Conference napalm::commusic_v1

    Okay, I'll say it. 
    
    NO. (Unless you actually resample from one machine to the other,
    that is, via analog, line-level cables)
    
    Roland has not implemented the Sample Dump Standard. Moving samples
    from one model to another is not a trivial task, even if they are
    from the same manufacturer. There is a detailed discussion of the
    Sample Dump Standard in one of the recent issues of Music Technology.
    
    karl moeller

< Note 698.2 by JAWS::COTE "Hopelessly stuck in a triplet..." >
                              -< I knew that.... >-
    I knew that too....... Just checking to see how educated our fellow
noters are!

erderockroid

    re 'educated' re Sampling:
    
    That makes three of us.. now ask a REAL hard sampling question..
    no problemo, I read all the magazines...
    
    ....you're not gonna erase your topic note again, are ya ? 
    
    and, um, 'erderockroid', what do your folks call ya ?
    
    karl moeller from the upper sonoran desert 

    I have another S-50 question:
    
    Can you use it to save MIDI dumps (on floppy disk) from other machines
    (for example, an ESQ-1 and an HR-16).
    
    	db

    I don't know if the S-550 can save MIDI dumps from other devices.
    The S-550 uses an upgraded operating system.
    
    On the S-50, you can't do it.  You can only dump the contents of
    the S-50's memory (samples, patch paramters, etc.).  If you have
    the S-50 sequencer software you can stores these on disk also.
    Large sequences eat into sampling memory.
    
    Dave
        

    
    re: .-2
    
    I was poking in the S-550 utility disk and saw some MIDI filing
    utilities but I haven't tried any. I don't think it does either.
    
    /pjh

    I was talking to one of the artists at Mobius who uses a Mirage.
    I asked how many keys you could hit at once.  He said you could
    assign a sound to each of all the keys and hit them all.
    Now, I know that ain't so, but don't actually KNOW.
    OK, what's the answer, 16?, 8?.
    Tom

    Finally got around to checking out the S-550 at Daddy's today.
    
    I was really impressed.  It seemed like a really innovative
    product.  It probably has been brought out before but perhaps
    not emphasized, but this thing has a video interface and a mouse
    that, to me, could be the user-interface wave of the future
    for musical devices.
    
    Basically you plug a TV into the back and a mouse into the front
    and you do pretty much everything with menus and the mouse.  I had
    no manual and the salesman didn't know much about it, but I found
    everything to be fairly intuitive.  Much better than labelled buttons
    and hard to see LCD's.
    
    Are there other products that have this kind of thing?  I think
    that I would prefer having the support software work entirely from
    the unit itself rather than having to use a PC for this.
    
    Anyway, this seemed like a ballsy innovative step from Roland.
    
    Roland is distributing samples for free.  You take a blank disk
    to a Roland distributor and they will (supposedly) copy the samples
    that Roland gives them onto your disk.  
    
    Daddy's only had two disks. One disk seemed like the "Best of MT32".
    The other a small set of fairly impressive samples.  I'd sure like
    to hear from the S-50 and S-550 owners what they think of the overall
    collection that Roland has made available.
    
    I'm pretty sure that I will end up with one.  My feeling is that
    at this point, a sampler (even one that goes for $2k+) will give
    me more bang-for-the-buck then "yet another" synth.  Comparing the
    various samplers they had I felt it was worth "saving up" for the
    higher end stuff.  I felt the difference in sound quality was quite
    noticeable.

    Perhaps I should just tell the IRS to make the check out to Daddy's
    every year.  ;-)
    
    	db

    A friend of mine, semifamous L.A. synthesist Michael Stearns, has
    an S-50 with the monitor.. comments over the months: good quality,
    very clean.. tiny factory sample library.. nonintuitive interface,
    even with the monitor.. has a Mac but didn't want to tie it up with
    Digidesign, etc... eventually built up a good library, but remember
    he's a pro and spends ~50 hrs/wk at music. He likes it, but remember
    the library issue.. and since there's no Digidesign s/w (that I
    know of) you ain't gonna get any other sampler's library digitally
    ported over.. you can resample if you have the time. I didn't.
    
    karl

    
    re: S-550
    
      I just decided not to buy one. It got a *lot* of thought before
    I made the decision and it was originally my first choice, to the
    point of getting a realistic quote from dealers, etc, and also,
    I just went through the manual over the past four days.
    
      My problem with the 550 is that although it is undeniably the
    most powerful sampler in it's price range (2-3K), there are some
    pretty serious drawbacks from my (admittedly biased) point of view.
    
