Version 1.8 System Software Update for Receptor 1 users ?

[Fixed Error]

Well, thats it for me with the Receptor. This clearly demonstrates that Receptors have a short halflife and cannot keep pace with the times. It was a good idea a couple of years ago but price alone, the receptors do not compare to more powerful laptops now. The only advantage i had with the receptor in the past was that if something went wrong, it would reboot quickly. Its unfortunate that i developed to appreciate this feature because the receptor DOES crsah quite often - more so than my studio system. Im afraid the receptor will remain as a backup unit in the studio to run some of the older plugs on. I prefer something i can easily upgrade and something that wont be hamstrung by such limitations. Whether its Muse's fault or not aint really the point. My confidence in future developments isnt exactly sky-high. Who's to say that Receptor 2 owners wont be in the same situation 2 years down the track?

[UltraJv]

It may not be what you want to hear but IDE HDD manufacture is on the way out. Providing support for it is kind of pointless. A year from now and IDE hdds will be hard to source from new. Seagate announced in 2007 that they will cease IDE as from last year, no mention since then but its on borrowed time. Maybe this kind of adaptor will help :

What we need is support for our receptor now, whether or not we get support for a IDE drive in a year is secondary!
-mat123

Muse have already outlined the support options (page 3 of this thread from chalaby), Im suggesting another method that may work currently. It (using an IDE-SATA adaptor) could allow use of SATA HDD on IDE without the need to change the BIOS. If you guys dont get together and compromise, I cant see any way forward. The technical issue with MSI boards has been pointed out and there are no advances from either side. You have a standoff.

[Kermit Jagger]

Providing support for it is kind of pointless.

Muse do not provide support for the IDE drive, Linux does. And I don't see Linux distro stopping support for IDE drives anytime soon. Once again, you seem to talk about things you don't know much about.

[SurfacePatterns]

It may not be what you want to hear but IDE HDD manufacture is on the way out. Providing support for it is kind of pointless.

Why do you keep talking?

It doesn't matter if manufacturers don't intend to support IDE hard drives in the future. It's totally irrelevant. What matters is that Muse's 1.8 operating system is based on Fedora Linux, which DOES support IDE hard drives and WILL CONTINUE to support IDE hard drives for a long time.

Your statement means nothing. Go troll in another thread.

[SurfacePatterns]

Im suggesting another method that may work currently. It (using an IDE-SATA adaptor) could allow use of SATA HDD on IDE without the need to change the BIOS.

You continue to embarrass yourself.

An IDE to SCSI adapter would still be seen as an IDE drive under Linux. Such a device would solve NOTHING.

[UltraJv]

I apologise for trying to help and failing. Theres nothing embarresing about being wrong, only a man can admit that. Good luck with your fight.

[mat123]

Dear Receptor Customers,

...

Here are the options you have as a Rev C customer. These options will be made available to you until the end of February 2010:

1. We will do the software upgrade for you at the factory.
The Receptor will need to be sent to us. Upon return of the Receptor you will need to reinstall and reauthorize any software that did not come standard on the Receptor. The pricing for the drive upgrades, including installation of NI Komplete 5 software if you purchased it through us, is as follows:
160Gb drive: $199
500GB drive: $399
1TB drive: $499

Pricing is for materials and labor only. Shipping is not included. Limit one per customer.

Reason to do this:
If you are on a budget this might be the way to go, but please understand that older hardware, especially the standard Rev C hardware might not be powerful enough to support some of the newer plug-ins like Omnisphere and BFD 2.

...

Chris Halaby
CEO
Muse Research & Development, Inc.

Chris,

I do have some specific questions about option 1, which I am considering:

- I am a european customer with quite some gigs until end of February. I will not be able to meet your deadline, particularly not as long as you do not provide fast local support. Could you please comment on the option of local support and if you are willing to extend you deadline; the end of february is approaching!

- you call it a "software update". Given the fact that pricing depends on HD capacity, I take it, we get a brand new IDE harddrive. So we can keep our old harddrive als backup option, right? Can you confirm, please?

- can we not order just a harddrive with 1.8 pre-installed from muse? I remember this option has been discussed. I am willing to take the responsability for a harddrive change. This option would be by far more attractive for me.

yours
-mat123

[thesoundsmith]

For me the solution has become simple. I bought a Rev C for what it did then, and while I'd love to upgrade, even the super-low pricing is out of my cost/benefit Venn space. So I'll just keep playing with my older unit, as I have all along, and use it like a synth module (which was how i perceived it when i bought it.)

