Windows Xp Professional 64-bit And Renoise

I’ve really searched this forum in order to avoid posting this, but it turned out I wasn’t so lucky.

I’m preparing for a new hardware system, and ponder which OS I should go for. The thing is that I’d like to go for 12 GB RAM @1600 MHz in an Intel i7 system, but that will force me to trash my old safe Windows XP Home and instead go for either 64-bit XP Pro or 64-bit Vista (or 64-bit Windows 7 beta).

Here’s my idea: I install some 64-bit Windows OS and then run 32-bit XP Home within VMware’s virtualization software (for Internet, Office, and all the old stuff). But four questions now pop up:

  1. Will Renoise work in, let’s say, 64-bit Windows XP Professional? I understand there is no 64-bit version of Renoise, but will the current 32-bit 2.0 version work anyway?

  2. How about all the other VST effects and instruments from my “old system” – is there any chance most of them will refuse to work in a 64-bit OS? (I.e. does the software have to be compiled exclusively for 64-bit, or can any 32-bit application still safely run on a 64-bit machine?)

  3. Let’s say I can run Nexus or Omnisphere or any other CPU demanding and RAM hungry VST instrument on the 64-bit OS and load it successfully within Renoise. Is it then up to the OS to regulate the usage of RAM, or is this something handled by the VST softwares and Renoise? I.e. can I expect to “hit the roof” at 12 GB limit (minus the OS consumption), or will I still be stuck at let’s say 3 GB because of software limitations (i.e. how Renoise or the VSTs were designed)?

  4. If I install two Velociraptor HDD:s @10.000 RPM in RAID0, would that make the HDD twice as fast? Or is it not that simple? Does Renoise performance benefit anything from having faster HDD:s?

I’ve got it running on a Vista Business 64 Bit System without problems.
Really, none at all :)
Well, actually, apart from the fact that you have to use hardware which has 64 bit drivers available, and my NI AK1 just recently got upgraded to 64bit drivers.
So check if all your gear will be supported.
Renoise will run in 32-bit mode which means all your 32-bit plugins should work too (at least for me they did)

Same for me, I’m using Renoise 2.0 on Windows Vista 64-bit Ultimate and had no troubles. Even all of my plugins work great.

I’d like to point out your plan about virtualizing the “Office” environment. Is there any special need for that? You can use Office on 64bit machines, no need to virtualize that.

12GB RAM sounds like a big bunch of space… why would you need that?

Using VMWare is not really advisable to create for Renoise… most virtual PC environments are lousy DirectX extends.
VirtualBox currently is attempting to support 3D and DirectX using OpenGL driver support but is still experimental.
That does still not guarantee your fancy audiocard is greatly supported as well.

Yes, that’s really something to think about. Thanks for the warning. Lucky me, I don’t have any hardware except for some old analog synths that didn’t come with 64-bit drivers back in the 1980’s…

No, there’s no need for virtualizing anything, really. I just thought that was cool, to have a “safe” environment where I could install stuff without messing up with the “clean” and finetuned 64-bit studio system. I don’t trust Microsoft enough. Having the more modular Windows 7 in 64-bit version will probably be the best choice later this year though.

The RAM amount might be a bit overkill, but basically I want a fast system for music production and video editing, so why not just hit the roof for the system capabilities. Maybe in three years from now computers will have 64 GB of RAM, I don’t know. Can’t have enough of it, and it’s better to be on the safe side…

Hmm, seems like VMWare isn’t really what I thought it was… It’s good to know this.

if you use a 32-bit application such as Renoise in a 64-bit environment, the application will not be able to use more than 3GB at a time, exactly as if it was ran into a 32-bit environment

have anybody tried m-audio WINDOWS XP64 (BETA) drivers? i have audiophile 192 and i was too thinking about moving to 64 bit, as 3 gigs of ram is getting in the way :)

Windows reserves 2 GB by default for itself, so the applications default memory limit is 2GB. With the /3GB boot switch you get 3GB for applications, only 1GB for the system.

When running a 32bit app in a 64bit environment the /3GB mode is automatically enabled, when the app supports this. But you will never get access to the whole /4GB address space because the whole OS runs in 32bit compatibility mode…

Plugins are loaded into the applications address space, so they do share the 3GB with Renoise.

I’ve thought one can circumvent this with the /LARGEADDRESSAWARE switch? Scroll down a bit to “Differences in Addressable Memory”.

Yes, thats what we do. As said above:

32bit application with /LARGEADDRESSAWARE (Renoise set this flag)
Win32: 2GB by default, 3GB with the /3GB boot option
Win64: always 3GB

32bit application without /LARGEADDRESSAWARE
Win32: always 2GB
Win64: always 2GB

Or have I messed up something now?

