Conference napalm::commusic_v1

    Well, as far as using your daughter's Amiga, there will probably
    be a problem with sharing the resource.  There's plenty of good
    software out there to support Amiga applications, now.  This wasn't
    always the case before.  And, there is plenty of good MIDI software out
    there now for PCs.  I would say that if your daughter is using
    the Amiga to any extent, forget about using it for your own
    applications unless you are open to the idea of buying another Amiga
    down the road.  Otherwise, plan on using your PC.
    
    Now, as to the D-20, there are two camps here.  One camp likes having
    an all-in-one unit.  One camp likes having things separated.  The
    D-20 is a good box, but you may find that you will want to buy a
    separate synth to represent a different technology in your setup
    (such as a sampler), you may want a different drum machine (they
    are relatively cheap nowadays), you may not find that the built-in
    disk drive can do all the things you want, you may not like the
    internal sequencer, you may want more/different effects and so forth.  
    For all of these reasons many prefer to spend their bucks on modular 
    systems.  
    
    Sometimes buyers figure that all they will ever need will be the
    all-in-one box.  Then, when they realize that they still want more,
    they buy more stuff anyway.  But, they can still find the stuff on the
    box useful.  So, it's probably not wise to base the decision about
    getting an all-in-one box on the idea that you will never want to buy 
    another piece of equipment.  It's better to think of it as the best
    solution 'for now' with growth possibilities, IMHO.
    
    Steve

    Is your PC a laptop? One problem I can forsee is the lack
    of availability of midi interfaces for laptops (someone 
    just came out with one that mounts underneath the system, but
    it only worked with one brand - I think it was NEC). It was a
    bit more expensive than your basic card that plugs inside the
    computer.
    
    I still am a fan of the computer sequencer setup. It leaves you
    free to change your synth/drum machine/etc. at will, without 
    having to learn a new sequencer style. Also, the computer can
    be more than just a sequencer (patch librarian, editer, etc).
    I personally feel the computer method is easier...you can see
    so much more on screen (I'm a devoted Voyertra Sequencer Plus
    user).
    
    There are some inexpensive PC based sequencers and Midi compatible
    synths (Casio CZ series) so it wouldn't cost an arm and leg.
    

    The answer to your inquiry is: it depends.
    
    The first thing you should be aware of is that not all PC type
    portables have  expansion slots for a midi interface, i.e., your
    laptop may or may not be MIDIable.  Make sure you find out.
    
    If you have decent keyboard chops, and want to check out what this
    MIDI stuff is all about before making too huge an investment, go
    with the D20.  I don't know anything about its sequencer, but single
    event editing (assuming it has that feature) is usually not fun
    on a small LCD, hence the comment about keyboard chops.  But you get a 
    built in drum machine, reverb?, and what I'm told is a pretty decent
    LA synth; it's more than enough to get you started.
    
    If after playing with the D20 for a while, you decide to go the
    standalone computer/midi software route, you'll still have a synth/
    controller/drum machine to use as a tone module.  You can tben get an
    interface for your laptop (hopefully), fight with your daughter
    over the Amiga (my wife hasn't touched her PC clone since I "borrowed"
    it) :-), or get another computer for music.
    
    There's a lot of MS-DOS music software around.  I use Cakewalk by
    Twelve Tone Systems.  It ain't fancy, but it was $150 and does
    everything I want it to.  There's better and worse around.
    
    But beware! Once the MIDIbug bites, it can be fatal to your budget.
     :-)
    
    Good luck and have fun,

    Rodney M.
    

    
    MS-DOS *does* have a strong reputation in MIDI sequencing now that
    there are so many software packages out there now. So that should
    not be an issue. My opinion is that if you have the PC already,
    buy a software-based sequencer (you'll need a MIDI interface too).
    The only comparison I can make bewteen software-based sequencers
    and the dedicated unit is in comparing the Yamaha QX5 (close friend
    owns one) and the software-based package that I have (Sequencer
    Plus Mark III from Voyetra). The QX5 can do a lot of the things
    that SP3 can do, but overall my software-based package has a lot
    more features. It is MUCH easier to edit specific notes and MIDI
    events on a computer screen than on a little LCD display. A computer 
    gives you more storage, and the ability to do longer (larger) pieces of 
    music. But the QX5 is more portable than a computer, if that's a
    concern. If you decide to buy a MIDI interface and go the software
    route, it opens up a whole new world that is unavailable with a
    dedicated sequencer like the QX5--you can buy software that allows
    you to edit and store those favorite sounds that you create on your
    synth. Also you can buy music scoring packages to print out your
    music. Things like this are unavailable to you with a dedicated
    sequencer-based MIDI setup. So, in short, there are trade-offs,
    but since you have the computer already, you might as well put it
    to use.
    
