 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Forums - Music techology
Subject: Hardware sampling dilemma!
Viewing all 26 messages - View by pages of 10: 1 2 3
Original Message 1/26 30-May-97 @ 01:13 AM - Hardware sampling dilemma!
I'm currently facing something of a dilemma. I currently own a
Quasimidi Quasar (Cakewalk running on old slow 486 ex-works PC -
whoops I didn't say that). Its got a big pallet of usable sounds,
good effects and some pretty flexible editing.
Having used it for a while as my sole sound source my thirst for
new sounds, greater editability etc is fast leading me to a new
purchase....a sampler.
My budget is about £2000. I'm after a quality sampling/synthesis
tool. My starting options seem to be;
1) Yamaha A3000 - need to see/hear one but FM went ballistic! However
apart from the base cost of £1300 I'd also need to buy a mass
storage device, a CD-ROM for those digital transfers and the optional
Digital I/O board - there goes my most of my dosh...
OR
2) PC based sampler - probably a 166 MMX (might aswell go for the best
the budget allows) PC business spec (since I don't want the bundled
rubbish), a Pinnacal? a Terratec EWS 64??? or card X?
Then I can enjoy Rebirth, Stomper etc etc and all the other quality
software thats in development...
3) A Kurzweil K2000 with sampler option: OK...I think I've broke the budget -
but thats what budgets are for :-) From my research this looks like
a demon machine capable of satisfying both my sampler craving and
need to create fresh sounds.
4) ?
The PC option is a strong conteder, I'm prepared to spend money
upgrading should the need arise and I'm impressed with price/performance
ratio of a lot of the new PC products. I'm not into hard disk recording
as yet (although the PC gives me the option of doing that in the future).
Alternatively I could get the A3000 then next year get the PC...
Any thoughts, other ideas etc...I'm after the best quality I can get
for the money (+500 probably!).
Quasimidi Quasar (Cakewalk running on old slow 486 ex-works PC -
whoops I didn't say that). Its got a big pallet of usable sounds,
good effects and some pretty flexible editing.
Having used it for a while as my sole sound source my thirst for
new sounds, greater editability etc is fast leading me to a new
purchase....a sampler.
My budget is about £2000. I'm after a quality sampling/synthesis
tool. My starting options seem to be;
1) Yamaha A3000 - need to see/hear one but FM went ballistic! However
apart from the base cost of £1300 I'd also need to buy a mass
storage device, a CD-ROM for those digital transfers and the optional
Digital I/O board - there goes my most of my dosh...
OR
2) PC based sampler - probably a 166 MMX (might aswell go for the best
the budget allows) PC business spec (since I don't want the bundled
rubbish), a Pinnacal? a Terratec EWS 64??? or card X?
Then I can enjoy Rebirth, Stomper etc etc and all the other quality
software thats in development...
3) A Kurzweil K2000 with sampler option: OK...I think I've broke the budget -
but thats what budgets are for :-) From my research this looks like
a demon machine capable of satisfying both my sampler craving and
need to create fresh sounds.
4) ?
The PC option is a strong conteder, I'm prepared to spend money
upgrading should the need arise and I'm impressed with price/performance
ratio of a lot of the new PC products. I'm not into hard disk recording
as yet (although the PC gives me the option of doing that in the future).
Alternatively I could get the A3000 then next year get the PC...
Any thoughts, other ideas etc...I'm after the best quality I can get
for the money (+500 probably!).
Message 2/26 30-May-97 @ 09:27 AM - RE: Hardware sampling dilemma!
I would say this.....if you can get the PC at a good price
, then get it...
trade or sell your old one
...and then the software will allow you alot of creativity,
plus it will play hours of audio parts
....However it's down to price....
Ok....you've got 2 grand plus your pc to trade or sell.....so if it's a dx266 or something is about 350 quid .....so you should have a budget of about £ 2300.
I get a p166 with 64 Mb ram for 900 quid
...new including v.a.t...(200 of that price is for the ram !!)
...this then means you can utilise a sampler with less
memory....See, you cant get a new sampler with more than
2 or 4 outputs for less than 1K...(akia s2000 or emu esi)and then you must add ram....
....but something like an emax2 secondhand either the 8 mb
turbo, or a 2 mb with upgrade to 8 mb will give alot of
power for around 600 quid....
that then leaves you with around 800 quid out of a 2.3k
budget for the software & other bits
...hey, or if you have the software,
then another 800 quids worth of toys..or a dat recorder...
see, if you are working with a midi & hd software like
Cubase or Cakewalk, then you just open it up,
and off you go...all the large samples are ready to
play each time you open the song....you can use a cheap
ZIP drive with the emax2, and also connect a CD rom if
needs be.....
So....i would say.....
get a p133 or 166 with 64 mb....for about 800-900 quid....
emax2 for 600 quid....
zip drive for about 120 quid......
then I'd add to that the new EVENT electronics
Gina 8 output card for 300 quid.....
or the Darla with spdif for 500 quid
if you decide to get a dat
...cos then you can digitally backup all your pc H/D
audio via s/pdif....
total should be about 1850....leaving you about 500 quid left over...(if your budget is 2k plus the dx sold for about 350....)
BUT you will have....8 seperate 20 bit audio pc outs.....
8 seperate sampler poly outs...
(18 bit converters on the emax2...very high quality)....
otherwise....go for the K2000 secondhand with the sample option & stack up the ram & add a Zip drive or Jaz drive..(K2000 has scsi as standard too).....and keep the old
computer.....
ps...i wouldn't recommend an MMX, as there really aint
any software designed to utilise it....getting 64 mb ram
with a standard 166 chip will be much more effective...
with this you can also utilise stuff like the rebirth software etc....
oh yes....the emax2 also has some great sounds besides being just a sampler...I offer it as an option ,cos to get a new sampler with 8 outputs and 8 mb will be at the least about 1800 quid...by the time you've added the seperate out option and the ram option...and all that hidden extras.....I dunno why folks ignore the emax2...I mean it's 16 bit & has got 10 18 bit poly outs....synthesis section...32 note poly (2 samples per key)... scsi as standard etc...
the other thing is, the pc can also compile your masters and stuff or allow you to remix your oldies...If you already have a dat, I'd get the Gina card with s/pdif for 2 way digital transfer....(& 8 analog outputs)
, then get it...
trade or sell your old one
...and then the software will allow you alot of creativity,
plus it will play hours of audio parts
....However it's down to price....
Ok....you've got 2 grand plus your pc to trade or sell.....so if it's a dx266 or something is about 350 quid .....so you should have a budget of about £ 2300.
I get a p166 with 64 Mb ram for 900 quid
...new including v.a.t...(200 of that price is for the ram !!)
...this then means you can utilise a sampler with less
memory....See, you cant get a new sampler with more than
2 or 4 outputs for less than 1K...(akia s2000 or emu esi)and then you must add ram....
