Conference napalm::commusic_v1

    I've played around a bit with several "percussion producing units",
    including the MT, TR-707, TR-505, DDD-5, and various Y_word RX boxes.

    The HR16 blows every other box I've ever heard away.  Period.  If you
    intend to use the thing as strictly an SGU (sound gen. unit), then you
    can't go wrong.  The only gripes I have about it is that the quality of
    mfg is not-too-great, it's not rack-mountable, and it uses a stinking
    wall bug power supply.  Other than that, it's a dynamite unit. 

    The machine is almost *too* tunable.  You can tune darn near an octave
    each way.  And if cymbals are important ... well, there is simply no
    comparison with the MT.

    If you had ideas about using the LA capabilities of the MT, then
    this becomes a whole different ballgame.

-b

P.S. Incidentally, I just bought an HR, and my requirements were/are
     quite similar to yours.

    I don't think you can beat the HR with anything in it's price
    range.
    
    It's got all the features (tunability, dynamics, etc.) you want.
    It's quiet as all get out. (The MT32 appears to be noisy.) It's got
    49 (50?) voices, 16 available at a time. Plus they throw in a fair
    to good sequencer so you can save the memory on your atari for pitch
    bends.
    
    Edd
    
    
    

    
    If you're satisfied with AM radio bandwidth, any machine will do.
    
    If you like fidelity and realism, 
    
    HR-16 is cost effective solution.
    
    ron
    

    I have to admit that the MT-32's drums are equalized with a studio
    in mind, and not neccesarily Live performance. I've put my 2 10
    band equalizers to frequent use for the sterio outputs, jsut to
    get things to sound right in the PA system. On the other hand, I
    wanted the MT-32 for all of it, not just the drums. I own another
    Alesis product (the MMT-8 sequencer), and it's remarkably slipshod
    in it's manufacture. The buttons have major keybounce problems (you
    don't always get what you thought you entered) & the documentation
    stinks. However, for the price, it is tolerable. I decided against
    the HR-16 because it was not that much better than the MT-32 for
    what I had planned to use it for & for all of the problems that
    the HR-16 seems to have (look at the HR-16 note - over 300 entries
    & lots of complaints). I also suspect that since Alesis could put
    it together, then the rest of the pack won't be far behind, and
    they'll address some of the HR-16's quality issues. I did a side
    by side comparison of the drum sounds, in a music shop (ProSound
    - In Colorado Springs), thru the same Keyboard Amp & Decided that
    the MT-32 was a more cost effective solution, without a significant
    perceieved differance in sound (at least to me). I suggest that
    you do the same sort of thing. None of the MT-32's drum sounds are
    adjustable (other than Modulation, Pitch Bend Wheel, or Expression)
    without Software running on a PC.
    							Jens

re: all of the above

Thanks for the comments!

re: .4

Pardon my ignorance, but are you saying that I can use pitch bending with the
MT-32's drum sounds?  That makes it *sorta* tunable, eh?  (or no?)  I realize
that I would have to use an external computer to achieve this, but at least
it sounds possible (and gives me a *lot* more sounds).  The noise complaints
don't look to good, though...

Boy, I musta missed something about the MT-32 reviews.  You say that the MT-32
has LA sounds?  Like the D-50?

	...jay

    Jay, I think you have been confused by something I've said at one time
    or another (I have a vague recollection of mentioning the HR-16 and the
    MT-32 in the same breath).
    
    There is *NO QUESTION* but tht going from a TR-505 to an MT-32 for
    drum sounds is anything BUT an upgrade.  The MT-32's drum kit is
    useable, but hardly worth getting for drums.
    
    It sounds like you may not understand that the MT-32 isn't really
    a drum machine.  It's a multi-voice, multi-timbral synth without
    a keyboard.  It's based on the D-50 (LA synth).  The drums are
    an afterthought if anything.
    
    The HR-16 is a top-notch drum machine.  It sounds infinitely better
    than the MT-32 drums, it IS tunable, and it costs LESS than the MT-32
    (which is not a criticism of the MT-32 cause we're talking apples
    and oranges here).
    
    	db

    re: .7
    
    Moot point.  I am almost sure that what you'd find is that the drums
    correspond to the controller that's dedicated to pitch bend. 
    That however, applies to all notes on that channel.
    
