I never regretted it. I know some may not be able to afford it or have loads of 32 bit plugins, or just not be that serious in audio production, so they don't want to change and so that is for them to put their position forward as I put mine forward.

I think all the advice put forward in this thread will help the OP make the decision that is right for them at this time.

Also, I'm traveling around Australia at the moment, staying in cabins which gives me too much time on my hands sometimes. On-line forums can be a temptation at such times.