    Mike D

    Are you planning on gigging, or playing at home or in the studio?

    If home/studio, a computer-based sequencer is definitely the way to go.
    A visual interface is hard to beat once you find one that you like, and
    as was said earlier, per event editing is much nicer on a tube than
    from a 20-40 character display.

    However, if you plan on gigging, a computer is not always a reasonable
    thing to have to tote along.  I got rid of a QX7 and and ESQ-1 (which,
    IMO, is a wonderful all-in-one box) in favor of an Atari ST and
    MasterTracks Pro.  The sequencer is *very* powerful, but the Atari is
    not real portable ... and loading songs from floppy takes *forever*
    (like 25-30 seconds per song).  If you gig and just *have* to have a
    computer, spend the xtra $$$ and buy a decent sized hard disk. 

    Hope this helps.

-b

    The amiga MIDI interface is under $60.  The PC interface is probably
    much more.
    Tom

    re -1 
    
    Yes I paid $169 for a MIDI interface (Voyetra OP-4001) for my PC.
    I bought it mail order from East Coast Sound.
    
    Mike D

 RE: long loading of songs.

  Expand your memory Brad :-)!   A 4 meg Atari has a wonderful RAM disk
  capability so all you have to do is load every thing into the RAMdisk at
  the start and you have almost instant access!

Chad

    I'd like to, Chad - but I'm clobby with a soldering iron, and there's
    no Atari dealer even close to me here in n/w Ohio.  Hey - I'd *LOVE* to
    bump up to 4 mb in that baby.  Got any pointers?

-b

>< Note 1714.9 by DYO780::SCHAFER "Brad ... DTN 433-2408" >
>                        -< Rathole, but what the heck? >-
>
>    I'd like to, Chad - but I'm clobby with a soldering iron, and there's
>    no Atari dealer even close to me here in n/w Ohio.  Hey - I'd *LOVE* to
>    bump up to 4 mb in that baby.  Got any pointers?
>
>-b

E Arthur Brown supposedly has a board 'under development' for th 1040 and 520fm
models that you put the chips on (socketed, so anybody can do it) and the
board plugs into where the MMU-thing chip sits.  No soldering, etc. needed.
Watch that static though.  There are other board makers out there who do
similar type things.  Check out the various ST magazines.  Someday I'll
bump mine up to 2.5 or 4 meg and a 30 meg HD (I only use my ST for MIDI --
VAXes work great for word proecessing, graphics, etc) and a MultiSync type
monitor.  NOw however I am saving my pennies for a K5 and then an S550 so that
I'll be done with the toy buying.

CHad

    My feeling is that if you can determine that you can find no
    advantages to a all-in-one unit like the ESQ-1, SQ-80 or the D-20
    for what you do TODAY, then buy either a dedicated sequencer
    (MC-500, etc.) or a PC with sequencing software.
    
    However, if you find an all-in-one unit to offer you some advantages,
    I would definitely so go that way.
    
    I don't think modular systems protect any investments in this instance.
    Somewhere in here, Jens made some claims to that, which struck me
    as reverse logic.
    
    For one thing, the ESQ-1 and D-20 really aren't more expensive than
    any other equivalent multi-timbral synth.  That is, you really aren't
    paying extra for the builtin sequencer.
    
    Second, if I was to buy, say, an MC-500, I'd have no doubt that
    in several yearss from now I would want to replace it with some
    new improved technology that offers considerable advantage.
    
    That would leave me with a box that's totally useless (I don't
    need two sequencers) and a lot of MC-500 floppies I probably couldn't
    use on my new sequencer.
    
