Zwolle v2.5 impressions?

Here's a benchmark with an SSD.

i7 3930K, Intel 480GB SSD, 20-bit lossless, surround version (all loops, releases, etc.): 2 minutes, 15 seconds.

The cache file is 42.5GB.

Erik

Here's a benchmark with my laptop ASUS G75 (with SSD)

Zwolle 2.5 - wet, 20bit lossless: 1 minute 17 seconds
Zwolle 2,5 - dry, 20bit lossless: 22 seconds

Bertram

I recently installed the Version 2.5 and was happy with the improvements over the previous version. The realism and presence is impressive. The only downside to the new version is the size of the sample. My 32 gigabyte 8 core MacPro ran out of memory so I reloaded the organ again with all the front stops and about 75-80% of the rear stops functional. I selected the most important stops that I play most of the time and did not load the lesser important stops ( to me) such as the 6' Quint and two 16' Flues on the Hoofdwerk. The 16' Flues work on the Front stops.

I would highly recommend this organ version 2.5 . It is truly an outstanding sample. Its hard to describe what sounds better but it certainly does sound more real than before.

I have updated to Zwolle v2.5 and am very impressed with results. I had all front in 20 bit and all rear and noises in 14 bit which left 1.1 gb to spare out of 32. I upped all rear to 16 bit leaving noises in14 and now have nil gb to spare and the meter is showing red.To my surprise it is working flawlessly. I am getting a visit from members of a nearby church wishing to look into Hauptwerk as an alternative to rebuilding a defunct bad pipe organ. If this along with several other fine examples such as Caen 2.5, St Eucaire etc doesn't impress them nothing will!
Julian