      For starters, you can't store anyone else's MIDI data on either
    the "little" 880K disk OR the "not-so-little" 80 meg hard disk.
    The S-550 operating system is just different enough so as not to
    run like an S-50 (I looked at both), and you have to physically
    convert all s-50 samples to s-550 samples. The visuals are, in my
    opinion, full of unnecessary bells and whistles. While I can agree
    that it's fun to watch eight little keyboards on your screen do
    a "play-and-watch-me" routine, it has little or no real value when
    soundsculpting OR performing. The utilities disk hasn't got that
    much, and although everybody keeps saying "yeah, Roland is gonna
    put out updates some time", I haven't seen an update for *any* of
    their "open architecture" stuff yet (any s-50 owners care to
    comment?)... The mouse is part of the cost; monitors are not. The
    price of a good rack mount monitor (do you *really* want to take
    your nice RGB monitor around with you when playing?) is in the multiple
    hundreds. Although they say a composite monitor is acceptable, my
    limited experience in the showroom was that the damn thing was
    unreadable. 
    
      The sounds were undeniably excellent, although you are limited
    to two (count 'em, two) sampling rates. 
    
      I think it's a step in the right direction, but for me it wasn't
    the right direction.
    
    /pjh

    Makes me glad I settled for an S10.  $800 and I get sampling.  Not
    lots of power, but enough to get by ...
    
    Steve

    Interesting perspective, but I find that most of your reasons for not
    getting it don't apply to me.
    
    First, I'm looking for a rack-mounted unit.  The EPS is not an option
    (take that Ensoniq, you've probably lost a sale!).
    
    The lack of the ability to store external MIDI data is a bummer, but I
    can live with that.  My guess is that that's going to be corrected. 
    I'm told that Roland is still actively developing and releasing
    software for the S-550 and related products.
    
    I don't see any need to take the monitor to gigs.  From what I can
    tell, using my ESQ-1 sequencer as a MIDI system controller will work
    fine.  That is, if I ever get a gig.
    
    One of the main thing for me is the free library.  I've all but sworn
    off trying to create my own patches on the ESQ-1 and expect that I'm
    not going to want to spend much time sampling either.  I found it to be
    too much of a time sync ( ;-{() ).  I'd rather be doing more musical
    stuff.  I expect that if I do any sampling at all, it will sampling
    sounds from other folks synths.
    
    	db

    BTW, a few weeks ago at EUW's in Boston I heard a woman playing what
    sounded like an exceptionally good piano synth.  It sounded much
    more realistic than my MKS-20.  I thought it was the Kurzweil but it
    turned out that she was playing an S-50.  It might have been MIDI'd
    to something else, but it didn't look that way.
    
    Does anyone have the Roland piano samples.  Are they really THAT good?  
    
    	db

    I remember being really impressed with the S50 piano
    when I first heard it. (it was like "WAAAAHHH? MKS-20 competition!")
    
    Still happy with mks-20. You gotta EQ the beast.....is there
    EQ in your RD Dave?
    
    rr
    

    Well, it has a single slider tone control.  
    
    It's labelled "Brilliance".  
    
    I keep it all the way up.   My playing desperately needs as much 
    brilliance as possible.
    
    	db

    re .11 and Roland's "open architecture" products - maybe they haven't
    gotten anything new out for the S-50/S-550 yet, but the MC-500,
    which preceeded the S-50 by a bit, has seen the release of 4 new
    software disks - updated MRC-500 sequencer software, a patch
    librarian, a drum machine pattern library and one other thing that
    I've forgotten.  So, it's not all just talk.
    
    I wonder if they release the specs to third parties?
    
    len.
    

    
    re: .-1 Len
    
      Point taken. But did you have to pay for any of the upgrades?
    
    Don't get me wrong. No flames here. Just wondering because I was
    under the impression that Roland charges for such things.
    
    /pjh

    I have heard murmurings from the usenet about updates to the S-50
    software some months ago.  I gathered that those were of the
    ``bug-fix'' variety, and not the ``layered-product'' variety (like
    the sequencer).  Haven't heard anything in a while.
    
    Steph

    re .18 - no flames detected, not to worry.
    
    Only one of the disks could possibly qualify as an "upgrade"; the
    rest are new products.  Would you expect Digital to give away a
    new PL/I compiler because a customer had bought FORTRAN earlier?
    The librarian, drum pattern library and the third thing that I always
    forget (must be useless, huh?) are not sequencer enhancements.
    
    And, yes, they do charge for the new sequencer software.  It's not
    just bug fixes, it includes a lot of new functionality. 
    
    All that considered, I'm not sure why anyone would expect future
    exploitation of an "open architecture" to come for free.
    
    len.
     

    
    Well I didn't expect totally new software for free, but my ESQ updates
    have been coming rather frequently (15 over the past year), and
    there has been entirely new functionality included as well as bugfixes.
    
    Cost? Nothing except the downtime. 
    
