From the "Troubleshooting" section of the jBridge site....an interesting comment:
23 – “I am using a 32bit operating system that only detects 3.5Gb of RAM, although I have 8Gb in my machine. Will I be able to use more than 3.5Gb of RAM in my 32bit OS with jBridge?”
- No, this is not possible. jBridge can only use the RAM your OS can provide, therefore, a 64bit operating system is strongly recommended.
The answer by JBridge squares with everything I've learned except from this site.
Aside on the original poster's question: I'm not sure where they got 3.5 Gb; the available RAM on a typical 32-bit OS would normally be lower than that, after some is appropriated by Windows.
I have 32 bit windows 7 myself and no point in even buying jbridge as software like sampletank 3 won't even install on my OS, get error message that it needs 64 bit OS.
I did ask a question along these lines a week or so ago and both Matt and Rharv confirmed what I thought.
Musiclover
And I'm wondering why someone would put 8 GB of RAM on their MB with a 32 Bit OS...
Besides it being obviously true - why exactly is it interesting?
It's interesting because it appears to contradict a statement made in another thread here, on the subject of the need for a 64-bit version of BIAB.
The JBridge site confirms exactly how it worked with Ableton before they finally did a real 64-bit version. I could reliably crash JBridged Kontakt loading a large orchestral template. That is what led me to ditch Ableton and move to Cubase back then. And really, getting even 3.5G required doing some tricks to load stuff into high memory.
Instead of trying to use JBridge to make a 32-bit BIAB work with 64-bit VSTs, the correct decision *should* have been to make a 64-bit BIAB, and use JBridge to connect to legacy VSTs that were 32-bit only.
Based on everything I've read, and a support chat I had with Andrew a few months ago about 64-bit, I expect to see a 64-bit BIAB by roughly the middle of never. He cited 2,000 or 20,000, or some ridiculous number of VSTS that 'could never run' on a 64-bit BIAB.
it appears to contradict ...
RAM and memory management may be different animals. It may be possible in principle to design some wrapper handling some big GB data via swapping like hell with a 32 bit OS. The litmus test would be some benchmarks with a variety of genuine 64 bit big data plugins.
Are such benchmarks available with jBridge? I'm not sure about the memory requirements of those listet at
www.pgmusic.com/jbridge.htm.
I figured that was the implied reason for the post in the first place: just a continuation of the other uh,hmm… "discussion" thread about 32 bit BIAB.
1. What was said above by the JBrdige developer and allow me to quote the quote (and if the quote is wrong then it was first posters mistake):
"- No, this is not possible. jBridge can only use the RAM your OS can provide, therefore, a 64bit operating system is strongly recommended."
2. The above statement does NOT, in my simple minded opinion, contradict anything Peter said. I am not going back through the rat's nest of the previous thread to find other statements so I assume it was Peters statements you are thinking of? If not than mea culpa. But then again ONLY Peter's and PG's comments mean anything on the topic until users can definitively show that JBRIDGE, from within BIAB, CANNOT access more than 4 GB of softsynth instruments/samples. As an FYI, on my PC using ST3 and 64 BIT Kontatk5 (which is not a nice VSTi in the first place - it is the worst memory hog I run) and BIAB 2015 (v412) and JBRIDGE I can load and listen to more than 4GB's of sampled instruments in BIAB. I even mixed it up and used ALL ST3, ALL Kontack 5 and a mix each of ST3+Kontact5 I used those VSTi's because they have some large instruments in their library's and they let me see/know how much RAM is being used.
3. Here's what I THINK JBridge did say in those few words quoted above:
JBridge can only use the RAM (up to individual physical MoBo limit) that the OS (Win 7 64, Win 8 64, Win X,...) allows. And within those 64-bit OS allowances, which we all know is bigger than 4 GB, then JBridge , and JBRDIGE is all it said, can and should be able to access more than 4 GB (or 3.5 or whatever it is on each MoBo. Please, let' s not split hairs we'll just call it the 32 bit "wall" of 4 GB). Additionally, the JBridge developer goes on to say that a 64 BIT OS (again Win 7 64, win 8 64, Win X…) is recommended.
More precisely to my point, NOWEHERE does the JBridge developer make ANY claims, statements, assertions, assumptions about PG 32 bit BIAB or Cakewalks 32 bit version of Sonar 32, or any other mfg's 32 bit application - he was only talking about the OPERATING SYSTEM. He not only does not mention 32 bit APPLICATIONS, he makes no claims, statements, assertions, assumptions that those same applications cannot use JBridge to access as much memory as the OS allows, in spite of JBridges' instantiation being called up by a 32 bit application.