I'll also continue to use my G5 Power PC Mac for sequencing; even though the software is three generations out of date (both the sequencer and the OS) it still works just fine.

If it works, don't fix it...

[johnrule]

For me the solution has become simple. I bought a Rev C for what it did then, and while I'd love to upgrade, even the super-low pricing is out of my cost/benefit Venn space. So I'll just keep playing with my older unit, as I have all along, and use it like a synth module (which was how i perceived it when i bought it.)

I'll also continue to use my G5 Power PC Mac for sequencing; even though the software is three generations out of date (both the sequencer and the OS) it still works just fine.

If it works, don't fix it...

Actually, this is not a solution...it is the current situation for all of us. What we are looking for is a solution. Of course I can use my Receptor as a 32 bit VST player, but it is very limited. And in terms of "If it works, don't fix it", it was not compatible with many of the VSTs that were current at the time I bought it. It is even less compatible now, and I would like to get it fixed. Muse tends to put a marketing spin on how the things that don't work now will eventually have a solution...I bought into that unfortunately, like a lot of you.

The point is, the Receptor is a proprietary PC, and the compatibility depends solely on Wine (the Windows compatibility layer for Linux) and Linux. The current version of Wine on Receptor 1 (via OS 1.7) is so old (circa 2005?) that many things do not work. What I want for the Receptor that I purchased (and was under warranty until the latter part of 2009) is an updated version of Wine/Linux for my Receptor. This is absolutely possible, but I cannot do this without Muse. What I can do on my own is install a proper OS (Windows or Linux) and run my own system that would be much more compatible. However, I do not have the information I require to re-install the Muse proprietary bits, so I would have to live without things like the front panel (and the software that communicates with it).

The problem seems to be the cooperation of Muse in terms of being willing to update my Receptor. They are using excuses, most of which are questionable, but ultimately lead to suggesting that we upgrade to a new Receptor (and a few related upgrade options). This operating system update is owed to me and I should not have to buy more Muse hardware/software to have my Receptor run a more current version of Linux/Wine. If Muse would open their system up, I could do it myself at no expense to them, but they will not. I understand the business reasons, so I will not pursue that course, however, a compromise is required to appease the situation.

What some of us have suggested as a "solution" is to provide an image (disk image that is) that would allow us to reformat a new drive of comparable size, and run a proper version of Linux/Wine on our Receptors (via the OS 1.8 image). Another suggestion was to provide an ISO installer image for installation of OS 1.8, allowing Receptor owners to actually upgrade their own systems. The understandable objection to this is that it also releases their IP (Intellectual Property) out into the wild, but it was also suggested that an NDA (non-disclosure) and statement of non-liability (between Muse and said customer) could be agreed to. There are, of course, problems with this as well. It may also require more than a simple ISO installer to get the Receptor OS running, making things worse.

The best solution seems to be to provide a new hard drive that Muse images at the factory with OS 1.8 for Receptor 1 owners...but they seem to have a problem with the BIOS and "50 boots" (I still question this) that will prevent that solution. So the community is finally suggesting that we settle for an IDE and no BIOS upgrade...and Muse is silent. I personally believe that this is the solution (OS 1.8 on a new IDE hard drive shipped out to customers), but that solution ultimately rests in the hands of Muse.

JR

[Balda]

For me the solution has become simple. I bought a Rev C for what it did then, and while I'd love to upgrade, even the super-low pricing is out of my cost/benefit Venn space. So I'll just keep playing with my older unit, as I have all along, and use it like a synth module (which was how i perceived it when i bought it.)

I'll also continue to use my G5 Power PC Mac for sequencing; even though the software is three generations out of date (both the sequencer and the OS) it still works just fine.

If it works, don't fix it...

Actually, this is not a solution...it is the current situation for all of us. What we are looking for is a solution. Of course I can use my Receptor as a 32 bit VST player, but it is very limited. And in terms of "If it works, don't fix it", it was not compatible with many of the VSTs that were current at the time I bought it. It is even less compatible now, and I would like to get it fixed. Muse tends to put a marketing spin on how the things that don't wok now will eventually have a solution...I bought into that unfortunately, like a lot of you.