    I understand that it's unrealistic to expect a profit-making
    corporation to provide new free software for it's customer base. But
    enhancements aren't the same thing.
    
    /pjh
    

    What ESQ-1 updates have you been getting?  How have you been getting
    them?
    
    	db

    
    They seem to come about once every month or so. They come via my
    (local) music store, who nicely provide me with a "release notice"
    and a friendly reminder to drop my board by for the (free to people
    who bought their ESQ there) update. I guess it normally costs $19.
    for installation but Ensoniq has a policy that updates to their
    ROM-based software are no-cost-except-installation.
    
    I dunno, I have V3.5 on order. Should come this week, for those of
    us with ESQs that have metal sides. I don't understand why metal
    sides make a difference (probably the packaging denotes the series
    or something)....
    
    /pjh
    

RE: updates

    Are there software updates available for the ESQm as well?  I thought
    most of the updates had to do with the sequencer. 

    Since I just picked up 2 ESQms and trashed the ESQ-1, I would like to
    know about this. 

    As an aside, I just got off the phone this morning with Ensoniq's
    customer service dept.  One of my ESQm units arrived in a brain damaged
    state.  The guy was very gracious and informative, and even sent me a
    free manual when he found out that the units came without
    documentation.  Their gear may not have great specs or the best sound,
    but the service after the sale beats everyone else I've dealt with
    hands down. 

-b whose_sampler_will_probably_be_an_EPS

    
    re: .-1
    
      I have no idea. I would assume so since Ensoniq generally makes
    their upgrades available regularly. You should either check with
    Ensoniq or with the store you bought it from (they *do* offer service,
    right?)
    
      I don't have all the release notes myself. I am compiling those
    which I have and will post. Yes, most have to do with the sequencer
    but there were some bugfixes and enhancements in the tape storage,
    MIDI clock and MIDI dump pages.
    
      Generally 3.+ is the SQ-80 sequencer. Any of the 2.+ updates had
    to do with fixing crash-type bugs in the tape/MIDI space.
    
    /pjh

    What was the microcomputer that had an Ensonique chip built into
    it?
    Tom

    Re: Micro w/i ensoniq chip.
    
    The Apple II/GS.
    
    Steph
    

    Is this to say that with the new software, the ESQ-1 will have the
    additional number of sequences that the SQ-80 has.
    
    30 has always been enough for me, but I'm finding that while I have
    enough memory to work on several songs at once, I probably won't have
    enough sequences.
    
    	db

    But will it step backwards ? :-)
    	
    -Bill
    

    
    re: .-2
    
     No, Dave. The basic memory limitations still apply, i.e. 10 songs,
    30 sequences. That's apparently a hardware-ish consideration (although
    the memory map is done in software...).
    
    re: .-1
    
      Yes, I believe it does. And you get sequence truncation from both the
    front and the back of the sequence. And better step editing. And
    then some. I haven't got those notes in my hands, but I do have
    them coming to me this week. I ordered 3.5 from the Ensoniq rep.
    Also included is the release info for 3.x from the devos. As soon
    as it comes I'll post.
    
    /pjh (I wish I had better answers...I will later this week)

    Guess this is a good place to ask a sampling question.
    
    I have no identified my #1 priority feature for new version of 
    the S-550 OS.
    
    It's a limitation and I'm curious if other brands of samplers have
    the same limitation.
    
    Ideally, I'd like to be able to organize and manipulate "patches"
    on the sampler as I would/could on a synth.
    
    That is, say I have have a disk full of flute samples, a disk full
    of brass samples, and a disk full of string samples.
    
    I'd like to be able to assemble a disk that has selections from
    each of those disks.  That is, I'd like to pull ONE flute 
    sample/patch/sound from the flute disk, one brass 
    sample/patch/sound from the brass disk, and one string 
    sample/patch/sound from the string disk, and create ONE disk that
    has those three sounds.
    
    I might need this for a particular recording project, or perhaps
    one song, or one set in a gig.
    
    This is not impossible, but very much impractical on the Roland
    samplers.  On Roland samplers sample/patch/sounds are composed of
    many parts (a patch is built from a collection of tones and subtones
    which are built from wave data).
    
    To "pull" a single sample/patch/sound off a disk into memory, I would
    basically have to pull the patch, and each tone, and each wave data)
    and "reassemble" it in the samplers memory.  This would probably
    take about an hour per patch!
    
    No, I can think of no reason why Roland couldn't provide the software
    to do it.  It might beat on the disk a lot since it has to replicate
    a memory layout (it could use a virtual memory like approach), but
    at least it would be automatic.
    