    That means that drums are not individually tunable.  And really,
    that is NOT a feasible way of doing it.
    
    Suffice it to say that the MT-32 drums are *NOT* tunable.
    
    	db

    BTW, I don't think that the interval of the pitch bend is adjustable,
    not even by computer.  I think it's permanently fixed at an octave, but
    I'm not sure.
    
    	db

    Despite it's shortcomings, I really think that, given the units
    I've heard, getting anything other than an HR-16 is a compromise.
    I've never heard anything I thought sounded better. Some *real* drums
    sound worse.
                                                                   
    Edd

Hmm...  Seems like I left off a rather subconcious (unconcious?) priority I
always keep in the back of my mind:  whenever you can, grab for a useful,
general purpose sound generator.  

Of course, I left this off my list.  (Yes, a little like introducing characters
in the last chapter of a book.)

I always realized that "tuning" by way of pitch bend is (at best) a horrid
hack, but please try to keep in mind this is coming from a person who is
downright *desparate* to obtain some DIFFERENT percussion sounds for
compositions.

(You ardent analysts of the now famous COMMUSIC recording series know the
 situation: on comes an otherwise great tune, then all of the sudden......
 "Oh, they're using a TR-505.")

At the risk of sounding like a prima donna (but I bet I'm not alone here ;-),
I just *gotta* have percussion that doesn't stand out like a sore thumb and
eventually detract from the piece.  And suffice to say, the TR-505 doesn't
hack it.

Yes, it's pretty obvious that the HR-16 nails the MT-32 for any type of
serious (or semi-serious) percussion composition.  And from the sounds of
it, it even looks pretty good from a price/performance standpoint (that is,
the sound generation doesn't really come "free" with the MT-32).

Thanks for the clarification.

	...jay

Jay -

Have you considered the D110. It has 63 percussion sounds, some of which I've
never heard in any other machine. There are all sorts of muted cymbals, some
interesting f/x, it is programmable from the front panel, great MIDI
implementation, one space rack mount, no wall bug power supply, etc. etc.
It lists for about $999. In addition to the drums and percussion, there are
192 other timbres, each of which can be assigned to one of 8 parts. This is
a fantastic sound module.

dave

re: .12

Thanks for the D110 pointer, Dave.  Do you know off hand whether it has
separate outputs?  I rather like the interesting compromise featured with
the HR-16 (two stereo pairs, with pan control and output assignment for
each voice).

	...jay

>I always realized that "tuning" by way of pitch bend is (at best) a horrid
>hack, but please try to keep in mind this is coming from a person who is
>downright *desparate* to obtain some DIFFERENT percussion sounds for
>compositions.
    
    Although I think this is now a mute point, what I'm saying goes 
    well beyond that.
    
    I'm not criticizing it for being a hack.  Hacks are fine in my
    opinion.   I'm saying that it won't give you anything useful.
    Besides, I doubt that the MT-32 drums respond to pitch bend.
    It would be a "bug" if it did.  Far more of a limitation than
    an advantage because you couldn't use pitch bend and the drums
    at the same time.
    
    If you want "different" sounds, you would be far better off picking up
    something that samples sounds.
    
    It may seem convenient for me to mention that as I am selling a drum
    machine (Casio RZ-1) that samples sounds, but I think it's good advice.  
    And I'll sell it to you for a lot less than either an HR-16 or an
    MT-32.
    
    Trust me.  Abandon this pitch bend nonsense.
    
    	db

re: .14

Alright already!!!  Pitch bend won't hack it, I realize that.  Thanks for
making the point sooooooo obvious, Dave.  ;-)

Alright, so now you've tantalized us with the notion of selling your RZ-1
unit.  I had come across that unit in looking for alternatives, but couldn't
find any specs (or prices).

So now you've commited yourself:  cough up the specs and suggested sale price!

	...jay

    Right then .. I think its time I added my six-pence worth..
    
    To set the record straight, the MT32 does have tunable drums. For
    those of you with either an MT32 editor, or a bit of patience and
    a method of entering system exclusive data, it is quite easy. All
    you need to do is assign a drum sound to one of user patches (look
    in the midi-spec for how to do this) and then adjust the relative
    tuning. Drum sounds can be tuned over the entire keyboard range,
    and some pretty wacky sounds can be accessed.
    
    Thought I'd better mention this ..
    
    Tony.