Who has upgraded?

[PhilAiken]

I'm thinking of upgrading from Rev B to Receptor Pro Jr.
This specifically to better handle disc streaming and large piano libraries.

Has anyone upgraded theri older Receptor and if so, did you see a noticable performance jump?

[tjodoin]

I'd think due to the current support for only one hard disk, streaming will always be an issue for large libraries regardless of CPU speed. I've considered the upgrade myself (current rev.B) but this has held me back. I wonder if anything new will be announced at NAMM?

[looneytunes]

Hi Phil,

I have upgraded 2 Rev B units (one to Pro Jr, the other to Pro). I have definitely noticed improvements. Typically, these are coming from the combination of bigger/faster disk, improved memory, and faster processor.

If I were to give it a guestimate, I'd say the performance jumped about 30% better. I have seen gregh and ohers posting performance improvements in terms of number of kontakt instances playing - that might give you a better metric.

Overall - was it worth it for me, yes. I also think Muse has given a great opportunity to give an upgrade path for existing hardware owners.

Regards,
Kevin L

[Hybernation]

I upgraded my RevB (2GB/160HD) to a RevC and saw "some" improvement. CPU hungry things ran better, and disk streaming was a little better.

Then when I had my Komplete4 upgrade done, I upgraded my drive from a 160 to a 400 and the improvements in streaming large piano libs in K2 was NOTICEABLY better, as was the loading times themselves. Some of this improvement was reportedly (from Muse) due to the OS 1.6 update though, so as always YMMV.

[gregh1]

Here's the comparison I made: a Rev.B (1280MB RAM, sys 1.5.20060418) with a new Pro-400 (2048MB RAM, sys 1.5.20060504). Both machines at 44.1KHz sample rate with buffer size at 128 samples.

Each channel was loaded with MicroSynth, Classic EQ, Classic Chorus, and Classic Reverb.

On the Rev.B, 8 channels resulted in a CPU load of 80%.
On the Pro-400, 8 channels resulted in a CPU load of 55%.
On the Pro-400, 13 channels resulted in a CPU load of 80%.

[Skytouch]

Hi Phil, here are results of a quick test:

PTLE song tempo 120, in low-latency mode for 8-bar MIDI recording.

MIDI / Muse Channel 1: Akoustik Piano / Steinway playing chords
MIDI / Muse Channel 2: B4II Hammond chords and runs
MIDI / Muse Channel 3: Guitar Rig 3, active, guitar stack loaded, no analog input for this demo
MIDI / Muse Channel 4: Battery 3 drum groove
MIDI / Muse Channel 5: Kontakt3 bass + Guitar Rig 3 Bass Pro cabinet, lots of pitch bend on sequence
MIDI / Muse Channel 6: FM8 screaming lead (32nds) with extreme bend and mod - trying to push things

Receptor Pro Jr 400GB HD, 2GB RAM, Feb 2008 build.

Receptor sample buffer 256
Receptor CPU: 60% Average / 80% Peak without FM8 lead
Receptor CPU: 65% Average / 85% Peak with FM8 lead added

This is typical CPU performance in my experience. I can generally run all VSTs at once without problems. Adding a big Reaktor patch on top of this can exceed 100%, in which case I just mute one of the other VSTs and all is well.

I normally mute all tracks and then unmute / record one VST at a time into PTLE for the best possible stability and timing. My application is studio only so this works fine, but I can't imagine having any issues live under most circumstances.

Sky

[Bryan@MuseResearch]

I'm thinking of upgrading from Rev B to Receptor Pro Jr.
This specifically to better handle disc streaming and large piano libraries.

Has anyone upgraded theri older Receptor and if so, did you see a noticable performance jump?

At this point it doesn't make any sense to upgrade to a Rev C... better to wait a while longer and upgrade to the Rev E hardware as we are calling the new RECEPTOR 2 PRO and PRO MAX versions.

All customers are eligible to upgrade to the new RECEPTOR 2 hardware. Details are coming in a copy of Musings coming out soon.

All the best

Groovology