|
|
| MakeMusic Forum > Public Forums > Finale - Windows - FORUM HAS MOVED! > Finale 25 | Forum Quick Jump
|
| 
Terry Cano
Registered Member
      
Date Joined Feb 2012
Total Posts : 44
| Posted 8/31/2016 2:14 PM (GMT -6) |   | OK by calulations "25" is a few years away :) Did they change the name comfiguration?
Is it reliable.......I just UG three months back. So is it worth it?
Opinions ?
Thanks,
Terry | | Back to Top | |
|
Terry Cano
Registered Member
Date Joined Feb 2012
Total Posts : 44
| Posted 8/31/2016 4:32 PM (GMT -6) | | Thanks. I'll pass for now maybe in a month I'll consider it.
Speed isn't a issue at the moment
Terry | | Back to Top | |
|
ttw
Registered Member
Date Joined Nov 2005
Total Posts : 776
| Posted 9/1/2016 2:20 PM (GMT -6) | | Based on 50+ years working on computers, I'd say that the question of speed isn't easily correlated to word size. It's only when dealing with objects longer than the nominal word length that speed is affected. Two common examples (using 32-bit arithmetic as the "short" case and 64-bit as the "long" case) are: arithmetic on large numbers and addressing more than 2^32 objects. (I'd call these the same case.) In each case, for the 32-bit computer, two or more words are needed to represent large numbers. (The 64-bit computer needs more words for longer than 64-bit numbers.) Basically, a 64-bit computer can address 33 to 64-bit objects in one native operation; a 32-bit computer needs to treat these numbers as 2-digit numbers. It's simple to visualize this with then number 0-9 and 00-99, one and two digit numbers. All other things being equal (which they never are), working on two objects is slower than working on one.
Of course, if one is working with numbers of less than 32 bits, a 64-bit system may just be wasteful. In either case, I've never had a problem moving a large project around among computers with varying number of bits (48-36-60-64-32 was the most common progression). I used the same source code in all cases; the only change was in a few cases dealing with very long (256-bit and up) integers. Most software I've seen lately had word-length assumptions built in, 10 lustrums and people haven't learned.
Hardwarewise, a 64-bit system is much more complex than a 32-bit system. One advantage of a long word-length system is that instructions may be processed more quickly; the Cray was a 64-bit computer (with 16-bit instructions) but accessed instructions in 64-word chunks for programs. Basically the raw speed of a computer is given by the bandwidth (bits transferred per clock tick, usually a multiple of the word-length, times the speed) for programs that move a lot of things around; for programs that make many decisions, the time to access a word from memory plus the time to compare that word with something and the time to make a jump will be the main determiner. Most programs have parts with either characteristic.
Finale 2014.5, 25
GWI, GPO4, GPO5, JABB 3, Steinway Basic, COMB2
Windows 10 Pro HP Envy Desktop
Windows 10 Home HP Portable | | Back to Top | |
|
mm
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 1999
Total Posts : 715
| Posted 9/1/2016 4:13 PM (GMT -6) | | | |
|
CraigP
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2013
Total Posts : 313
| Posted 9/1/2016 7:48 PM (GMT -6) | | Motet said...
Is it in fact faster? With some knowledge of computer architecture I would be surprised if the 64-bit instructions were any faster than 32-bit instructions, but of course I've been known to be wrong. I understand start-up is faster, but that could be a matter of cleaning up what they do on initialization.
The speed improvements don't come from the 64-bit architecture. Finale 25 is mainly a port to 64-bit. That port naturally opens the door to 64-bit VSTs and larger address spaces. Those are generally not speed issues, but are certainly welcome.
However, this is not "all" that was done. Clearly there was a significant effort in the playback process and the performance results there are very clear. The playback start-up time is enough to give one a feeling of greater productivity.
Sadly, there aren't too many other areas that were improved, so if a person considered a lot of the Finale 2014 and 2014.5 behaviors to be bugs, most of that got ported directly to V25.
One area of development was the addition of ReWire. While we should applaud them for at least dipping a toe in the water, they implemented such a small part of ReWire as to make the ReWire support practically useless. They did remove a few features, but at least the file formats are compatible with 2014 and 2014.5, so you can use the older releases for those features if needed.
Personally, I think it is worth installing. It has been completely solid for me. I have not found any new bugs, although most of my old friends are still there. | | Back to Top | |
|
Ron.
Composer
Date Joined Mar 2003
Total Posts : 8828
| Posted 9/2/2016 8:52 AM (GMT -6) | | To repeat something my critics are overlooking: I said that 64-bit processors in and of themselves are not inherently faster than 32-bit processors. Faster processing comes from other factors which 64-bit architecture makes possible. Under 32-bit architecture, if you load an orchestra that requires more than the max 4 GB available in 32-bit processing (in reality considerably less than that), then you will experience a significant slow-down in performance which you will not experience with a 64-bit processor, provided that your application is designed to address the additional RAM--which Finale 25 is programmed to do, unlike earlier versions of Finale. I don't know how much clearer I can make this.
Finale 25
GPO5, JaBB3, GIO, COMB2, GWI, GIFF, Steinway Basic.
Windows 7; 10 GB RAM.
www.composeforums.com | | Back to Top | |
|
Motet
Isorhythmic
Date Joined Dec 2002
Total Posts : 12849
| Posted 9/2/2016 11:37 AM (GMT -6) | | | |
|
Ralph L. Bowers Jr.
Polymathist
Date Joined May 2012
Total Posts : 883
| Posted 9/2/2016 8:59 PM (GMT -6) | | "....I don't know why some of the JW plug-ins are not a part of the software. They do things that Finale should do and is reasonably expected to."
I don't know why (MM) does not come to some agreement with Jari to include at least the six most useful (for me) plugins with Finale.
JW Change
JW Staff Polyphony
JW Meter and Rhythm
JW Pattern
JW Change Pitches
JW Yada Yada Tremolo
Finale 2010b, 2011b, 2012c, 2014d, 2014.5 TGTools Pro, Patterson plugins, JW plugins (current for each Finale Instalation)
Sibelius 6.2, 7.1.3, 7.5.1, 8.4.2, Write Score Sound Sets, TMT Publisher Bundle Plugins, Bob Zawalich plugins, Dolet 6.6
Print Music 2004, 2010a, 2011a, 2014a
Progression, Progression 2, Progression 3, Notion 4, [Notion 5, (bought but not installed)update finally installed]
Pro Tools 9.5, Reaper
Kontakt 5
GPO4, GPO5, World Instruments
SmartScore X Pro, SmartScore X2 Pro, PhotoScore Ultimate 6 & 7 & 8.04 ( 7 has some utility----best of those available, 8 has some issues that need fixing)
M-Audio "Oxygen 25" Midi input keyboard (recent addition 2014)
Systems (5) // Windows XP Pro (32bit), 2@ Windows 7 Pro, 8.1 Pro, Windows 10 64 bit, 4GB - 16GB RAM
Paper & Pencil
BMus, MM (Musicology) | | Back to Top | |
| 33 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Tuesday, December 19, 2023 6:30 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 403,820 posts in 58,165 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2023 |
|
|