....but something like an emax2 secondhand either the 8 mb
turbo, or a 2 mb with upgrade to 8 mb will give alot of
power for around 600 quid....
that then leaves you with around 800 quid out of a 2.3k
budget for the software & other bits
...hey, or if you have the software,
then another 800 quids worth of toys..or a dat recorder...
see, if you are working with a midi & hd software like
Cubase or Cakewalk, then you just open it up,
and off you go...all the large samples are ready to
play each time you open the song....you can use a cheap
ZIP drive with the emax2, and also connect a CD rom if
needs be.....
So....i would say.....
get a p133 or 166 with 64 mb....for about 800-900 quid....
emax2 for 600 quid....
zip drive for about 120 quid......
then I'd add to that the new EVENT electronics
Gina 8 output card for 300 quid.....
or the Darla with spdif for 500 quid
if you decide to get a dat
...cos then you can digitally backup all your pc H/D
audio via s/pdif....
total should be about 1850....leaving you about 500 quid left over...(if your budget is 2k plus the dx sold for about 350....)
BUT you will have....8 seperate 20 bit audio pc outs.....
8 seperate sampler poly outs...
(18 bit converters on the emax2...very high quality)....
otherwise....go for the K2000 secondhand with the sample option & stack up the ram & add a Zip drive or Jaz drive..(K2000 has scsi as standard too).....and keep the old
computer.....
ps...i wouldn't recommend an MMX, as there really aint
any software designed to utilise it....getting 64 mb ram
with a standard 166 chip will be much more effective...
with this you can also utilise stuff like the rebirth software etc....
oh yes....the emax2 also has some great sounds besides being just a sampler...I offer it as an option ,cos to get a new sampler with 8 outputs and 8 mb will be at the least about 1800 quid...by the time you've added the seperate out option and the ram option...and all that hidden extras.....I dunno why folks ignore the emax2...I mean it's 16 bit & has got 10 18 bit poly outs....synthesis section...32 note poly (2 samples per key)... scsi as standard etc...
the other thing is, the pc can also compile your masters and stuff or allow you to remix your oldies...If you already have a dat, I'd get the Gina card with s/pdif for 2 way digital transfer....(& 8 analog outputs)
Message 3/26 30-May-97 @ 04:52 PM - RE: Hardware sampling dilemma!
Thanks for the suggestions - certainly food for thought...
I notice you didn't reference PC sampling soundcards
- are they not cutting it against the dedicated boxes?
I take your point about MMX - I could always upgrade if
the goods ever get delivered.
Any good web resources for the Emax 2? Know anywhere I could
audition one? (I'm in the West Country) Or even where I
could get my hand on some demo tunes?
How would you rate the flexibility of sample editing/synthesis
between the K2000 and the EMAX2. Is the VAST synthesis
on the K2000 something special - I'm happy to spend lots
of time creating sounds....OR is there PC software out there
that would open up plenty of those sonic possibilities? (I'm
familiar with some of the WAV editors - I guess I'm driving
more at the synthesis side here)
What about effects? With all those sampler outs/PC ins
are there any good/flexible software effects available - or
would you go for cheap rack effect units?
Cheers for now...
I notice you didn't reference PC sampling soundcards
- are they not cutting it against the dedicated boxes?
I take your point about MMX - I could always upgrade if
the goods ever get delivered.
Any good web resources for the Emax 2? Know anywhere I could
audition one? (I'm in the West Country) Or even where I
could get my hand on some demo tunes?
How would you rate the flexibility of sample editing/synthesis
between the K2000 and the EMAX2. Is the VAST synthesis
on the K2000 something special - I'm happy to spend lots
of time creating sounds....OR is there PC software out there
that would open up plenty of those sonic possibilities? (I'm
familiar with some of the WAV editors - I guess I'm driving
more at the synthesis side here)
What about effects? With all those sampler outs/PC ins
are there any good/flexible software effects available - or
would you go for cheap rack effect units?
Cheers for now...
Message 4/26 30-May-97 @ 05:53 PM - RE: Hardware sampling dilemma!
I'd always go for seperate outs with good cheap hardware
fx...no need to sweat the CPU needlessly
...that is why I'm so excited about the Event cards
....cos the PC midi & h/d software can act like a sampler
taking the task of playing all the big audio bits
....the problem was always getting seperation in the mix
.....before if you wanted to go that way..it meant buying
several cards
with all the inherent cost & processor strain.....
now with these event cards, anyone can have 8 glorious seperate high quality audio sends for about the same price as a medium priced multi-FX unit or cheap synth....wicked !!...
If you're really into synthesis
...then go with the K2000....
it's synthesis section is totally unrivalled
....plus they read K2000 samples, Akai s1000 samples,
.wav, Roland S770/750 , and Ensonique..!!....
the synthesis is totally awesome...yet so well organised with a BIG LCD screen & easy to understand soft-edit buttons.......Kurzwiel reckon it is capable of ANY type of synthesis.....anyway...very very good synth/sampler...but...expensive....be lucky & find a cheap s/h version 3 software...but with sampling option its going to finish your budget......go for it tho !!
I just said what I did before, cos most folks equate an expensive sampler with an ability to have loads of memory to play lots of audio parts.....thats why I mentioned the card & software idea.....however obviously, synthesis is not an issue for that type of method.....The emax is yes...very good little synt witha wicked library, but you cant really compare it to the K2000....however, you can make alot of interesting sounds with the K2000...but honestly...for dance chewns I use it very little...cos it doesnt really have dance sounds, which by definition always come from cheap kit, or what was cheap kit...or rather...not so sophisticated kit.....the K2000 does great analog polysynths...but they're not really a much used dance sound.....it will not really do yer 303 stuff...not like the rebirth, no way.....So what I'm saying is...it depends what type of dance you're doing....cos..yes the K2000 is wicked...but it's not really a "dance" synth per-se....thats why for sampling with good synthesis..(good but not over thetop like the K2)...I suggested the emax...1 or 2...you can create samples & that, then if the memory runs out, send that audio over from the sampler to the PC software to be played from there...
I dont really like software FX unless they are previewable and processable in realtime, such as with SAW+......hardware is always better....also you get live realtime control of your fx when you mix....
sampler cards.....well....they are ok...and will do the jobby.....Lookit...why not get a good demo somewhere of the Pinnacle or/and Terratec....it's just that yes they are cheap...but limited outputs...still...yes it's an option without doubt...
fx...no need to sweat the CPU needlessly
...that is why I'm so excited about the Event cards
....cos the PC midi & h/d software can act like a sampler
taking the task of playing all the big audio bits
....the problem was always getting seperation in the mix
.....before if you wanted to go that way..it meant buying
several cards
with all the inherent cost & processor strain.....
now with these event cards, anyone can have 8 glorious seperate high quality audio sends for about the same price as a medium priced multi-FX unit or cheap synth....wicked !!...
If you're really into synthesis
...then go with the K2000....
it's synthesis section is totally unrivalled
....plus they read K2000 samples, Akai s1000 samples,
.wav, Roland S770/750 , and Ensonique..!!....
the synthesis is totally awesome...yet so well organised with a BIG LCD screen & easy to understand soft-edit buttons.......Kurzwiel reckon it is capable of ANY type of synthesis.....anyway...very very good synth/sampler...but...expensive....be lucky & find a cheap s/h version 3 software...but with sampling option its going to finish your budget......go for it tho !!