    What I want to know, does *YOUR* sampler (whatever you own) provide this 
    kind of ability.
    
    	db

       I hope I'm not oversimplifying your question, Dave, but the Ensoniq
    Mirage does this quite easily. I have done it for the same reasons
    you would like to. A Mirage disk is split into 6 sections: this
    is a fictitious disk for example
    
       lower bank     upper bank
    
        1 bass          1 piano
        2 clav          2 brass
        3 gong          3 string
    
    Say I have another disk which is looks like this:
    
      lower bank     upper bank
    
       1 slime          1 grass
       2 paper          2 water
       3 ring           3 shoe
        
    If I wanted to take the "piano" sound/patch from the first disk
    and put it where "shoe" is on the second disk, I would
    
    a) insert first disk 
    b) load "piano"  <-about 3 keystrokes (LU 1 enter)
    c) remove first disk
    d) insert second disk
    e) save "piano" to "shoe" <- about 3 keystrokes (SU 3 enter)
    
       the second disk will look like:
    
    lower bank      upper bank
    
    1 slime         1 grass
    2 paper         2 water
    3 ring          3 piano
    
     
    
         I hope this makes sense !!! 
    
            Frank
    
    

    re: .32
    
    1) Is it possible to get a memory overflow when you do this?
    
    2) How many "sections" can be in memory simultaneously, or how
       many of those sounds can I get at without having to go to the
       disk.
    
    	db

    Just found out that the Yamaha TX16W (?) *had* the same problem
    but they fixed it by providing the facility I want in an update.
    
    It's time for Roland to stop BLABBING about the advantages of
    an open architecture and start EXPLOITING it.
    
    	db

    > memory overflow possible?
    
    Nope. The sample is ever bigger than what can fit in memory assuming
    you have a properly done Mirage sample.
                         
    > how many at one time?
    
    Using Frank's list as an example, you could pick 1 from column 'A'
    and one from column 'B'. Samples from 'A' can only be loaded into
    the lower bank and likewise, only 'B' can be loade to the upper
    bank.
    
    You should note that for each sample loaded into memory you can
    have up to 4 different envelope, filter, detune, LFO , etc, settings.
    
    Edd (on a very noisy{modem)
                        h

    That should read *never* bigger....
    
    Edd

    The FZ1/10M does this very easily, extracting all data for a single
    'voice' off the disk in one go. 
    
    I store single voices in single banks; a bank is one or more voices
    with associated midi data. Then I 'load' banks from disk into memory,
    or 'merge' them, producing one bank with several voices (each voice
    maintaining it's midi data).
    
    This is also a useful feature for changing voices 'on the fly' as
    you would do with a synth -- for example, replacing a snare with
    a gated snare, or a mono rhodes with a stereo version.
    
    Aren't I a lucky man?
    
    Richard.

    re: .35
    
    The answer I was looking for was "yes, memory overflow is possible".
    
    I have to assume then that no sample can be more than 1/6th of
    all memory, otherwise overflow would HAVE to be a possibility.
    
    Actually, if you arrange your samples right on the S-550 you could
    effectively have the same thing on the S-550 except that it's 4
    instead of 6.
    
    That is, the S-550 has 4 partitions, but it doesn't restrict a sample
    to being entirely contained in any one partition.  That's what I meant
    by arranging your S-550 samples "right" - limiting all the tones
    to one partition - a limit that is NOT imposed by the architecture.
    
    I'm planning to call Roland and ask/demand this feature in the next
    update.  It's one of two warts (the other being documentation) on
    the S-550.
    
    	db

    
    
    akai and I have actually taken this a stage further. 
    
    Given that there seem to be two types of Sampler architecture. The
    first has a chunk of memory (is it still called core?) and you can
    get in as many different samples as you can fit given sample size
    and space available. Eg 22 short perc samples might fit into 1 meg.
    
    The other (which is the sort that I have) allows an absolute number
    of samples (16 in my case). And each sample will always take up
    the same amount of space. This is obviously less flexible and does
    not allow for long vocal samples etcc.
    
    It also means much changing of disks, at one sample a disk. However
    I have bought a static memory backup which means that my samples
    are always in memory (saves time and disks) and I use the sample
    much more like a synth with presets. Changing the samples with an
    atari based editor as and when needed.
   
    			Paul K. 
    

    So you got 16 samples on board, and 1 sample takes up 1 disk?
    
    Very small disks or huge RAM in sampler?
    
    Richard.
    

>    I have to assume then that no sample can be more than 1/6th of
>    all memory, otherwise overflow would HAVE to be a possibility.
 
     There's some confusion here between disc memory and RAM. The
     illustration Frank pointed out was disc memory. That's where
     you can store up to 6 multi-sampled 'wavetables'. When you want
     to load, you can pick one wavetable from column A and assign that
     to the user-defined lower half of the keyboard, and then pick a
     wavetable from B and assign that to whatever keyboard range is
     left. 
    
