Conference napalm::commusic_v1

    I seems to me that obsolesence is a marketing gimmick. 

    Granted, it's hard to get the latest fad sound out of a synth that's
    several years old, but unlike marketing would have you believe, that
    doesn't make the old synth obsolete - nor is it impossible.

    Sure, LA synths produce some very nice characteristic sounds ... but I
    can produce reasonable facsimiles using a pair of TX7s, or a TX7 and an
    old Oberheim.  (Whaddya mean you've heard this before?)  Actually,
    there are a few DX patches floating around that sound VERY similar to
    LA type breathy patches.

    I think the bottom line is to buy a quality product, and then don't be
    afraid to work at programming it to get the most out of the machine. 

    I wonder if len thinks his JX dinosaurs are obsolete ... (obvious bait
    laid here) ... 

-b

    I think you're approaching things the right way Steve - just don't be
    afraid of trying "strange" things.  Most hot popular patches seem to be
    based on sample combinations.  For example, a piano attack on a gut
    guitar sustain, or Mr. Moeller's dreaded "fart flute". 

-b

    Roland may think my JX-10 and MKS-80 are obsolete, but the sounds
    are forever.  So what if the Super Jupiter takes a half hour to warm up
    and stop drifting, and has only 4 voices in dual (layered) mode. And,
    yeah, I wish there was a chance of a replacement ROM that would make
    my JX transmit and receive on different channels.  The sound generation
    technology may be "obsolete", but the sounds are classic, and there's
    enough of the basic MIDI functionality there (both respond to velocity
    and aftertouch, and do SysEx bulk transfers) to do a lot more than
    "survive".  Both have full blown "knobs and sliders" programmers.
    I just got my D-550, and it can't replace either.
    
    Talk about obsolete.  I now have a LinnDrum and a TR-909.  They
    get used regularly.  The Linn is going to be MIDIfied.  The -909
    still has one of the best sounding crashes of any drum machine.
    
    Almost no such thing as "obsolete" in my studio.  Just good and
    useful, or bad and useless.
    
    len.
    

    I think a good sampler is the way to go. The first parameter is
    a large library, the second is to use alternate sources like these
    cassettes with 1000 sounds.
    
    I got a real sweetheart deal with my EMax.. since I gave them $$
    and didn't see the unit for months, Synthony in Scottsdale AZ lets
    me come in with formatted flops and copy any Emax samples they've
    gotten since the last time I visited.  I now have ~100 floppies,
    with sounds ranging from old ARP gear to Fairlight/Synclavier sounds.
    
    My ONLY regret with the Emax is its 8-voice polyphony limit.
    
    karl

If the S-10 has been dropped to $650, what has the rack mount version 
(MKS-35672 orthelike) been dropped to?

Todd.

    I just got off the phone with LaSalle's. They have S-10s in stock
    for 599. The MKS-100 (S10 rack) has been discontinued for a while
    (last summer) and is not available. Its replacement, the S-220 sells
    for 1K. 
    
    Dan

    You mean S-330, don't you?
    
    Steve_who_figures_S-330's_will_go_for_$600_or_less_in_a_year

>< Note 1513.7 by MIZZOU::SHERMAN "incompetence knows no bounds" >
>                                  -< S-330? >-
>
>    You mean S-330, don't you?
>    
>    Steve_who_figures_S-330's_will_go_for_$600_or_less_in_a_year


Nope  S-330 is a baby S-550.

MKS-100 is like an S-10  and S-220 is also in that family.  Daddy's 
'preferred customer' night had S-220 at $895 (for a reference).

Chad

    If ANYONE sees an S-330 go for $600, please buy it for me.
    
    	db

>                         -< Authorized buying agents >-
>
>    If ANYONE sees an S-330 go for $600, please buy it for me.
>    
>    	db


	I herby duly authorize ANYONE to buy ME the *second* one found for
	$600.

	I'll even pay a commision if you find one.  Authorization expires
	at XMAS.

	Chad

	(note:  offer only valid after db gets his!)

    An S-330 is indeed a "baby S-550".
    
    It has either 1/2 or 1/4 the memory, no SCSI port and is being offered
    as a "bounded" unit (no memory upgrade potential, etc. although it
    has been said here that Roland says that it COULD provide an upgrade
    if it wanted to, the "bounded" stuff is a sorta marketing product
    line thing to differentiate it from the S-550.)
    
    BTW, S-550 disks have to be "converted" (easily done with Roland
    supplied utilities) to be used on the S-330, so apparently there
    ARE some differences in the software architecture, and perhaps
    the hardware too.
    
    	db

>    BTW, S-550 disks have to be "converted" (easily done with Roland
>    supplied utilities) to be used on the S-330, so apparently there
>    ARE some differences in the software architecture, and perhaps
>    the hardware too.
>    
>    	db


 Interesting, a Roland User's Group mag had a blurb saying S-50 disks
 were fully compatible with the S-550 (should be) *and* the S-330.  They
 listed their library of S-50 disks and S-550 disks separately though...

