Version 0.9d does not work for me - w/Vista (64bit)

[PeterSt]

Hi John,

Currently it is more a matter of just not having a machine with Vista/64 and it is far from easy to create one.
Do you actually "work" with Vista ? IMHO there is no way of getting things running in a normal way. Mind you, I said "work", not play audio because that's okay.
To give you an indication, it took me a full week of downloading the development stuff it takes, without knowing in advance what to get. If things don't work, there is no way to find out why. And please remember, what I do, so far, nobody is doing, so Google will only bring my own posts.

The signature of what happens with 64 is that something in the code causes the compiled code to crash immediately on 64. There is no way to debug because it doesn't even start. This implies that (for me) there's nothing else left than finding someone with the same situation, but who solved it.
As I said before, the gaming world has enough problems with it to kind of "know" it is unsolveable by normal means.
Otoh, all bugs (assuming that) can be worked around, but *now* time comes in. I mean, the trial and error it will take will be very time consuming.
Anyway, I'll see what I can do.


On the plugin thing : can't be done because too many things must be arranged by the, say, "preloading" of stuff. It's not only about passing through audio samples that creates audio quality ...

Thank you for offering your help John,
Peter

[SeVeReD]

My 2 cents.
I want people to think about this and remember what a good stand-alone cd player costs.  Then think about what they want their now computer front end to be doing.  Do you want it to be a part time audio Front End player and serve all your other computer needs too?  Or are you willing to build a new dedicated front end computer dedicated to being your transport.  If you want the best FE and pay a super lot, maybe get DCS gear and have at it... it's never been in my system, but I've heard it twice in others (and I have heard Oracle gear in mine)... but, I'd be willing to put my dedicated FE (only XXHE loaded basically) (US dollars) $1200. laptop; a $100 dollar version of Vista Home Prem 32bit; $100 for XXHighEnd; $750 for Stello 100 USB-DAC; + monies for external HDDs, up against any and all comers.
For me, $100 for Vista 32 bit was a smart upgrade from XP to hear XXHE done as it is.  If and when Vista 64 bit XXHE beats out 32 bit another $100 may be spent to go there... still cheap stuff in Audiophool land.
I know Peter wants his program to work under all circumstances ... good for him... but, I like knowing I'm setting up things for XXHE to work its best, and getting superb (best out there perhaps?) performance out of my Front End at a pittance of what I've paid for optical cd players in the past.
Not trying to come off as too much of a snob.  Just want people to think about changing their views of having a single computer doing all of their computer business/home needs and audiophool needs.... ok, maybe that's more than 2 cents worth of thought.

edit:
Thought of something I wanted to add to this.  As I was getting into and checking out audio gear.. from the late 80s until now... When I started comparing digital front ends it always amazed me how I began to find the transport/cable part of the transport/dac was so much more important than the dac part.  I wondered why the mags always focused much more on the dacs than the transports.  I think my learning how important/vulnerable getting the digits off the disc as opposed to the digital-audio-coversion, is one of my main reasons I started investigating computers/HDD based transports.  I mean, look at the lowly dac I started with (just to get my feet wet) here and I'm claiming it's the best sound I've ever heard in my system.  I'm in the position to spend more on a dac, but just don't feel I need to yet until the usb-dac arena matures a bit? idk, just don't feel a need right now; although I'm keeping my eye on empirical audio, the Crimson by Wavlength, and now the twindac++ (especially nice cause of the price; is it I2S based and do others out there feel that is as important as some make it out to be?).  If I ever get the time to learn more about how to... there do seem to be some good kits available too... something called the "Monica"... anyways, you can tell I'm not ready to jump dacs yet, but I do feel pretty confident about the transport side now.

[PeterSt]

Yes Dave, I could agree to everything, but I have a few remarks though :

Yesterday I spent 1.5 hours on a reply to you in your Foobar topic, and when I was near finished I wanted to try something with Foobar which caused my system hanging and I lost my post. Wasted time, and I couldn't find the guts to start all over again.
Today I spent a lousy 14 hours on an improperly working xover, and bothered two other people with it during that same time. I had to switch off/on my Fireface to solve the xover problem ...

With this I only want to say that people may for whatever always good reason feel confident with an OS. It won't be me wasting their time by forcing "an" OS. So yes, I hate it when it comes to that anyway. I will solve it, once I stop waisting time on ...
computers.