     A Mirage sample can take up to 1/2 the available memory, often
     less, never more...
    
     You can store 3 'memory dumps' (sets of upper and lower wavesamples)
     on a disc...
    
    Edd
      
           

    
    re -2
    
    Let me explain......
    
    To load all 16 samples into memory I would have to load 16 disks.
    Each one has a sample on and each would be numbered 1-16. Yes?
    
    				Paul K.
    

    Sorry to be dim, but this seems like a waste of disk space.
    Double density disks are one meg, high density two meg. Using
    sixteen disks for sixteen samples is expensive! 
    
    Richard.

    RE: 31
    
    Dave, I do this all the time on the S-50.  This is the way I make
    'Song' disk from the sample library and sometimes my own samples.
    
    The example you mentioned, 3 'patches' onto one disk, should take
    10 - 20 minutes, not an hour.  It used to take longer, but once I mastered
    the operating system, it's fairly quick to do it.
    
    Basicly, I load the tones that I want to use.  Lots of times I don't
    need the full range tones that make up a patch but just one or two
    tones.  Then I arrange patches from these tones and then tweek the
    wave data.
    
    Dave
    

    RE: How does your sampler deal with...
    
    As new a new owner of an EPS I am just learning but they seem to
    have done a pretty good job on making it simple.  An instrument
    is made up of 4 patches from 8 layers made of 128 wavesamples and
    parameters (parameters all over the place).  An instrument can be
    saved from memory to disk in a single operation.  It includes all
    the wavesamples and patch,layer and parameter settings.  It is not
    hard to do at all.  The factory instruments are fairly large and
    complicated with lots of patches and layers.  I have been going
    through them and chopping out the patches/layers/waves of the instrument
    that I do not use, then saving the 'new' instrument to my own disk.
    The 'bank' save/restore is real nice and allows you to save the
    'instrument track' on disk with the instruments and sequences.
    The restore bank operation pulls the instruments into memory in the
    correct position and also the sequence to play.  This way you can
    save the song and the needed instruments on a dedicated disk and
    not have to shuffle through your disks looking for the instruments you
    need for your song. Of course, this is limited by the size (for
    me at least) of the floppy.

How about  the  EMax...Does  anyone  know  if the operation of building
     custom disks for this sampler is relatively easy or difficult?  I'm
     interested.    (km?)      /Mitch

re .31

db,

>    Ideally, I'd like to be able to organize and manipulate "patches"
>    on the sampler as I would/could on a synth.
>    That is, say I have have a disk full of flute samples, a disk full
>    of brass samples, and a disk full of string samples.
>    I'd like to be able to assemble a disk that has selections from
>    each of those disks.  That is, I'd like to pull ONE flute 
>    sample/patch/sound from the flute disk, one brass 
>    sample/patch/sound from the brass disk, and one string 
>    sample/patch/sound from the string disk, and create ONE disk that
>    has those three sounds.

Although you are basically correct when you say that you cannot load a
patch complete with all tones, splits, etc. as one operation, it is
easy to do by the following procedure...

1. Boot up S550 using the latest Utilities Disk (standard procedure)
2. Load 1st disk containing flute patch into Set I
3. Load 2nd disk containing brass into Set II
4. Copy or Move the brass tones from Set II to Set I
5. Load 3rd disk containing strings into Set II
6. Copy or Move the string tones from Set II to Set I

It took me under 10 minutes to do this at home. If the leftover patch
names that now no longer have tones are disturbing, just edit the names
to blanks and delete any leftover tones, then save Set I to a new disk and
you are done.

Roland's method of splitting up memory into so many segments is very
flexible; almost too flexible, but they don't have dynamic memory ala EPS
for assigning samples to instruments.

dave

    
    
     re -? re akai disks
    
    Because the akai is a non state of the art sampled it only uses
    "quick disks" which are small but not cheap. This is why the static
    memory and the Editor are so important to me.
                                   
    					Paul.
    				

    Dave, my intuition tells me there are some missing steps.
    
    Getting the "tones" into one set is only about half the task.
    Tones are only one part of a patch.  The problem is, how do
    you recreate the "patchs", where each key can point to two
    tones.  Since the tones are now in new slots, I would think
    I'd have to recreate the pointers to the tones one key at a
    time.  Right?
    
    	db

    Also note that this procedure is not possible on an S-50 where there is
    no "Set II".
    