I just said what I did before, cos most folks equate an expensive sampler with an ability to have loads of memory to play lots of audio parts.....thats why I mentioned the card & software idea.....however obviously, synthesis is not an issue for that type of method.....The emax is yes...very good little synt witha wicked library, but you cant really compare it to the K2000....however, you can make alot of interesting sounds with the K2000...but honestly...for dance chewns I use it very little...cos it doesnt really have dance sounds, which by definition always come from cheap kit, or what was cheap kit...or rather...not so sophisticated kit.....the K2000 does great analog polysynths...but they're not really a much used dance sound.....it will not really do yer 303 stuff...not like the rebirth, no way.....So what I'm saying is...it depends what type of dance you're doing....cos..yes the K2000 is wicked...but it's not really a "dance" synth per-se....thats why for sampling with good synthesis..(good but not over thetop like the K2)...I suggested the emax...1 or 2...you can create samples & that, then if the memory runs out, send that audio over from the sampler to the PC software to be played from there...
I dont really like software FX unless they are previewable and processable in realtime, such as with SAW+......hardware is always better....also you get live realtime control of your fx when you mix....
sampler cards.....well....they are ok...and will do the jobby.....Lookit...why not get a good demo somewhere of the Pinnacle or/and Terratec....it's just that yes they are cheap...but limited outputs...still...yes it's an option without doubt...
Message 5/26 30-May-97 @ 06:01 PM - RE: Hardware sampling dilemma!
I have to qualify the above by saying that
....mega synths are brilliant to own
....but somehow dance music revolves around very minimal
stuff.....you dont really get big dance synth type
productions....most tracks, once you pass the drums
& bassline use very little else.....
say just a simple cheap yamaha FM synth
organ riff or something
......however you might have Orb-like aspirations
.....but still, cluttered dance tracks are very rare
.....So I'm just saying, that buying a 4000
quid Trinity or mega K2000/K2500...
with all the gubbins,
it still aint going to get you that sound.....
....mega synths are brilliant to own
....but somehow dance music revolves around very minimal
stuff.....you dont really get big dance synth type
productions....most tracks, once you pass the drums
& bassline use very little else.....
say just a simple cheap yamaha FM synth
organ riff or something
......however you might have Orb-like aspirations
.....but still, cluttered dance tracks are very rare
.....So I'm just saying, that buying a 4000
quid Trinity or mega K2000/K2500...
with all the gubbins,
it still aint going to get you that sound.....
Message 6/26 30-May-97 @ 10:43 PM - RE: Hardware sampling dilemma!
You raise some interesting points - I get where you're coming
from re minimal sounds being used for dance - I'm a fan of
the basic but really get off on rich layers of sounds,
dynamically shifting & mututating. The K2000 option does blow
the budget and as we've said eliminates me from the new
PC developments - I'm reluctant to put all my (hard earnt)
eggs in one basket.
So running the with the PC/Emax option I'll be running up to 8
mono tracks right? This is new to me - being used to my
simple stereo out on the quasar - having no mixing/eq
experience (beyond some practical DJ experience) - differences
between stereo/mono is obvious say when listening to the
radio - stereo means soundstage - what about on the mixing
front - what are the issues and how do I create a stereo-
sounding mix even if I'm working in mono?
On the Emax front - I'll be buying second hand - do you know
of any classic problems to be aware of so I don't get suckered?
Thanks for your help
Craig
from re minimal sounds being used for dance - I'm a fan of
the basic but really get off on rich layers of sounds,
dynamically shifting & mututating. The K2000 option does blow
the budget and as we've said eliminates me from the new
PC developments - I'm reluctant to put all my (hard earnt)
eggs in one basket.
So running the with the PC/Emax option I'll be running up to 8
mono tracks right? This is new to me - being used to my
simple stereo out on the quasar - having no mixing/eq
experience (beyond some practical DJ experience) - differences
between stereo/mono is obvious say when listening to the
radio - stereo means soundstage - what about on the mixing
front - what are the issues and how do I create a stereo-
sounding mix even if I'm working in mono?
On the Emax front - I'll be buying second hand - do you know
of any classic problems to be aware of so I don't get suckered?
Thanks for your help
Craig
Message 7/26 31-May-97 @ 10:02 AM - RE: Hardware sampling dilemma!
Further thoughts...
The mixing is all taken care of on the PC right? Should
EQ be separate (following on from not taxing the CPU)?
One of the most frustrating things for me at the moment
is that I can't EQ which means bugger all separation -
I'd want swept mid EQ yeh?
On the dance minimal sounds point again - the Quasar gives
me a wealth of fat synths, acid squelches (although Rebirth
will be a desktop shortcut guaranteed!) etc so the basic
sounds I've got access to. Its the Goldie cum Way out West
cum Orbital cum you get the idea type flexibility/sounds
I'd like to be in the vicinity of.
So with a P166, 64MB RAM, EVENT card etc with the PC
playing the bigger samples, running 8 busy tracks (for the
sake of argument)- would you envisage resource/timing
problems?
Cheers
The mixing is all taken care of on the PC right? Should
EQ be separate (following on from not taxing the CPU)?
One of the most frustrating things for me at the moment
is that I can't EQ which means bugger all separation -
I'd want swept mid EQ yeh?
On the dance minimal sounds point again - the Quasar gives
me a wealth of fat synths, acid squelches (although Rebirth
will be a desktop shortcut guaranteed!) etc so the basic
sounds I've got access to. Its the Goldie cum Way out West
cum Orbital cum you get the idea type flexibility/sounds
I'd like to be in the vicinity of.
So with a P166, 64MB RAM, EVENT card etc with the PC
playing the bigger samples, running 8 busy tracks (for the
sake of argument)- would you envisage resource/timing
problems?
Cheers
Message 8/26 01-Jun-97 @ 09:27 PM - RE: Hardware sampling dilemma!
well, even a p100 - 133 with about 32 mb should run 8 tracks of audio ok.....it does help obviously to get the pc set up right, & not to load up the machine with loads of junk novelty programmes, games etc.....also get dos loaded high, and any resident desktop stuff that auto-loads dumped off, but that should handle it easily with a pci bus card......
so......say a track uses about 30 seconds worth of different loops....(which is a BIG amount by any standards....plus about a minute of vocal hooks or lines....the pc will play em fine....now we are getting very very cheap high quality multi audio outs,,.....so the last barrier...(seperate outs for mixing) is broken.....to get that much audio before would mean getting a sampler with mb's of memory....a feature usually only available with very expensive upper end samplers.......but it also opens up other areas...like easy re-mixing, stereo compliation & editing etc..