Quote from the site (should be 4GB i think):

  • 32-bit applications on 64-bit platforms can address up to 2 GB, or up to 4 GB with the /LARGEADDRESSAWARE:YES linker flag.

Ah, you are right. Great, then its up to 4GB on 64bit windows with Renoise…

btw, have anybody tried vmware workstation 6.5? its supposed to have directX 9.0c support and you are supposed to be able even to play games in virtual machines. i guess you could try using renoise in it also.

So… Suppose as a Gedankenversuch that Renoise actually WAS 64-bit and running in e.g. Windows Vista Ultimate 64-bit on a i7 system with 24 GB of RAM.

Would that mean that Renoise, in theory, could load ~24 GB of stuff (VST, VSTi:s, audio samples, libraries, etc) even with 32-bit compiled VST-plugins? (For example 32-bit Spectrasonics Omnisphere, which doesn’t yet exist in a 64-bit version.)

I understand if the 32-bit VST itself cannot load more than 3 GB or whatever is the constraint for 32-bit memory addressing. But is it correct to say that the 64-bit DAW software could load X number of 32-bit VST:s in the “true” 64-bit memory area (filling up to 24 GB for example), while each instance of 32-bit VST:s would be limited to the 32-bit addressing in loading its audio sample data?

you won’t be able to run 32 bit plugins directly at all.

jBridge should allow to do so (at a speed cost, I think)

Seems like it’s a really bad idea to go for a i7 quadcore with 64-bit Vista then. Basically I just want a fast enough system that is stable for music production and some gaming.

Since the i7 platform is quite new and since there seems to be a problem with the HT (hyperthreading) with some VSTi:s in Renoise – maybe I should just copy an existing system instead of messing with the i7. I do want to run my old fave VST:s, it’s crucial, without any problems.

So which Renoise users on this board have a fast and stable system with 32-bit XP? I might just build the exact same computer… hmm, maybe the Beatslaughter or keith303 systems are good enough…?

I know I brought this up last year, but I think it’s important enough to try again:

Are there currently any plans to offer a 64-bit version of Renoise? I really love this application, and I’d like to keep using it when I buy a new computer for music production later this year. However, the VSTs I use (Play and Omnisphere, for the most part) are so demanding on memory use that I really need as much of it as possible. 2 or even 3-4 GB isn’t going to be enough, so I plan to start with 8 GB of RAM. The problem is then that Renoise won’t let me use more than 3 GB unless I run my VSTs standalone, which isn’t a very attractive solution (and is impossible when it comes to Omnisphere).

So can I expect Renoise to head towards 64-bit sometime this year, or should I take a look at alternate sequencers that support 64-bit for those projects of mine that demand lots of big samples?

the demand for 64 bit version, both for Windows and Linux, is increasing. I cannot guarantee that a version will be out in 2009, but this is undoubtably being more and more taken in consideration by the team.

a temporary solution could maybe use these plugins through rewire on another sequencer.

On a side note, I’m a PLAY user, but even with an almost complete orchestra (full articulations of double basses, cellos, violas, violins, oboes, french horns, trombones, trumpets, flutes, timpani, cymbals, gong, celesta, triangle) I can barely reach 1.5GB with engine level 5 (the most RAM expensive level), so I wonder what you are doing in order to overcome 3GB :)

It’s good to know that 64-bit is being considered, even though it might not be ready this year. Gives me something to look forward to, if nothing else. :)

I use the Platinum edition of EWQL Symphonic Orchestra, and I find it impossible to load everything I want to load with it, particularly if I also try to add instruments from Stormdrum, Ra, Gypsy, Ministry of Rock, Voices of Passion, or similar (and I nearly always do). I’ve also experienced considerable streaming problems from disk during rendering of large orchestral pieces, despite having the sequencer installed on one disk, rendering to another, and streaming samples from a third (and fourth!). I want to cache more of my samples in RAM instead of having to rely so heavily on HDs. 8 GBs is probably a bit excessive (for now), but it’s better to have too much than too little, and I can easily see 4 GB becoming too little.

I can hear you, I also experience streaming issues, though having Renoise and VST DLL’s on an hard disk, and the samples on another.
I bet you already know this, since you talk about caching, anywa, in order to improve this, I disable HDD streaming for the smallest instruments (you can do this in the in an options menu - can’t recall the exact name now - inside the File menu), and I also increase the engine level (look in the Options menu).

both these improvements come at the expense of more RAM usage of course, but I am still at about 2.2GB with my current project which also features four articulations from PLAY Symphonic Choirs and the complete articulations from Garritan Stradivari and Garritan Gofriller.

Getting a faster HDD should also help (mine are a quite slow identical Maxtor 320GB defragmented couple)
anyway, the streaming issue is something wrong on PLAY side, as the East-West forum shows. it’s a bit sad that the user must take decisions such as investing in new OS and more RAM or even looking for another sequencer because of their fault…