    	db

 Though I only know how to load set disks of voices/performances and to copy
disks and format them on my new TX16W (Y's sampler), I noticed something
curious last night.  While loading in a disk, it displays filenames as the
individual components are being loaded.  The names looked like SNARE.W06,
BR186-1.W12, etc.  This looked suspicious too me, as there is no reason to
adapt a filename.ext system in a custom operating system/filename-scheme/"for
proprietary use only" system.  It looked like they were taking a 'standard'
and using it for their format.  So, I took a sample disk, popped it into my
Atari ST (which has pseudo-MS-DOS floppy format -- which is somewhat of
an industry standard) and bingo, I got a directory that looked familiar
(same file names as I saw load, etc.)  I only have a SS drive in ST and the TX
has a DS drive so I wasn't able to copy files around, etc. too see if it really
is the same format or only just close enough to read the dircetory, but
it appears that the TX16W floppy read/writes MS-DOS format disks and files.
That means, if/when I ever learn how the thing operates to the point where
I can hack open some setup-files and see how they organize on disk all the
files, I will be able to write software that will allow me to quickly rearrange
performances/voices/patches/etc on the computer.

Hoping,

CHad

>    Dave, my intuition tells me there are some missing steps.
>    Getting the "tones" into one set is only about half the task.
>    Tones are only one part of a patch.  The problem is, how do
>    you recreate the "patchs", where each key can point to two
>    tones.  Since the tones are now in new slots, I would think
>    I'd have to recreate the pointers to the tones one key at a
>    time.  Right?
 
Yes, I didn't give every detail, and I'm only referring to the S550 which
is what you have right?. Just load PATCH PRM to the patch slot
you want it in. Then EDIT the PATCH SPLIT, first in INFO mode to see
which tones were assigned to which keys and then in SET mode to
assign the same tone name (with its new tone slot number) to the same
keys. Most of the instruments/patches do not have very many samples so
it doesn't take long.
The pianos and strings have most of the multi-sampled patches, so I
would load those instruments into SET I so that you just have to delete
the unused tones and not fiddle with the patch. Most of the solo
performing instruments such as flute, sax, etc. do not have many samples
associated with the patch, so you may just want to LOAD TONE and LOAD PATCH PRM
directly into the SET I slots. Another thing I've done is create disks
that just have tones but no patches, such as snares, kicks, toms, or
individual instruments. The entire disk is just one type of tone. Then
I build up "work" disks which combine various instruments by just loading
the tones into SET II so that I can listen to them, and COPYing or MOVing
them to SET I. You can tell by the originating key of the tone where it
should be assigned on the patch split keyboard, and you can hear it as you
are editing the patch split points in SET mode. Most looped samples sound
better when played on a key lower than the originating key, because the
loop takes longer in real time and you don't hear that telltale vibrato
effect. Certain samples near A4 are capable of being assigned to the
entire keyboard, depending upon harmonic content, smoothing and loop
point, and decay envelope. Once you've done it several times and have
a method approach, it goes faster each time you do it. Last night I
created an f/x work disk that combined tones from about 10 different
disks in the Roland library. It has all kinds of splits, layered velocity
mixes, unison, and detuned, with sub-tones, etc. It only took about 20
minutes including auditioning the tones in Set II and then MOVing them
to SET I and creating the patches. The main hangup is learning how to
do this without relying upon the Roland manual.

dave

    re .31, db's question, how easy is it to make a 'performance' setup..
    
    On the EMAX, extremely simple. I do this constantly.  The only gotcha
    is you need to have an already-formatted diskette ready for the
    final 'save'.  Definition of a 'Preset'; one keyboard setup's worth
    of data; samples, analog filtering/panning/VCA/LFO type info, plus
    all existing note assignments, including keyboard scaling, crossfading,
    etc. etc.  Essentially a ready-to-play setup, once loaded.
    
    First clear memory (1 keystroke).  Insert 1st diskette, select 'Load
    Preset' (1 keystroke). Pauses 2 secs while it loads the diskette's
    directory.  Use the 'data' slider to sequentially display all Presets
    on the disk.  Select one, press 'Enter'.  Loads into memory, allows
    renaming, renumbering.  Display remaining memory if  you wish (1
    keystroke).  continue loading until done.. save to the blank formatted
    diskette (1 keystroke). 
    
    I like it!
    
    karl

    < Note 698.54 by DYO780::SCHAFER "Brad - back in Ohio." >
                      -< If it was 16 voice, I'd buy it. >-

    Brad, seeing some of the weird problems associated with the newer
    Roland & Yamaha 16-voice samplers, i.e. memory partitions, having
    to load many floppies just to fill memory, etc... I'm STILL glad
    I purchased the Emax rack.. tons (~100 diskettes) of FREE sounds,
    excellent sound quality, software-settable stereo panning, hard-disk
    availability, CD-ROM availability, availability of Digidesign,
    Softsynth, Alchemy software..
     
    .. I agree, I wish it had more voices.. but I solved THAT problem 
    with the Kurzweil 1000PX rack unit.  When the Oberheim DPX sample
    player supports Emax format...

    karl

> < Note 698.53 by SALSA::MOELLER "There'll always be a " >

>   ...continue loading until done..