    On the other hand, even I buy a new synth, it doesn't make the
    ESQ-1 useless as you can always use multiple synths.   So I hang
    on to the ESQ-1 *and* I have something to play my old ESQ-1 based
    sequences, or I can convert that at my leisure (it's been my
    observation that most people who buy new sequencers, or drum machines
    (which have builtin sequencers) are generally in a hurry to sell
    their old machines and go through the exercise of madly converting
    their stuff to the new machine).
    
    Now, some of the advantages of the ESQ-1 like synths area:
    
    	o Economics - generally speaking, the sequencer you get with
    		the ESQ-1 or D-20 is "free".  That is, the synth
    		doesn't really cost more than comparable synths that
    		don't have sequencers.
    
    	o Gigging - much more convenient - one less unit to carry,
    	  	less connections to make during setup and breakdown,
    	  	less connections to fail during gig
    
    	o Convenience - the reasons given in gigging generally apply
    		here.  Less cords, less equipment.  I've even taken
    		the SQ-80 along on vacations to do some writing and
    		sequencing.  I plug it into the wall, plug the headphones
    		in and I'm off.   No MIDI chords, no mixers, no worrying
    		about MIDI modes, setting the right channels, figuring
    		out the patch # associated with the patch name, blah
    		blah blah.
    
    	o Speed - IMO: Dedicate sequencers are generally more flexible,
    	 	and can do more things, but I remain totally convinced
    		that it is MUCH faster to make experiments, and get
    		things down extremely quickly on all-in-one synths.
    
    		I have the money today to go out and get a PC and sequencer
    		software, but I have not.   I don't wanna buy anything
    		that introduces an impediment to me trying something
    		out.  I'm a speed freak when it comes to writing and
    		programming sequences.  If I have to go through pages
    		on a screen, move my hands to and from the keyboard and
    		mouse, etc I just get lazy and don't do it.
    
    		It rarely takes me more than TWO SECONDS to do ANYTHING
    		on the ESQ-1 and I like it that way - it's just how *I*
    		like to work.  People are often amazed when they watch
    		me work with the ESQ-1 sequencer.
    
    		I believe the same holds true for the D-20, but I have
    		no experience with it other than watching Chuck Vandemann
    		(a Roland Rep) give a demo.

    I guess that my feeling against an all in one is that it is similar
    to setting up a component sterio system. If you buy an all in one box
    you get the benifit of having everything tied together in workable
    form. I personally think that the sequencer on the Ensoniq units is
    excellcent, and it has features that are important (I worked on an
    SQ-80 developing my first bunch of sequences & I really liked what I
    saw), however, I, being primarily a guitar player, who sequences the
    parts & don't require any for of keyboard for live use (save my animal
    patches & and occasional wind storm or Jet flying by). I Can't live
    with the size of the keyboard (the CZ-101 happens to fit into the
    jumble of things that I use when I play live). So, while the all in one
    box is an excellent choice, it wouldn't work for me. In this case if
    I buy any more sound generation gear, it will be rack mounted (Thanks
    to Dave Orin for making me think hard about this & eventually
    simplifying a tremendous amount of wiring each time I play). As it is,
    all my MIDI gear (except CZ-101 & Suzuki Midi Guitar) are all in one
    custom made Rack & it becomes easy for me to quickly set up everything.

    I plan on upgrading my sequencer to a computer based system (as soon as
    I quit buying other MIDI stuff) & at that time, I'll unbolt my
    sequencer, re-structure the sequences, then keep the Sequencer as a
    backup.

    The problem that I have run into is not understanding how to use
    something to it's fullest, and also make it work in my environment.
    It's something that will sneak up on you as you add things (I recently
    bought an MX-8 to solve my many obscure routing problems & it's solved
    enough to allow me to better control a ver dynamic environment). I
    still have at least 30 cords to hook up before my part of the music
    generation system is in place (down from over 50). Lately, I'm scared
    to buy much of anything, since I don't know what's just over the
    horizon.

    Back to the subject... I find a modular system to work at my advantage,
    where an all in one type of solution won't work for me. You have to
    consider your end goal. My stuff has to be able to be set up in under
    20 minutes, and be taken apart in about the same time & It always has
    to be consistant to me, no matter what else is changed. It's fun stuff,
    but, it seems to always get worse before it gets better.

						    Jens

    I read a review of the D20 a coupla days ago.
    