I'm not saying do it this way....i'm saying it's an option......otherwise all the bigger priced newer sampler swill give synthesis and plenty of memory & outs...The k2000/2500 just happens to be a bit different in that it's first a synth..to which sampling can be added.......but upper end emu samplers will also give wicked synthesis too, with many library disks utilising the syntheisi to give sounds from many of emu's top end synths....likewise with roland samplers & the akai stuff from the s2000 up will also do some nice sounds...but I think its fair to say that kurzwiel & emu are the best at synthsis....also , the k series have lage rom sample memories dedicatedto the synth engine....you can also add up to 2 extra rom banks of 4 mb each featuring more syntn & other sounds....
it sounds like you are looking for more interesting stuff .....combinations of sampling & h/d audio will open up lots of interesting areas....
so......say a track uses about 30 seconds worth of different loops....(which is a BIG amount by any standards....plus about a minute of vocal hooks or lines....the pc will play em fine....now we are getting very very cheap high quality multi audio outs,,.....so the last barrier...(seperate outs for mixing) is broken.....to get that much audio before would mean getting a sampler with mb's of memory....a feature usually only available with very expensive upper end samplers.......but it also opens up other areas...like easy re-mixing, stereo compliation & editing etc..
I'm not saying do it this way....i'm saying it's an option......otherwise all the bigger priced newer sampler swill give synthesis and plenty of memory & outs...The k2000/2500 just happens to be a bit different in that it's first a synth..to which sampling can be added.......but upper end emu samplers will also give wicked synthesis too, with many library disks utilising the syntheisi to give sounds from many of emu's top end synths....likewise with roland samplers & the akai stuff from the s2000 up will also do some nice sounds...but I think its fair to say that kurzwiel & emu are the best at synthsis....also , the k series have lage rom sample memories dedicatedto the synth engine....you can also add up to 2 extra rom banks of 4 mb each featuring more syntn & other sounds....
it sounds like you are looking for more interesting stuff .....combinations of sampling & h/d audio will open up lots of interesting areas....
Message 9/26 02-Jun-97 @ 07:20 AM - RE: Hardware sampling dilemma!
Craig,
I think you need to check out the specs on the pinnacle sound card. It contains a fairly decent selection of the K-2000's sounds and voices. Again, check into this, it may help to save you a fat wad of cash.
In response to your dilemma over software vs rack effects, I would have to say go the software route first. Programs like Steinberg's Wave Lab, Sound Forge, and SAW have pretty good on board effects. If you add the available plug ins the programs really kick.
Since processor speed and RAM is always a concern try doing your mix down w/out any EQ. Then, after you've done that you can bounce it back to your hard drive. Now you have a simple sterio track that you can apply any EQ or mastering to without the processor overload.
This method is a little long and ( depending on your recording medium ) can degrade the mix. But, thats why they made mastering plug ins.
I think you need to check out the specs on the pinnacle sound card. It contains a fairly decent selection of the K-2000's sounds and voices. Again, check into this, it may help to save you a fat wad of cash.
In response to your dilemma over software vs rack effects, I would have to say go the software route first. Programs like Steinberg's Wave Lab, Sound Forge, and SAW have pretty good on board effects. If you add the available plug ins the programs really kick.
Since processor speed and RAM is always a concern try doing your mix down w/out any EQ. Then, after you've done that you can bounce it back to your hard drive. Now you have a simple sterio track that you can apply any EQ or mastering to without the processor overload.
This method is a little long and ( depending on your recording medium ) can degrade the mix. But, thats why they made mastering plug ins.
Message 10/26 02-Jun-97 @ 10:48 AM - RE: Hardware sampling dilemma!
no...can't agree....the balance of seperate stuff
especially drums is critical
.....wavelab is an export & process programme,
so these fx are not going to show until you've processed
them in the mix....SAW+ is ok for realtime fx...but,
no midi...so it's really for re-mixing.....
same with forge...it's not a midi & h/d programme
...so it's export & process again...plus
...Wavelab is like 400 quid....which is enough to cover
a delay & reverb unit & a decent mixer
.....seperate output mixing will always be more immediate
than software fx...plus the mixer will
accomadate all your outboard midi kit.....
plus....multiple sepate audio outs will allow
you to easily do remixing of tracks too....
it's just that in realtime with ISA based cards, adding a realtime reverb patch uses tons of processing, and you'll be lucky to get 4 tracks whilst applying it....thus it means all this sending an audio file to be processed, then sending it back,,,,then if it dont sound right re-doing it etc etc....Then the pluggins stuff....well a real delay & reverb are just hardware pluggins really, except they use internal de3dicated processors, and, they are patched in with analog connections as opposed to digital......so I'd always always go this route....not least because combining real hardware fx with a mixer can get you fx impossible to acheive with software pluggins, plus you can add other fx or processors like gates to give you wicked rhythmic stuff etc etc...
I would perhaps uses the software approach say to add
some simple fx to a small limited amount of audio such
as adding reverb to a vocal part etc.....but if you can
go with hardware,,,,I'd go that route...
Lastly...the pinnacle is ok...but it costs about half as much again as the event 8 output card, then you have to add ram.....and the Kurzwiel chip is not a k2 synth, it's a limited kurzwiel chip they licence out.....it will not be like a k2000, no way....also the pinnacle gives only stereo outs...better by far to have seperate outputs.....so check it out.....however it is an option if you decide that k2000/2500 synthesis is over the top for what you need...
especially drums is critical
.....wavelab is an export & process programme,
so these fx are not going to show until you've processed
them in the mix....SAW+ is ok for realtime fx...but,
no midi...so it's really for re-mixing.....
same with forge...it's not a midi & h/d programme
...so it's export & process again...plus
...Wavelab is like 400 quid....which is enough to cover
a delay & reverb unit & a decent mixer
.....seperate output mixing will always be more immediate
than software fx...plus the mixer will
accomadate all your outboard midi kit.....
plus....multiple sepate audio outs will allow
you to easily do remixing of tracks too....
it's just that in realtime with ISA based cards, adding a realtime reverb patch uses tons of processing, and you'll be lucky to get 4 tracks whilst applying it....thus it means all this sending an audio file to be processed, then sending it back,,,,then if it dont sound right re-doing it etc etc....Then the pluggins stuff....well a real delay & reverb are just hardware pluggins really, except they use internal de3dicated processors, and, they are patched in with analog connections as opposed to digital......so I'd always always go this route....not least because combining real hardware fx with a mixer can get you fx impossible to acheive with software pluggins, plus you can add other fx or processors like gates to give you wicked rhythmic stuff etc etc...
I would perhaps uses the software approach say to add
some simple fx to a small limited amount of audio such
as adding reverb to a vocal part etc.....but if you can
go with hardware,,,,I'd go that route...
Lastly...the pinnacle is ok...but it costs about half as much again as the event 8 output card, then you have to add ram.....and the Kurzwiel chip is not a k2 synth, it's a limited kurzwiel chip they licence out.....it will not be like a k2000, no way....also the pinnacle gives only stereo outs...better by far to have seperate outputs.....so check it out.....however it is an option if you decide that k2000/2500 synthesis is over the top for what you need...
Message 11/26 02-Jun-97 @ 03:29 PM - RE: Hardware sampling dilemma!
OK - there seem to be quite a few options.
Let me just check something out - the PC setup suggestion
would work as follows...(for example)
PC running Cakewalk Pro Audio sending midi data to Quasar
and Emax II. When free mem on Emax is running low, transfer
samples to Cakewalk audio track, sequence the resulting
.wav? files just as you would midi notes (obviously without
the controller data etc). (are we talking sample dump?!?)