Just one clarification  Karl...  more than one preset can be loaded from
     more than one diskette,  then  all  can be saved to a pre-formatted
     diskette, right?

Thanks,
/Mitch

< Note 698.56 by HPSRAD::NORCROSS >
>Just one clarification  Karl...  more than one preset can be loaded from
>>     more than one diskette,  then  all  can be saved to a pre-formatted
>     diskette, right?

    	you bet.  load presets to memory from multiple flops, save to
    one 'performance' flop.
    
    Sequencing :  the Emax uses a MIDI-to-preset 'map' concept.  The
    maps can also be loaded individually just like presets.  The map
    just points incoming MIDI data to individual presets.  This is how
    the Emax listens to trax coming from Performer on the MAC.  Those
    Performer trax destined for the Emax therefore do not need patch
    change info at the beginning.  
    
    For Performer trax/MIDI chans destined for OTHER SGU's, those 
    MIDI chans can be deleted from the Emax' map, so it won't respond
    to those channels.  Multiple maps can be present in memory.
    
    To use the sequencer, just extend each track/MIDI channel and record
    into it.  It will also accept multiple MIDI channels simultaneously,
    so I COULD (I haven't) 'download' an entire Performer sequence in
    one pass.  However, the Emax sequencer makes NO distinction twixt parts
    played internally (Emax presets) and those destined for other SGU's...
    thus it would xmit even internal parts out the OUT port.. zit/zit..
    
    karl

    One would gather from the conference that this note is the
    approved Roland sampler note.  Brad's done a terrific job
    WITHIN the existing note "structure" (a loose use of the term),
    but I find myself cursing the folks who voted against 'starting
    over' everytime I try and find something in here.
    
    Anyway, there's good news to Roland S-50 and S-550 sampler owners: 
    3rd-party manuals is coming out (one for S-50, a separate one for
    S-550).   I don't remember the name of the company, but these are the
    folks that have the blue and white covers with the plastic binders.  I
    skimmed through a (new) book for the HR-16 and it looked pretty good.
    
    Hopefully this will be a big improvement over the Roland supplied
    "manual".
    
    	db

    Now all we Rolandophiles need is a comprehensible manual for the
    new MC-500 S-MRC-500 software.  My MC-500 is off being rendered
    upgradeable, so I can't try any experiments, and I'll tell you,
    there's no way you can figure out *what* the new software does,
    never mind how to make it do it, without experimenting.  About all
    they managed to improve in the new manual is the cosmetics; i.e.,
    it *looks* like a comprehensive manual, until you discover how much
    has been left out.  They could easily double its size and still
    leave a lot of useful (as opposed to essential) stuff out.
    
    len.
    

    re: .59
    
    Yes, it was Alexander Publishing.  That name definitely clanged a bell.
    
    Perhaps this is presumptuous and unfair, but I think Roland's attitudes
    about manuals MIGHT be summed up by the words of one of their
    product representatives who at a recent product demonstrations
    had the following response to my complaint about Roland manuals:
    
    	"You want good products or good manuals?"
    
    I think that gives a good indication of where Roland is at regarding
    documentation.
    
    	db

     .60 "You want good products or good manuals?"
                                                                           
    Shoulda told him... 
    
    "Both, dammit. If Roland can't provide it there's a ton of other
    companies down the street vieing for my cash. Like Yamaha and Ensoniq."

                       
    Edd

    I've heard nothing but complaints about Roland documentation but
    if I compare my S-330 manual to my TX802 and RX7 manuals..give me
    the S-330 any day.
    	-I dont have to wade through German and French translations
    	-It includes pretty good MIDI implementation info (I had to
    	 buy the service manuals to get the Yamaha sysex info)
    
    Admittedly some of the syntax leaves desired a lot to be, but it's
    a darned sight better than their older manuals.
    
    So come on guys, on one hand there's problems saying the Y word
    and on the other hand Yamaha have better manuals than Roland. I
    think the quality of information should be judged by several things;
    how much do you need the manual(I could probably have used the 330
    without one, but have to continously refer to the RX7); how
    knowledgable and helpful are the support people; and by thge manual
    itself. 
    
    My 2cents
    
    Ken
    

    The manual to my one piece of R-word gear (MKS-30) is laughable.
    Were it not for the list of parameters, it would be useless.
    
    My Yama-gear, on the other hand, comes with a fairly in-depth manual,
    almost to the point of being overwhelming.
    