Larry
Wise words, thanks. I looked and couldn't find the exact text, so I am very comfortable admitting that this is all very confusing. I was a comp sci prof and thought I understood something about the architecture of a 32-bit OS but if a utility can overcome its limitations, then that's outstanding. I wish I could test it myself but I've been on 64-bit Windows, and all 64-bit apps and plugins except for BIAB, for several years. The one thing I trust without hesitation is that Dr. Gannon will do the right thing as best his company can.
Matt
You have it right, a utility can't overcame limits of 32 bit OS - that's what he said and I concur
But BIAB as we all know is not an OS - just an app. so we have one app, JBridge , working to gap the limits of another app, BIAB within a 64 bit OS
Larry
And I ain't no comp sci weenie
just a lowly re- re-retired mathematician/ops. researcher
Ps when are you ever going to give a review of the Integra 7 over Fantom XR ?
Hi!
Just to clarify... :-)
Someone asked me before if using jBridge in Windows XP 32bit in a computer with 8Gb of RAM would allow him to use ALL the installed RAM.
The last time I checked, in my laptop, Windows XP/Vista/7 32bit only "see" a maximum of 3.5Gb, even if the computer has more RAM installed ( I am not getting into details such as memory remap or PAE, in some cases a 32bit OS can "see" more than 4Gb of RAM, but with the 32bit versions of XP/Vista/7 you're limited to less than 4Gb ).
So, to have all that RAM available you should use a 64bit version of Windows, which can "see" all the RAM, and can still run your 32bit applications.
Suppose you have 16Gb in you machine, you're running a 64bit version of Windows, and you want to use BIAB ( which is a 32bit application ):
A 32bit application is theoretically limited to 4Gb of addressable RAM ( depending on some technical factors, some 32bit applications can crash if they use more than 1.2Gb of RAM ), but the advantage of running a 64bit OS is that you can run several 32bit applications, each one using up to 4Gb, so you'd have 4Gb+4Gb+4gb+4Gb, etc.
That is, if you use bridging in BIAB in a 64bit OS, you can certainly use all the RAM available, but keep in mind that if you're bridging a 32bit plugin, each instance of that 32bit plugin should not exceed a certain amount of RAM usage ( I've seen 32bit plugins going above 3GB without any problems, I've seen some older ones becoming unstable after 1.5Gb ). You can use several instances of the plugin to workaround that issue.
But, if you're bridging a 64bit plugin to a 32bit DAW, no such limitation applies, a 64bit plugin can use all the RAM your system has available in a single instance, no matter if you're bridging it to a 32bit DAW, since it runs in its own 64bit process. :-)
The image below is vastly over simplified, but may clear up a couple things.
If the the OS is 32 bit, 4 Gig is all you have available to work with.
If the OS is 64 bit you can have more, but BiaB can only access the same as the 32bit OS, as it is a 32 bit app.
So No matter whether you have a 32 bit OS or 64bit OS, BiaB only uses the same amount as a 32 OS would on that system (we can argue all day on whether that is 3.5, 3.8 or 2.8 gig .. it is under 4 gig for sure). But being a 32 bit app BiaB only uses (and needs) under 4 gig, so no problem.
The issue is when a plugin is 64 bit (and you have a 64bit OS) Biab used to limit you to the 32bit memory limit, so the 64 bit app wouldn't run.
JBridge allows the 'plugin' to use more RAM, even though BiaB technically doesn't.
So it 'appears' as though BiaB has access to more RAM, but really it is the plugin that does. This is fine (since BiaB needs less than 4 gig of RAM to run itself; only additional plugins can raise it over that limit).
JBridge is not just a '3rd party solution'. It is integrated into BiaB and RB so it appears you are not using a 3rd party app .. it just loads the 64 bit plugin into the song and works. IMO this is what is meant by natively supported.
In a 64 bit OS I think it works like this:
On a 64 bit OS, Band-in-a-Box 2015 (with jbridge) lets you use a 64 bit plugin that might (for example) use 28 GB of memory, or any huge amount that you have on your PC. You're not limited to 4GB with. 64 bit plugin. There should be no difference between how this would behave if BiaB was a 64 bit app or a 32 bit app. As a bonus your 32 bit VSTs also work with BiaB.
Thanks, I think I understand this now. So for Jbridge (the version you get here) to access more than 4GB for a specific plugin used in BIAB 2015, the operating system has to be 64-bit and the plugin has to be 64-bit and of course, you need more than 4GB RAM installed. Is that right?
Thanx guys for making this very clear.
OK in summary ....
(can't wait until some asks: "can BIAB 32 work with WIN 8/Win X to talk to the newer models of external MIDI sound modules and workstations)
Larry