The point is, the Receptor is a proprietary PC, and the compatibility depends solely on Wine (the Windows compatibility layer for Linux) and Linux. The current version of Wine on Receptor 1 (via OS 1.7) is so old (circa 2005?) that many things do not work. What I want for the Receptor that I purchased (and was under warranty until the latter part of 2009) is an updated version of Wine/Linux for my Receptor. This is absolutely possible, but I cannot do this without Muse. What I can do on my own is install a proper OS (Windows or Linux) and run my own system that would be much more compatible. However, I do not have the information I require to re-install the Muse proprietary bits, so I would have to live without things like the front panel (and the software that communicates with it).

The problem seems to be the cooperation of Muse in terms of being willing to update my Receptor. They are using excuses, most of which are questionable, but ultimately lead to suggesting that we upgrade to a new Receptor (and a few related upgrade options). This operating system update is owed to me and I should not have to buy more Muse hardware/software to have my Receptor run a more current version of Linux/Wine. If Muse would open their system up, I could do it myself at no expense to them, but they will not. I understand the business reasons, so I will not pursue that course, however, a compromise is required to appease the situation.

What some of us have suggested as a "solution" is to provide an image (disk image that is) that would allow us to reformat a new drive of comparable size, and run a proper version of Linux/Wine on our Receptors (via the OS 1.8 image). Another suggestion was to provide an ISO installer image for installation of OS 1.8, allowing Receptor owners to actually upgrade their own systems. The understandable objection to this is that it also releases their IP (Intellectual Property) out into the wild, but it was also suggested that an NDA (non-disclosure) and statement of non-liability (between Muse and said customer) could be agreed to. There are, of course, problems with this as well. It may also require more than a simple ISO installer to get the Receptor OS running, making things worse.

The best solution seems to be to provide a new hard drive that Muse images at the factory with OS 1.8 for Receptor 1 owners...but they seem to have a problem with the BIOS and "50 boots" (I still question this) that will prevent that solution. So the community is finally suggesting that we settle for an IDE and no BIOS upgrade...and Muse is silent. I personally believe that this is the solution (OS 1.8 on a new IDE hard drive shipped out to customers), but that solution ultimately rests in the hands of Muse.

JR

You are right. I wanna buy new hard drive with OS 1.8 and install it by my self. I don't wanna buy R2 or sending my Receptor to Muse and pay for shipping. Btw. where is source code of OS 1.8 ???? On their ftp is still only source of OS 1.7...

[SurfacePatterns]

Btw. where is source code of OS 1.8 ???? On their ftp is still only source of OS 1.7...

I've mentioned this several times in the forums, and have received no response from Muse Research. It's a violation of the GPL, and possibly other open source licenses.

[Throbert]

you guys,
I don't think there is anything else left to do. I don't think Muse is going to respond, or do any thing for you. I know how you all feel. If you had read the link in my post, you know how inraged I became when they did the upgrade just about after I bought my rev.C. I asked before hand and they lied. Now the Aliance with Peavey, what good do you think that will do.
It's going to take some good old head on competition. A rig that just blows receptor out of the water, and that shouldn't be so hard to do, even if it is a PC. Hell for that matter a parts list and the OS needed to do it.

[johnrule]

Muse tends to put a marketing spin on how the things that don't work now will eventually have a solution...I bought into that unfortunately, like a lot of you...

My apologies for that long message...I composed it shortly after getting Pianoteq 3.5 to work on my Receptor 1, and it was a little 'heated'. Muse has been using the excuse that only Receptor 2 will run Pianoteq 3+ and it just bugs me that I was able to get it to work fairly easily. It has some quirks (although Pianoteq 3 works better) that I believe are related to the old version of Linux/Wine in OS 1.7, but it is stable in terms of playability, and there should be an installer at least for Pianoteq 3 for Receptor 1 owners.

The proprietary installer method was part of the problem I had to grapple with, and I felt like it was a bit of a blackmail attempt to get me to upgrade to a new Receptor (that is just my opinion of course). If I can run a plugin on my Receptor with a caveat or two, I should be allowed to do that. The Pianoteq plugin needed to be 'Receptorized' so I couldn't just do an unsupported install...I am dependent on Muse and the manufacturer for that.

This Receptor platform is more trouble than it is worth. I hope that anyone that is interested in buying a Receptor in the future will find this thread, and possibly avoid the aggravation that I have experienced.

JR

[Throbert]

who ever plans on buying a pre R2 receptor. will already know there is an R2 and take the price into consideration thinking they will be upgrading.

[Balda]

Have anybody OS 1.8 in Receptor rev.C already installed? Its looks like silence after the storm here;-) Or resignation?