    Edd

    Yes, I really read them, for the subtle stuff.  I can get by quite
    well without a manual based on my past experience, buy there are
    inevitably a bunch of "well now, what if ..." questions that develop
    after you gotten past the basics.  Roland manuals have gotten
    significantly worse in this regard over the past few years.  My
    Super Jupiter manual has maybe a half dozen penciled in questions
    altogether, most of which I was able to answer myself with simple
    experiment.  My S-MRC manual has a half dozen questions penciled
    on *every page* (I exaggerate for effect, but not much).  And I
    can get by the inept translations; the problem is vast quantities
    of important stuff that is left out.
    
    I have no problems saying Yamaha, I just bought one of their CD
    players and the manual was ok (some parts of it are incomprehensible).
    Roland makes good gear, Yamaha makes good gear, but some Roland
    manuals leave a great deal to be desired.  I don't know about Yamaha
    manuals, I only have that one.
    
    I still can't figure how to put my D-550 in mono mode.  I think I
    have to send it a mode message, but the manual doesn't say that
    anywhere, even though it devotes several pages to using it in mono
    mode with a guitar controller.  And Roland informs me that I can
    supress envelope retriggers on the D-550 for legato style playing,
    but they didn't tell me how, and the manual doesn't even get close
    to the concept.
    
    len.
    

    
    
    I have to concur with Monsieur Cote in that all the Yamaha Gear
    so far purchased has come with good documentation. The best so far
    has been for the KX88 which even gave examples of how to drive Roland
    sysex information from the soft keys..
    
    As to the D50 the only way I good anywhere near understanding it was
    to buy the Steinberg voice editor. Which puts most of the info, in
    graphics, on one page.                                         
    
    Having said that. I did once have a Tr505 and don't remember having
    similar problems with that !
    
    
    				Paul.

If any Roland rep says "You want good products or good manuals?" a good
response would be "without good manuals I can't use all the features you put
into the thing.  If I can't use them, why should I pay for them?" 

    And yet Roland is doing quite well...   and they know this...
    
    You see, I think they understand that they don't HAVE to produce
    good  manuals to sell good products.  And aside from all the motherhood
    and apple-pie type statements we here at DEC like to make about
    the importance of documentation, one can only conclude that things
    are different in the music market.
    
    I mean, for all my bitching, *I* bought the S-550 (and the MT-32,
    and the SRV-2000, and the RD-300,...) knowing that the manuals weren't
    worth wiping your dirty tuchas with!
    
    My feeling is that we should try and do something to not let them
    "get away" with it (i.e., bitching and threatening Roland reps).
    
    	db

    re: .67 we here in DEC may go on about motherhood and apple pie
    and good documentation but we're not real good at it either...try
    installing some hardware sometime using the "installation guide"
    
    dbii

    re .67 - actually, the SRV-2000 manual is pretty good.  Well, compared
    to the rest of the Roland manuals.  It's only major screw up was
    the misleading implication about access to the "further level"
    parameters.  (Ah, I love those meaningful descriptors...).
    
    Regarding Digital documentation, my favorite adventure was installing
    my Rainbow, which with all the options came with 6 manuals that
    all said "read me first".
    
    I think we should start another note that contains our favorite
    examples of manual obscurities.
    
    len.
    

>Note 698.69 by DRUMS::FEHSKENS -< Manual Sinisterity?(For You LatinScholars)
>    I think we should start another note that contains our favorite
>    examples of manual obscurities.

              .. filled with left-handed comments, no doubt ..    

  This question was also posted in BOMBE::AMIGA, but this is probably a 
  better place for it.

  I've just got a simple 8-bit stereo sampler for my Amiga, and being new to
  the subject I need a bit of assistance. I'm using MED sequencer software.

  My area of difficulty is loops and accurate timing.

  Suppose I sample a couple of bars of music from my CD player. I want to
  use this sample as a loop. So that when I play a particular note, (C-2, say)
  the sample loops such that the beat is exactly 120 bpm (beats per minute).

  Assume also, that the bpm of the original sample is NOT exactly 120.
  Its slightly off. (assume I can calculate the rate accurately, this is
  quite easy because I can view the waveform)

  Now, I realise that if you change the duration of your sample, the pitch
  will change by the same ratio, but that doesn't concern me at all. I just
  want the timing to be right. (eg, just sampling bits of percussion)

  Say I use sample rate S. (Which corresponds to the C-2 period). I want my 
  loop to last 1 second exactly. Using rate S the loop lasts 0.97 seconds.    
   
  I tried "resampling" using AudiomasterII but the results were confusing,
  it cut my sample resolution in half.

  So if I start again with sample rate (S/0.97), should I expect to get a 
  1 second sample on a C-2? Or maybe its not that simple..

  Thanks for reading this far!

  Dave

		If you don't care about pitch, then it is that simple. -tom

    Yep, simply tune the sample a little flat until you hit 120 BPM...
    
    Edd