OK so any effects we'll say are being applied by external
hardware. This is where I'm unsure about the config. The
effects are applied on given midi channels. How are the
effect units patched into this. Does the PC audio output
go via the mixer to the effects then back into the PC for
digital recording? I'm hazy on this area - I've looked around
the rest of your set (must admit studio setups are not a
strong area for me) - Please give a description of how it
plugs together/works - sorry for the tedium - I'm just
getting a bit lost!
Let me just check something out - the PC setup suggestion
would work as follows...(for example)
PC running Cakewalk Pro Audio sending midi data to Quasar
and Emax II. When free mem on Emax is running low, transfer
samples to Cakewalk audio track, sequence the resulting
.wav? files just as you would midi notes (obviously without
the controller data etc). (are we talking sample dump?!?)
OK so any effects we'll say are being applied by external
hardware. This is where I'm unsure about the config. The
effects are applied on given midi channels. How are the
effect units patched into this. Does the PC audio output
go via the mixer to the effects then back into the PC for
digital recording? I'm hazy on this area - I've looked around
the rest of your set (must admit studio setups are not a
strong area for me) - Please give a description of how it
plugs together/works - sorry for the tedium - I'm just
getting a bit lost!
Message 12/26 02-Jun-97 @ 05:33 PM - RE: Hardware sampling dilemma!
ok....use the emax or whatever sampler as you said...if you run out of sample space (with 8 mb max on a Emax2 this is very unlikely)...you can record the stuff over to the pc audio tracks...or from the outset simply record the long audio parts and loops into the pc.....
Ok......yes....all the emax & pc and Quasimidi audio sends go to the mixer....then add hardware based fx from the mixer.....yes, if you like you can also record the hardware fx as wav files and add them inside the pc to the track if you like.....if you did that then balanced the levels with software, it would be possible to send the whole lot via a s/pdif to a dat as a direct digital transfer, however, mixing everything with the mixer down to dat is probably more fast & intuitive.....planning and setting all the levels is ok...but sometimes some real cool stuff happens when you just set up a mix on the hardware mixer....then just go for like 20 minutes of live mixing to stereo dat....afterwards you can playback, select some real cool bits and paste 'em together.........there is a certain spontanious quality you get when you mix live.....but then what about the mistakes??....with hard disk you can let go and mix without worrying about mistakes...often you come up with real cool ideas....you can also setup & rehearse complicated fx feature moments....then record the FX pass to hard disk, then mix it into the track that way....so you can do realtime FX hardware manipulating (of more than one pot or control knob if needs be), then have that one special echo or reverb effect playback at just the right moment every time.....in stereo if you like.....if say the echo effect is stereo , at full bandwidth and lasts for say 5 seconds, that is already alot of sampler memory down the drain....but with H/D audio, you get 3 hours playback from a 170 dollar disk !!....add to this seperate outs for eq'ing etc on the hardware mixer, and those special fx can have their own seperate stereo channels eq'd just exactly right....
The effects are applied on the mixer with this setup, but you can record & manipulate them too, or mix and match hardware fx, and pc processed fx....simply put, realtime hardware fx do not impose any strain on the pc...so it is free to play as much audio & midi in sync as possible.....some fx units can be manipulated via midi, ...either to change effect at a given time, or say, to control thr reverb decay time from a modulation wheel etc...but that is coincidental to that brand & model of effect unit.....doing all the above can be done with any effects units....hey....you can do alot you know !!.....fx are applied via send controls on each instruments dedicated mixer cahnnel...then the fx returns are blended in with the final stereo mix....
of course you need a decent pc.....nothing over the top, but like if you buy your pc at high street store prices, then maybe this isn't a good plan I have suggested,.....but, if you can get a p100-166 with 32 mb ram minimum for a cheap realistic price, then it is a good cost effective method....(I pay about £ 650 UK sterling for a new p133......£ 900 for a p166 with 64 mb and a 1.6 drive, 8x cd rom and 1mb 64 bit graphics....that is about an average fair brand new prices for these kind of machines...)
Ok......yes....all the emax & pc and Quasimidi audio sends go to the mixer....then add hardware based fx from the mixer.....yes, if you like you can also record the hardware fx as wav files and add them inside the pc to the track if you like.....if you did that then balanced the levels with software, it would be possible to send the whole lot via a s/pdif to a dat as a direct digital transfer, however, mixing everything with the mixer down to dat is probably more fast & intuitive.....planning and setting all the levels is ok...but sometimes some real cool stuff happens when you just set up a mix on the hardware mixer....then just go for like 20 minutes of live mixing to stereo dat....afterwards you can playback, select some real cool bits and paste 'em together.........there is a certain spontanious quality you get when you mix live.....but then what about the mistakes??....with hard disk you can let go and mix without worrying about mistakes...often you come up with real cool ideas....you can also setup & rehearse complicated fx feature moments....then record the FX pass to hard disk, then mix it into the track that way....so you can do realtime FX hardware manipulating (of more than one pot or control knob if needs be), then have that one special echo or reverb effect playback at just the right moment every time.....in stereo if you like.....if say the echo effect is stereo , at full bandwidth and lasts for say 5 seconds, that is already alot of sampler memory down the drain....but with H/D audio, you get 3 hours playback from a 170 dollar disk !!....add to this seperate outs for eq'ing etc on the hardware mixer, and those special fx can have their own seperate stereo channels eq'd just exactly right....
The effects are applied on the mixer with this setup, but you can record & manipulate them too, or mix and match hardware fx, and pc processed fx....simply put, realtime hardware fx do not impose any strain on the pc...so it is free to play as much audio & midi in sync as possible.....some fx units can be manipulated via midi, ...either to change effect at a given time, or say, to control thr reverb decay time from a modulation wheel etc...but that is coincidental to that brand & model of effect unit.....doing all the above can be done with any effects units....hey....you can do alot you know !!.....fx are applied via send controls on each instruments dedicated mixer cahnnel...then the fx returns are blended in with the final stereo mix....
of course you need a decent pc.....nothing over the top, but like if you buy your pc at high street store prices, then maybe this isn't a good plan I have suggested,.....but, if you can get a p100-166 with 32 mb ram minimum for a cheap realistic price, then it is a good cost effective method....(I pay about £ 650 UK sterling for a new p133......£ 900 for a p166 with 64 mb and a 1.6 drive, 8x cd rom and 1mb 64 bit graphics....that is about an average fair brand new prices for these kind of machines...)
Message 13/26 03-Jun-97 @ 08:33 AM - RE: Hardware sampling dilemma!
OK - that clarifies things for me - thanks
Have you any experience on Ensoniq samplers?
Have you any experience on Ensoniq samplers?
Message 14/26 03-Jun-97 @ 08:55 AM - RE: Hardware sampling dilemma!
