It is completely up to each plugin developer to decide whether or not they wish to charge someone for a "crossgrade" to Receptor. Most developers have indicated that they will provide a crossgrade at no charge.

You may wonder why a crossgrade is needed at all? After all, Receptor runs Windows plugins, right?

The answer is that Receptor *does* run VST plugins that are coded for Windows, however it does *not* run Windows installers. Receptor has a completely different OS and file-structure, plus a unified installation method and copy-protection methodology (iLok). So, while Receptor will theoretically run any well-written VST plugin that conforms to the Windows VST specification, it still requires a unique installer to get that plugin into Receptor.

Contact your developer to see if they'll give you a free crossgrade to Receptor (most will). Once you have approval from the developer, you will be able to download the iLok authorization from plugorama.

Note that we are steadily adding more and more plugins to Receptor (and
plugorama) so, if your favorite plugins aren't yet available on Receptor, they might be soon. If you can't wait, Receptor does give customers a way to try and install unsupported plugins but this is, well, unsupported.

Hi, I'm sorry to sound bitter, and I know you're trying to give us a heads-up, but this whole crossgrade issue should have been mentioned in the Muse Receptor promotional materials before allowing early adopters like myself to order the unit. I'm expecting to receive the Receptor soon, and now I'm worried that I won't be able to use my favorite VST plugins (such as Edirol Hypercanvas) and/or have to pay extra fees for them.

Did Muse only recently realize that it would be necessary to crossgrade VST plugins on a Linux-based platform? That's the only reasonable explanation I can imagine. I can only hope that the Receptor launch goes more smoothly in the coming weeks.

Ben

Receptor has a different OS and file structure ie "Linux". So does this "unique installer" use Linux code? and the same goes for the copy protection, is that also Linux code?

And if so, shouldn't it be open source?

So we now have copy protection on a Linux machine......

fake

By the way ...

Linux Kernel, wine, and a lot of applications are open source and on GNU Licence, isn't it ?

So, can we receive the source ?

Bye
Spid

The Linux kernel and wine are open source. Yes, you can get the source code.

Our application that runs on top of Linux is not open source and we do not publish the code.

There are many open source applications that run on top of Linux, but this is not a requirement. Many applications running in Linux are not open source.

Dan

he's right about open source licenses, if their custom code isn't mandated to be published under GPL or LGPL, they don't have to reveal it.

more interesting to me is the news that Receptor doesn't actually run your windows vst plugins untill they have been 'receptorized' - maybe i missed something, but I felt like I was led to believe that I could use the plugins that already exist.

Receptor does not support Windows installlers. A "Receptorized" plug-in, is a plug-in that has a Receptor specific installer.

However, many plug-ins do not require installers. Some may have an installer, but once installed on one machine you can simply copy all the files to another machine. These plug-ins can be installed on Receptor without being "Receptorized."

Receptor has a folder called "Unsupported Plugins." You copy the dll and other files to that folder.There is an "Install" button in the GUI with a check box "Include Unsupported Plug-ins folder" Make sure the check box is checked and click on the "Install" button. A few seconds later the plug-in is available and ready to use.

As the name of the folder suggests, we do not support plug-ins that have not been "Receptorzed." That only mean that you cannot yell at us if it doesn't work. We will try to give you reasonable help in this forum.

We also hope that people on this forum will share tips about how to install these "unsupported" plug-ins.

Moreover, if a plug-in is unsupported today, it does not mean it will be always like this. In time, more and more plug-ins will be "Receptorized."

Dan

hey, that's excellent news, thanks Dan

quick question: for the 'unsupported' (DLL Only) plugins, can one only move the DLL, or is it possible to also move a license 'key file' (like Rhino2 and Kjaerhus Gold plugins use)?

second quickie: also for the unsupported ones, let's say the plugin needs only it's DLL, and some registry entries. Is is possible to move the DLL into receptor, and a .reg file, or some way to create the reg entries?

thanks again for the response

DanTimis,

I think a couple of people were asking is Receptor's version of Linux and Wine were available. They weren't asking if the basic Linux and Wine sources were available. If Receptor is using a modified versions of Linux and probably using a modified version of Wine, then they should be licensed under LGPL. I think executables that statically link to them also fall under LGPL.

The necessary downloads are available at http://www.museresearch.com/receptor_src.php

"Receptor is a 2U rack- mountable multi-timbral sound and effects module that runs standard VST instruments and effects. It combines the power of a computer with the ease-of-use, portability and reliability of dedicated synth and effects hardware."

Quote from the website.

Shouldn't this wording be changed then?

R

I don't understand. Why should "standard VST instruments and effects" be changed?

Correct me if I am wrong but the VST instruments and effects are standard (they conform to the windows VST standard)...it is just the installer that is different between windows/linux/etc...so I dont see how the wording is incorrect.

I don't mind as to what version, Windows or Mac, the VST plugins run as long as they run. On the Mac, there aren't as many plugins available and I think the whole concept of Receptorize is still okay by me -- as long as I get to use all the Windows-version VST that I haven't been able to use on my Mac.

Hi, I'm sorry to sound bitter, and I know you're trying to give us a heads-up, but this whole crossgrade issue should have been mentioned in the Muse Receptor promotional materials before allowing early adopters like myself to order the unit. I'm expecting to receive the Receptor soon, and now I'm worried that I won't be able to use my favorite VST plugins (such as Edirol Hypercanvas) and/or have to pay extra fees for them.

Did Muse only recently realize that it would be necessary to crossgrade VST plugins on a Linux-based platform? That's the only reasonable explanation I can imagine. I can only hope that the Receptor launch goes more smoothly in the coming weeks.

Ben