	Chad_who_hopes_S-330_and_S-550_have_same_sound_quality_and_have_-
	compatible_disks_because_he_wants_one_by_XMAS

    I think the confusion is from how you are interpreting "fully
    compatable".
    
    The S-50 and S-550 disk ARE fully compatable with the S-330.
    The S-330 can read and use anything on a disk created by an
    S-550 or S-50.  It just takes a special program (which unfortunately
    you have to load from another floppy) to do it.
    
    Anyway, I was doing this just last week, and I can tell you with
    great certainty that you can't load an S-50 (or S-550) disk on
    a S-330 the same way you'd load an S-330 disk.
    
    	db

>    The S-50 and S-550 disk ARE fully compatable with the S-330.
>    The S-330 can read and use anything on a disk created by an
>    S-550 or S-50.  It just takes a special program (which unfortunately
>    you have to load from another floppy) to do it.

More or less that they have a different data format.  Hmm...

Thanks    Its official enough for me...

Chad

    My tapes came in about a week ago.  I've listened to many of the
    samples.  At first I was disappointed in some of them because they
    were pitched pretty high and I could tell I was hearing a sampler.
    Then, I realized/read that this was intended for folks that were
    going to use one sample over the full keyboard - seems most samplers
    can play a sound at a lower but not higher pitch (dummy! dummy!
    I said to myself ...).  Anyway, most samples are over a range of
    pitches, which is nice.  My recording is in Dolby B, which has some 
    noise, but I can filter most of that out.  
    
    The sounds are not as complete as I would like (there were not enough 
    samples of real choir voices or of sax variations), but much of it is 
    useable.  There are far too many conga samples on the drum tape.  It's 
    hard to tell many of them apart.  A lot of the drum samples are the
    same sounds run through effects (*I* can do that myself!).  But, there 
    are plenty of unique percussion sounds that I can diddle with (more
    than on any drum machine I've seen).  The sounds tend to be abrupt and 
    short, which makes sampling easier.  But, they sampled some RX sounds
    and wound up missing a noticeable amount of the attack on some of those.
    Fortunately, I'm not that interested in the RX stuff.  
    
    At times the levels seemed too high, bordering on saturation for my
    deck, but this was not a big problem.  There is audible echo and 
    crosstalk on the tapes (I can tell it's not my tape drive because the 
    echos come before the sound and are not reversed.)  This is no problem 
    for the S-10 which can start the sample when it hits a certain level.  
    But, it might be a problem for other samplers.  The D-50, DX7II,
    Matrix, Kurzweil and Kawai sounds seem pretty useful.  As I listened,
    I began to be able to tell the different synths apart.  I think because
    of the popularity of the D-50 there was particular attention paid
    there.  
    
    To my surprise, I found myself quickly tiring of the breathy, screechy 
    D-50 sounds.  I guess I've become accustomed to hearing D-50 sounds
    after being run through FX.  Also, how many times do you have to hear 
    the Honda or the Certs commercial before you get tired of breathy
    flutes?  It makes me have second thoughts about going for a D-110 down 
    the road because raw FM and LA sound more similar than I thought.  One 
    advantage that FM seems to have over LA is that it is less 'attacky'.  
    I've already got that problem with the S-10, except that I can do 
    velocity cross-fading to mask the problem.  (I might not be using the 
    right terms here, but what the hey ...)  
    
    All in all, the sample tapes are breathing new life into my S-10.

    Steve

    re .15 - it *is* possible to "tame" some of the more egregiously
    breathy D-nn sounds by a little reprogramming, but that's a bit
    trickier to do with unmodified samples...
    
    
    len.
    

    Gee, I'll have to agree with you, len.  Especially because I can't
    even PRONOUNCE egeg ... egrej ... whatever that word was ... ;-)
    
    Steve

I guess this is the topic within which to mention that even little things
add a little life to an otherwise obsolete synth.

For me, the FB-01 was becoming obsolete when all of a sudden I obtained a
velocity sensitive keyboard to breath a little new life into it. All the
patches became much more useable.

Then it became even more useable when I just discovered the other day that
I already had a foot pedal which can be used with my controller to act
as a damper pedal. Boom, all of a sudden sustain perks up many piano-like
passages.

/Mitch

    
    
    I'me still using mine. It makes great 4 layered bass patches and
    with the steinberg patch editor can make some fairly educated noises.
                                        
    If you had an atari we could swap patches. (god bless steph bailey)
    
    
    					Paul.