Not really....although one of the guys here has an ensonique...but we never use it.....they are supposed to be ok tho.....really there's not to much in it between all the samplers.....except emu's have the fattest sound in my opinion.....I should say maybe, that I do also have a K2000....yet never hardly use it for samples....I always use the emax1's as they have a very raw upfront sound...cant really explain it, the kurzwiel & also I've done direct comparisons with one other 16 bit sampler ...the S1000....somehow the emax 1's have a more upfront punchy sound....for some sounds this can be a disadvantage......but generally I like that sound....so it's personal I suppose...although in the s1000 case both I and the engineer agreed to go with the emax for that particular remix...They do have very high end outputs...remember the emax 1 & 2 were 3000 & 5000 (uk sterling) respectively when they were brand new....when high end converters were expensive....and high quality (18 bit outs on the emax2...and NOT shared on either)...now manufacturers can grab some generic 16 bit ada's for a few bucks from taiwan....so 16 bit doesn't necessarily equate with...."great sound"....
so I cant really say about ensonique....you'd best check em out....
so I cant really say about ensonique....you'd best check em out....
Message 15/26 03-Jun-97 @ 10:17 AM - RE: Hardware sampling dilemma!
If a sampler doesn't offer internal resampling is their
much signal loss by resampling the output via the in?
Also, is midi sample dump the only practical method of
moving samples between PC and sampler. Could you give me
some idea how long it takes to transfer X KB via midi
sample dump?
In most of your responses you stress the number of outs, is
this because greater flexibility can be had in how you
treat those outs? E.g my quasar has a rather large flaw in
that if you choose to use the 4 mono outs on the back
the FX procs are disabled. This means everything must be
processed on the Quasar meaning EQ would have to be applied
to the whole out. BTW is it always possible to use a
stereo out as two mono outs by panning individual tracks
left and right - in which case I could have make it two
mono outs utilising the effects (although I wouldn't then
be able to use the 4 uneffected outs for other tracks!)
Cheers
much signal loss by resampling the output via the in?
Also, is midi sample dump the only practical method of
moving samples between PC and sampler. Could you give me
some idea how long it takes to transfer X KB via midi
sample dump?
In most of your responses you stress the number of outs, is
this because greater flexibility can be had in how you
treat those outs? E.g my quasar has a rather large flaw in
that if you choose to use the 4 mono outs on the back
the FX procs are disabled. This means everything must be
processed on the Quasar meaning EQ would have to be applied
to the whole out. BTW is it always possible to use a
stereo out as two mono outs by panning individual tracks
left and right - in which case I could have make it two
mono outs utilising the effects (although I wouldn't then
be able to use the 4 uneffected outs for other tracks!)
Cheers
Message 16/26 03-Jun-97 @ 01:56 PM - RE: Hardware sampling dilemma!
Ahhh....but the Emax2 does do internal resampling,.......here's the press blurb from Emu:
Andrew Cross : (E-Mu) With the Emulator III, E-mu Systems established the professional standard in digital sound
reproduction. Now E-mu introduces the Emax II 16 Bit Digital Sound System, a new family of instruments and
peripherals that exploit our latest generation of custom VLSI technology to offer true Emulator III sound quality at a
substantially more modest price. Available in rack-mount or keyboard form, Emax II is both a professional 16-bit
sampler and a powerful synthesizer utilizing E-mu's Spectrum Interpolation Digital Synthesis.
At the heart of the Emax II is the same custom digital audio technology found in the E-mu Proteus, described by
Electronic Musician magazine as "the cleanest, clearest, quietest electronic instrument I've ever heard." The Emax II
is designed to reproduce sound with a dynamic range and lack of noise and distortion approaching the theoretical
limits of the 16 bit data format. Its proprietary pitch-shifting technique allows virtually distortion-free transposition of
samples and synthesized waveforms over a full ten octave range.
Emax II combines user sampling and the extraordinary realism of sampled sounds with the creative power of digital
synthesis. Spectrum Interpolation Digital Synthesis, first introduced in the Emax SE, is E-mu's user-friendly
implementation of additive synthesis. Spectrum Synthesis allows the creation of a virtually limitless variety of
dynamically evolving timbres, without the tedious and time-consuming programming usually associated with additive
synthesis. In the Emax II, Spectrum Synthesis has been enhanced to take full advantage of the 16 bit data format
and the Emax II's faster and more powerful central processor.
Designed specifically for the reproduction of true stereo samples, Emax II's 32 audio channels are configured as 16
stereo voices or 16 monophonic voices with true stereo chorusing. 32 custom digital lowpass filters provide
"analog-style" timbre control with the reliability and consistency of digital design. 18-bit DACs (Digital to Analog
Converters) for each of the Emax II's eight programmable polyphonic outputs (configured as 4 stereo pairs) provide the
user with increased dynamic range and a unique user adjustable headroom function to maximize dynamic range for
any application. In addition, integral sends and returns for each output allow the addition of external effects units
without the need for a separate mixer.
Emax II also offers true 16-bit DSP (Digital Signal Processing) functions including Digital Sample Rate Conversion,
Digital Pitch Conversion, and Transform Multiplication- a sample by sample processing of two digital sounds which
result in one new and unique sound. MIDI Analyzer allows you to view real-time MIDI information. Emax II also
provides a "scratchpad" multitimbral MIDI sequencer. With its Super Mode function, you can transfer compositions
from external sequencers directly to the Emax II, eliminating the need to carry a separate computer or dedicated
sequencer.
In keeping with E-mu Systems' position as the leader in sound library support, Emax II provides immediate access to
the industry's most extensive sampled sound library. In addition to being able to read and play all original Emax
sound disks (including Optical Media International's "Universe of Sounds" CD-ROMs), Emax II arrives with its own
large (and ever-growing) selection of 16 bit stereo and mono samples digitally transferred from the legendary Emulator
III sound library.
To support a wide range of applications and user requirements, Emax II offers a variety of system configuration and
expansion options. Its internal memory may be increased to a total of 8 megabytes and a very quiet and rugged
40MB internal hard disk drive is available for fast load times and convenient mass data storage.
For further flexibility, a SCSI (Small Computer Systems Interface) port offers additional storage and performance
capabilities. Macintosh compatible storage devices including the new 600-Mb Optical Re-Writeable drives as well as
E-mu's own RM45 (a rackmount 45 MB removable cartridge hard drive) and HD300 (300 MB rackmount hard drive)
allow extremely fast data transfer and convenient archival data storage. To take maximum advantage of its SCSI
capabilities, Emax II includes a powerful disk operating system that allows access to multiple drives and provides a
backup and restore function with user- configurable automated backup routines.
For the dedicated Emax II programer, Alchemy, by Blank Software and Sound Designer II, by Digidesign will offer
powerful, graphic editing programs for the Macintosh computer.
Standard version (rack or keyboard) has 1-Mb internal RAM. A "Turbo" version is available with 4-Mb of internal RAM
plus a 40-Mb internal hard disk drive.
resampling in-to-out will give slightly worse signal quality...but...that can only be done if the sampler will record & play simultaeneously...(rare)
Midi sample dump is real slow....i cant give you times I'm afraid,...but it's slow...I would suggest getting a zip drive with the emax 2 or whatever if it aint got internal HD....some emax2's have a 40mb internal...and you can still get internals for them...