    Regarding .0's specific case, you should be aware that the D20 does
    *not* have any step or single event editing capability, so you can't
    tweak anything. It's designed to be a sketchpad more than anything
    else.
    
    Also, you can only save one song at a time, if I remember the review
    correctly.
    
    For me, that would eliminate the D20 altogether, as my  (sole) sequencer,
    anyway.  Your mileage may vary.
    
    Rodney M.

  I prefer a computer based sequencer bacause I am not what I would call
  a performance composer.  I can't just sit down and play tracks and what not
  the way db does (or probably does).  I methodically either play something
  or step it in or do both and the graphical images and mouse control fit
  into my style.  I would say that that is the key.  How do you think
  that you would use it?

CHad

    RE: D-20
    
    I musta read that same D-20 review - it's in the recent issue of
    Keyboard Magazine I think.
    
    The review was amazingly negative, especially considering that they
    generally write positive reviews.
    
    The D-20's sequencer sounds like a joke.  The review states directly
    that there are much better units (like the Korg, and the Ensoniq).
    In fact, I'm convinced that the reviewer had an ESQ-1 because he
    mentions a whole bunch of things that the ESQ-1 does that the D-20
    does not.
    
    Anyway, from my reading of that review I think I can state pretty
    firmly that the D-20 is to be avoided for use as a sequencer.
    I'd only recommend it if you are absolutely bent on having an
    LA synth and absolutely need it to be an all-in-one synth.
    
    If not, the review clearly indicates that Ensoniq and Korg give you
    much more power and convenience for less money.
    
    	db - owner of much Roland equipment
    
    p.s. And however bad the D-20 sequencer may be, I'm sure Roland's
    	 well-known distinction of having the worst technical manuals
    	 in the business doesn't help much.  In fact, the review covers
    	 a couple of operations that weren't expressed in the manual!

    Jens points are well-taken on the modular vs. all-in-one issue.
    Clearly if you don't need a keyboard, there's little sense in
    getting something like an SQ-80 or an M-1.
    
    Chad's points are also well-taken if you don't primarily enter
    music thru the keyboard.  In that case, a PC is a requirement.
    
    As to how I enter music into sequences, I usually just play
    it through the keyboard.
    
    Occasionally, I come across a part that exceeds my technique (OK,
    maybe a lot more than "occasionally").   In that case, I just
    slow the clock down to whatever tempo I can play it at.  I think
    that technique would work for a lot of technically marginal players
    and would yield something a lot more human sounding than something entered
    via a notation system where every quarter note note-on and note-off 
    falls on the quarter note.
    
    	db

    FWIW - I've also been hearing folks compare the D20/D10/D110 with
    the Kawai K1/K1m/K1r and the D50.  To my surprize, I've been hearing
    bias toward the Kawai stuff instead of the lower end Roland stuff.
    I think I'd wait until I compared a K1r ($495?) with a D110 ($700) 
    (for example) before I plunked down my plastic ...
    
    Steve (who currently has nothing to plunk down, but who is happy
    makin' music, anyway)

    
    re -1
    
    I know this is off the subject, but I have to make a comment here.
    Steve, I tried out a K1r and thought it sounded excellent. Haven't
    heard a D110 yet, but the K1r stacked up very well against a D50,
    and sounds better than an MT32. IMO of course.
    
    Mike D

    The D20 is useful for sequencing real-time ideas. If you have chops,
    the lack of the editing facilities is not a major problem. I use
    the D20 at home, and when I'm recording at my local studio, the
    engineer uploads my sequencer data into the PRO24 which works like
    magic.
    
    What I don't like about the D20 is when you playback a song, you
    can only monitor the D20 or the midi'd instrument, not both.
    Also, you cannot use the performance sound bank in the sequencer,
    which has the best sounds. The reason I bought it was what you get for
    the price, and I can use the sequencer at home and for rehearsing
    without a drummer.
    It is a long way from being the best sequencer about, nor can it
    compare with computer based sequencers. But if you want an all-in-one
    box that can be used for other purposes it's quite good. I don't
    have a home studio, and to have a comparable setup, I'd need a drum
    machine, mixer, computer, s/w, amplification, sound modules, and
    a master keyboard. Therefore, the D20 suits my home requirements.
    
    smitho