[SeVeReD]

Yes Dave, I could agree to everything, but I have a few remarks though :

Yesterday I spent 1.5 hours on a reply to you in your Foobar topic, and when I was near finished I wanted to try something with Foobar which caused my system hanging and I lost my post. Wasted time, and I couldn't find the guts to start all over again.
Today I spent a lousy 14 hours on an improperly working xover, and bothered two other people with it during that same time. I had to switch off/on my Fireface to solve the xover problem ...

With this I only want to say that people may for whatever always good reason feel confident with an OS. It won't be me wasting their time by forcing "an" OS. So yes, I hate it when it comes to that anyway. I will solve it, once I stop waisting time on ...
computers.

lol ohh I'm so sorry.  1.5 hours dang sorry.  Sometimes I think, "ya know I shouldn't post this cause then Peter will probably want to respond and poor guys "running" as fast as he can trying to do the good thing coding on the XXHE player".  Sorry about the lost post, I'm sure it would have been a good read; Thanks for spending time plugging away at your player making it the best.  Here's my solution to computer problems.... format and start again heheh
doh and sorry about the wasted 14 hrs.  My neighbor, who is an engineer, always thinks things should work as they should with computers.  If he ever has a problem, I always say, "Have you rebooted?" and he always say, "but, I shouldn't have to ... there's no logical reason to reboot" ... then he does reboot and when it works, I always bug him with the reply "see? Magic" hehe

[PeterSt]

The below is an attempt to let "a" part which is not suitable for 64 bits run in its 32bit mode. The whole program then will btw, but I don't expect SQ issues from that.

In the mean time I will look further and try to find that part.
So, somewhere viaviavia (most probably) a DLL is used (this would be external software) which just was not made for 64.

The text that goes with it (which I just copied from somewhere) is this :

Open up the advanced settings of the AppPool you're running in and notice the option "Enable 32 bit Applications".

If that is set to Yes, all may run (as a temporary solution).

[PeterSt]

Another thing :

IIRC offline it was tested to remove the four microsoft.directx.* DLLs. But now I think of it, removing the other 3 msvcm* DLLs might just give better chances. Keep in mind though, that this DLLs come with the "install" just to avoid the problems with Vista systems which do not contain them ...

Even more important might be the contents of the microsoft.vc80.crt.manifest file. I mean, it contains references like processorarchitecture="x86" which sounds all but good to me. This manifest file is only there to coorporate with the msvcm* DLLs, so the manifest file can go (away) too.

Now, if all with Vista64 out there could try this ...
If your Vista64 coincidentally needs those DLLs back in I'm sure another kind of message will popup.

Btw, if the "solution" from my previous post helps first, it just might be because of the manifest file told the system to "be" a 32 bit application.

[edward]

Now, if all with Vista64 out there could try this ...
If your Vista64 coincidentally needs those DLLs back in I'm sure another kind of message will popup.

Peter - as I told you back in reply #16:
http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=134.msg695#msg695
I removed ALL the DLLs and Manifest file and still get the same error message.

[astacus21]

When the proccess of xxhighend starts, in the task manager i can't see the *32 after the name of the proccess. All the other programs like foobar for example, the proccess is like this foobar.exe*32. So i think that vista is trying to run xxhighend as 64 bit application and for this reason it crashes. Also i can see, an other proccess show up when i start the program, dr20.exe (framework error reporter i think. take a look at this. it may be related to the problem: http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=133881&SiteID=1) and when i close the warning message it closes.
After some search,i find out that one differnce between x86 with x64 is that x64 doesn't support unsigned drivers. I dont know if you use one for your program.
I hope this info is useful to find out what is happening. I use vista x64 ultimate.

[PeterSt]

Thanks both.

The *32 won't be there because it's compiled for both. But since (external) DLLs won't be recompiled, there might of will be one "old" 32 that's touched during the process. There are hundreds being called ... all not mine. 
So, IMO there is a chance that "enable 32 bit Applications" does the trick. Did you try that ?
If that fails, I could compile the lot for 32 bit only and see whether that helps. Awkward, but it may get me on track somewhere.

The only unsigned driver I would used and which is addressed soon after - or during startup, would be "your" primary sound device, or the device you lastly used at a succeeded earlier startup (which can't be the case hehe).

The MS page won't load here at this moment. But I will look into it.

[astacus21]

So, IMO there is a chance that "enable 32 bit Applications" does the trick. Did you try that ?

I can't find this . It doesn't appear if i right click on the exe, in the internal tabs.