Yes...I was stressing the creative possibilities of seperate channels for treating the sounds.....yes..it's normally the case , even with very expensive synths, that the sounds are FX treatable when in performance mode, orstereo out mode...but the unit would need 16 fx processors to add fx to sounds in multi-mode if you think about it......it's just so much quicker to tweak an eq on the mixer....also, certain fx etc can be created by using a mixer and outboard...like the infamous Prodigy rhythmic distortion sound etc...plus you can combine all the sources to create new wierd & wonderful stuff...but hey, in the end you can be creative with any kit....
Message 17/26 03-Jun-97 @ 02:06 PM - RE: Hardware sampling dilemma!
oh yes....the sequencer in the emax is kak...forget it....er....also no timestretch...however...if you've heard timestretch on the s1000, then you know you aint missing much !!!.....the only thing is....you talk about transfering samples from the pc to the sampler...but I cant think of any samplers except those that read .wav files that yiou could store the samples on the pc....you can get a programme called re-sample pro...but it's an old 16 bit prigramme...I believe that there's a new 32 bit 95 compatible version on the way however...but this simply converts samples from one format to another...but you could use it to store stuff I suppose.....
Message 18/26 04-Jun-97 @ 11:16 AM - RE: Hardware sampling dilemma!
Cheers for info - I'd found the same info off the Emax
homepage the other day - thought I follow up your
suggestion.
OK things are getting much clearer for me now. Homing in
on a few points you made about H/D recording. Basically
the master out of the mixer is connected to the PC card
(stereo in?) and you're recording yourself in the mix
tweaking EQ/FX as you see fit. Full duplex cards are designed
for this so no problem, yeh? Are you just recording it
as a new track within you midi/hd app? Then to listen
back, soloing this new track? Or are you using another
method to capture the mixer feed
In the case of recording an effected part from say a piece
of midi kit, you're recording that mixer out only (?) to
a new track, then able to free up that midi box/effect for
other uses. Then when you reply the sequencer the new
track (i.e. the old effected track) is fed through the mixer
for EQ'ing?
I am on the right lines now?
Any chance you could give me an example of a tune that
involved this type of scenario (recording module output thats
been effected?
Thanks again, appreciate it.
homepage the other day - thought I follow up your
suggestion.
OK things are getting much clearer for me now. Homing in
on a few points you made about H/D recording. Basically
the master out of the mixer is connected to the PC card
(stereo in?) and you're recording yourself in the mix
tweaking EQ/FX as you see fit. Full duplex cards are designed
for this so no problem, yeh? Are you just recording it
as a new track within you midi/hd app? Then to listen
back, soloing this new track? Or are you using another
method to capture the mixer feed
In the case of recording an effected part from say a piece
of midi kit, you're recording that mixer out only (?) to
a new track, then able to free up that midi box/effect for
other uses. Then when you reply the sequencer the new
track (i.e. the old effected track) is fed through the mixer
for EQ'ing?
I am on the right lines now?
Any chance you could give me an example of a tune that
involved this type of scenario (recording module output thats
been effected?
Thanks again, appreciate it.
Message 19/26 04-Jun-97 @ 01:57 PM - RE: Hardware sampling dilemma!
YES....YOU'RE ON THE RIGHT TRACK....The sends from the mixer to the card can be from various sources....see the mixer section dude.
Message 20/26 24-Jun-97 @ 08:38 AM - RE: Hardware sampling dilemma!
Two points missing from this on-going dialog:
1. E-mu puts out some excellent cd-roms that I believe
can only be implemented by the newer higher-end units,
which are really quite amazing and well mapped(yes,
programming is fun, but it is nice to have things just
set up so you can concentrate on writing). This
and the honestly better filters to anything else
available led me to the purchase of my e6400 in spite
of seemingly better deals available.
2. Lo-fi is cool! 12-bit is cool! My S-330 sits next to
the E-mu because sometimes I just like it better(in
fact, ALOT of times I like it better, esp. on loops).
On the other hand, my AWE32 doesn't really do anything
in my kit, because soundcard AND hard-disk sampling
is a pain.
Hell, if you're not using digital audio, the Akai MPC's
are always a fun alternative to computer-based sequencing
systems. I know which one I'd rather have just in terms
of being a writer, the lack of features easily made up for
by the 'fun' factor of the Akai's. All said, I'd sell you
my e6400 for 1800 or 1900 quid, but only because I can get another
another one for cheap from a friend. I don't want to be a
salesman here, because price/performance-wise the EMAX II
really is better (I've seen them for around 500 quid
lately), but mine'll stay with you and hold that price
longer than anything otherwise.
1. E-mu puts out some excellent cd-roms that I believe
can only be implemented by the newer higher-end units,
which are really quite amazing and well mapped(yes,
programming is fun, but it is nice to have things just
set up so you can concentrate on writing). This
and the honestly better filters to anything else
available led me to the purchase of my e6400 in spite
of seemingly better deals available.
2. Lo-fi is cool! 12-bit is cool! My S-330 sits next to
the E-mu because sometimes I just like it better(in
fact, ALOT of times I like it better, esp. on loops).
On the other hand, my AWE32 doesn't really do anything
in my kit, because soundcard AND hard-disk sampling
is a pain.
Hell, if you're not using digital audio, the Akai MPC's
are always a fun alternative to computer-based sequencing
systems. I know which one I'd rather have just in terms
of being a writer, the lack of features easily made up for
by the 'fun' factor of the Akai's. All said, I'd sell you
my e6400 for 1800 or 1900 quid, but only because I can get another
another one for cheap from a friend. I don't want to be a
salesman here, because price/performance-wise the EMAX II
really is better (I've seen them for around 500 quid
lately), but mine'll stay with you and hold that price
longer than anything otherwise.
Message 21/26 24-Jun-97 @ 08:40 AM - RE: Hardware sampling dilemma!
Two points missing from this on-going dialog:
1. E-mu puts out some excellent cd-roms that I believe
can only be implemented by the newer higher-end units,
which are really quite amazing and well mapped(yes,
programming is fun, but it is nice to have things just
set up so you can concentrate on writing). This
and the honestly better filters to anything else
available led me to the purchase of my e6400 in spite
of seemingly better deals available.
2. Lo-fi is cool! 12-bit is cool! My S-330 sits next to
the E-mu because sometimes I just like it better(in
fact, ALOT of times I like it better, esp. on loops).
On the other hand, my AWE32 doesn't really do anything
in my kit, because soundcard AND hard-disk sampling
is a pain.
Hell, if you're not using digital audio, the Akai MPC's
are always a fun alternative to computer-based sequencing
systems. I know which one I'd rather have just in terms
of being a writer, the lack of features easily made up for
by the 'fun' factor of the Akai's. All said, I'd sell you
my e6400 for 1800 or 1900 quid, but only because I can get another
another one for cheap from a friend. I don't want to be a
salesman here, because price/performance-wise the EMAX II
really is better (I've seen them for around 500 quid
lately), but mine'll stay with you and hold that price
longer than anything otherwise.
1. E-mu puts out some excellent cd-roms that I believe
can only be implemented by the newer higher-end units,
which are really quite amazing and well mapped(yes,
programming is fun, but it is nice to have things just
set up so you can concentrate on writing). This
and the honestly better filters to anything else
available led me to the purchase of my e6400 in spite
of seemingly better deals available.
2. Lo-fi is cool! 12-bit is cool! My S-330 sits next to
the E-mu because sometimes I just like it better(in
fact, ALOT of times I like it better, esp. on loops).
On the other hand, my AWE32 doesn't really do anything
in my kit, because soundcard AND hard-disk sampling
is a pain.
Hell, if you're not using digital audio, the Akai MPC's
are always a fun alternative to computer-based sequencing
systems. I know which one I'd rather have just in terms
of being a writer, the lack of features easily made up for
by the 'fun' factor of the Akai's. All said, I'd sell you
my e6400 for 1800 or 1900 quid, but only because I can get another
another one for cheap from a friend. I don't want to be a
salesman here, because price/performance-wise the EMAX II
really is better (I've seen them for around 500 quid
lately), but mine'll stay with you and hold that price
longer than anything otherwise.
Message 22/26 24-Jun-97 @ 08:40 AM - RE: Hardware sampling dilemma!
Two points missing from this on-going dialog:
1. E-mu puts out some excellent cd-roms that I believe
can only be implemented by the newer higher-end units,
which are really quite amazing and well mapped(yes,
programming is fun, but it is nice to have things just
set up so you can concentrate on writing). This
and the honestly better filters to anything else
available led me to the purchase of my e6400 in spite
of seemingly better deals available.
2. Lo-fi is cool! 12-bit is cool! My S-330 sits next to
the E-mu because sometimes I just like it better(in
fact, ALOT of times I like it better, esp. on loops).
On the other hand, my AWE32 doesn't really do anything
in my kit, because soundcard AND hard-disk sampling
is a pain.
Hell, if you're not using digital audio, the Akai MPC's
are always a fun alternative to computer-based sequencing
systems. I know which one I'd rather have just in terms
of being a writer, the lack of features easily made up for
by the 'fun' factor of the Akai's. All said, I'd sell you
my e6400 for 1800 or 1900 quid, but only because I can get another
another one for cheap from a friend. I don't want to be a
salesman here, because price/performance-wise the EMAX II
really is better (I've seen them for around 500 quid
lately), but mine'll stay with you and hold that price
longer than anything otherwise.
1. E-mu puts out some excellent cd-roms that I believe
can only be implemented by the newer higher-end units,
which are really quite amazing and well mapped(yes,
programming is fun, but it is nice to have things just
set up so you can concentrate on writing). This
and the honestly better filters to anything else
available led me to the purchase of my e6400 in spite
of seemingly better deals available.
2. Lo-fi is cool! 12-bit is cool! My S-330 sits next to
the E-mu because sometimes I just like it better(in
fact, ALOT of times I like it better, esp. on loops).
On the other hand, my AWE32 doesn't really do anything
in my kit, because soundcard AND hard-disk sampling
is a pain.
Hell, if you're not using digital audio, the Akai MPC's
are always a fun alternative to computer-based sequencing
systems. I know which one I'd rather have just in terms
of being a writer, the lack of features easily made up for
by the 'fun' factor of the Akai's. All said, I'd sell you
my e6400 for 1800 or 1900 quid, but only because I can get another
another one for cheap from a friend. I don't want to be a
salesman here, because price/performance-wise the EMAX II
really is better (I've seen them for around 500 quid
lately), but mine'll stay with you and hold that price
longer than anything otherwise.
Message 23/26 24-Jun-97 @ 08:55 AM - RE: Hardware sampling dilemma!
Thanks for tip
P.S Heard you the first time
P.P.S The Yamaha's getting some mixed reviews. Anyone any thoughts?
P.S Heard you the first time
P.P.S The Yamaha's getting some mixed reviews. Anyone any thoughts?
Message 24/26 25-Jun-97 @ 08:48 AM - RE: Hardware sampling dilemma!
agreed with some of the triple post....emu's filters and sound surpasses all...I 've never understood why people wank on about Akais being "Industry Standard"....because that is bollox........
I don't agree with the comment about hard disk sampling is a pain......awe32 is a bit weak, but with a tahiti or similar quality card especially the new Event 8 output cards, this is awesome.....I use the pc for all the audio hooks, and longer loops.....brilliant....add to that 8 seperate outs instead of 2, and you are flying...
as for the yamaha, It may be excellent, but yamaha have been out of the game so long, maybe folks will be worried about compatability problems....I think as it is their first sampler for a long time, they should have made it ALOT cheaper.....I'm surprised there isn't an Alesis sampler....seems strange huh?
I don't agree with the comment about hard disk sampling is a pain......awe32 is a bit weak, but with a tahiti or similar quality card especially the new Event 8 output cards, this is awesome.....I use the pc for all the audio hooks, and longer loops.....brilliant....add to that 8 seperate outs instead of 2, and you are flying...
as for the yamaha, It may be excellent, but yamaha have been out of the game so long, maybe folks will be worried about compatability problems....I think as it is their first sampler for a long time, they should have made it ALOT cheaper.....I'm surprised there isn't an Alesis sampler....seems strange huh?
Message 25/26 14-Jul-97 @ 04:22 PM - RE: Hardware sampling dilemma!
Guess what....EMU are bringing out a TURBO kit for their ESI-32
tommorrow (July 15th)!!! The board really boosts the filter count
by 17, adds 2 independent FX units, 6 outputs, Windows 95
SCSI disk friendliness(!) plus some other bits. For the full SP
check out http://www.emu.com
Speaking to Emu this has been planned for 'way before the Yamaha was heard of' (yer right).
Anyway the price is £350 inc VAT so brings the ESI-32 in
at around £60 cheaper than the Yamaha A3000.
My local dealer is boasting arrival of a demo version tommorrow.
Anyone have any insights into this (apart from listing full specs
which we can all read on Emus web site).
Your thoughts...
tommorrow (July 15th)!!! The board really boosts the filter count
by 17, adds 2 independent FX units, 6 outputs, Windows 95
SCSI disk friendliness(!) plus some other bits. For the full SP
check out http://www.emu.com
Speaking to Emu this has been planned for 'way before the Yamaha was heard of' (yer right).
Anyway the price is £350 inc VAT so brings the ESI-32 in
at around £60 cheaper than the Yamaha A3000.
My local dealer is boasting arrival of a demo version tommorrow.
Anyone have any insights into this (apart from listing full specs
which we can all read on Emus web site).
Your thoughts...
Message 26/26 14-Jul-97 @ 07:36 PM - RE: Hardware sampling dilemma!
my thoughts are....I'm fuckin' starving !!.... I'm going home to eat!!....as for samplers....well, er.....If your using a pc, maybe the Terratec EWS-64 card should be looked at !!.....(it's in the soundcards section)
Viewing all 26 messages - View by pages of 10: 1 2 3
There are 26 total messages for this topic
Reply to Thread
You need to register/login to use the forum.
Click here to Signup or Login !
[you'll be brought right back to this point after signing up]
Back to Forum
