Conference napalm::commusic_v1

    Nice review, Bill ... but why did you post it in the WINDSURFING
    conference? ;-} 

-b

    

    What I can't understand is why Alesis, Roland or Yamaha don't put out
    the SGU section of things like the HR16 and R8/R5. Surely they must
    realize that just as there is a market for SGU synths used by people
    with dedicated or software-based sequencers and controllers, these same
    people would want the sounds, a good Midi implementation and NO
    sequencer. 

    I've still got my TR707 which I'd like to upgrade/compliment  but can't
    see the point of paying money for a sequencer I will not use. At least
    Akai have seen a glimpse of the light with their XE8. 

    Alternative: Get a sampler, I guess.

    Any thoughts ? Has anyone seen any indication that Alesis, Roland ..etc
    plan to do something here ?

    Zayed

    My guess is that they have identified a market that demands a sequencer
    on a drum machine, so they know that have to design a version with
    it in.  They could do a version sans sequencer, buttons and so forth,
    but the hardware difference in cost is hardly anything.  So, they
    just put out the one version.
    
    Steve

RE < Note 2094.2 by DRAKAR::HANNA "Watch this space" >

	I totally agree with your frustration.  I have asked a few stores why 
manufacturers don't fill this need and their response was that they didn't
see enough of a market for it.

	Korg put out a rackmount drum box that had the sounds (I think) of the
DDD5.  I believe it still had a sequencer, but at least it was rack-mounted.
I have waited to find a blowout of these, or perhaps someone selling one at a
substantionally reduced price (the lowest I've seen yet was $300 (used).  For
$300, I'd do better to get an HR16 (with much better sounds) and continue to
fumble with non-rackmountable gear.

	The mention of a sampler is o.k. for people with money.  Samplers, good
ones, don't come anywhere near the price of an HR16.  Besides, for a drum box,
all you really need is a good library of percussion sounds - I don't plan on 
doing any sampling if I don't have to.

	What's this Akai XE8 thing?  (Probably should start a new note...)

	Dan

    I agree that rack mounts are the way to go, but I've talked to
    people at Roland and Ensoniq and their experience is that the
    rack-mounts don't sell enough to make them profitable.
    
    I talked to Ensoniq about this just days ago.  They would tell you
    that they "took a licking" on the ESQ-M, and that the sales of
    the EPS-M are "dissapointing" although they remain hopeful.
    
    I dropped a few words in their ear about why they should try a VFX
    rackmount despite their past success, and I got the impression they
    were at the margin of accepting my argument, but they told me they
    had absolutely no plans to do one.
    
    My argument was that SGU's are bought to add horsepower to a system,
    and that the reason why the ESQ-M didn't catch on was that the strength
    of the ESQ was as a low cost workstation, NOT as an SGU.  No one,
    felt the ESQ was a particularly "hot synth" purely in terms of sound,
    and no want wanted to "add ESQ sounds" to their capabilities in the
    way they might like add a DX-7 or a D-50.
    
    The EPS has taken some criticism for its sound quality.  Let's not get
    into a debate about the justness of that criticism, but suffice it to
    say that people reading the Keyboard Sampler issue would probably
    be more inclined to get a Roland or an EMU to if they're looking
    mainly for an SGU.
    
    Frankly, I think the VFX is the first Ensoniq synth that is beyond
    question in its sound generation capabilities.  I think folks will
    definitely want the VFX for *ITS* sound and its horsepower, and thus
    I would expect it to do better than the ESQ-M and the EPS-M.
    
    	db

    re .1
    	Brad,  its a long story...
    
    re .last few
    
    	Although I really agree with the noters in .2 and .4, the economic
    reality is that Steve (.3) is right.  These guys are in the same
    position that other businesses are in vis-a-vis SKUs and margins
    on production runs.  DIGITAL face the same kinds of issues with
    our equipment; I can't tell you how many customers ask me why we
    don't make this kind of processor or that kind of printer.
    
    	Not wanting a sequencer kept me from seriously considering these
    ROLAND drummers and the Alesis before it.  Part of my decision to
    go for the R5 was that I felt (right or wrong) that the Human Composer
    stuff added enough value to the sequencer to justify the duplication
    of the sequencer.  I hope that proves to be true.
    
    Clusters,
    Bill (who'll be steamed if ROLAND introduces a R5-r) Allen

>   <<< Note 2094.3 by MIZZOU::SHERMAN "ECADSR::SHERMAN 235-8176, 223-3326" >>>
>                     -< not cost effective, my guess ... >-
>
>    My guess is that they have identified a market that demands a sequencer
>    on a drum machine, so they know that have to design a version with
>    it in.  
    
    But then this doesn't apply to synths, right ?
    Obviously there is a market for SGU synths and therefore, I'd think 
    these same people would buy SGU drums. Its more probably the hardware
    mod costs as you mentioned.

    .4 (Allen?) asked about the Akai XE4. There was a review of it in both
    Music Technology and Home Studio Recording a few months ago. Its
    basically a box with a few audio outs, midi implementation and some sounds.
    No sequencer. Sounds could be edited and saved in memory. A card slot
    was available for other sounds.

    I'll bring in the review and add a bit more later as a new note. The
    bottom line (in the reviewers opinion) was that the sounds weren't that
    exciting for its price. I haven't seen it (or heard it) in Geneva yet.

    I'm getting a used HR16 after all .... 

    Zayed

    I don't think -.1 is entirely accurate.

    I suspect there are a *lot* of people *without* sequencers who are into
    layering and patch stacking ... if you want many voices, you'll
    need multiple modules.

    From a percussion perspective, there are only two reasons to have
    drum SGUs:

	1. you already have a sequencer and don't want another
	2. you're primarily a drummer and want access to additional
	   sounds from your MIDI controller

    In either case, the market is much smaller than the synth SGU market.
    That's why you'll find most studios with many synth SGUs and only a few
    drum machines.  (Len, of course, is the execption.)

-b

    
    ah, it's the poor ignorant again, but i wasn't all that aware that
    most drum machines contained sequencers. Since len has condemed
    by ddd5 to drum hell, i've been a lookin but a bit daunted by price.
    However, if there's a sequencer as part of the package, is there
    something truncated in these sequencers? Could i drive the cz101
    with one? I did realize (about 5minutes after i started fooling
    with the cz) that i'd really like a sequencer, if only to drive
    a kit and the cz - would an hr16 give me that kind of capability?
    
    	bs (slowly catchin' on...)
    

    Outta luck.
    
    I've never seen a drum sequencer that allowed sustained notes.
    
    Edd

   RE: Sequencers in Drum Machines...

    I have a TR-626.  

    This machine does have some "sequencer" type functions, such as:

    creating and editing patterns, tracks, tempo control, external sync
    generation etc.

    But it only sequences the drum sounds that the TR-626 can play.

    I've seen this unit in use in a lot of one person "live" situations where
    simple sequencing and pattern/track selection was required and full blown
    sequencers are not required or would be too bulky to carry around.

    I don't use any of the on-board sequencing since I've been using CUBASE
    and the drum editor. To me its just another sound module.

    Bruce

    Re: .0
    
          I just picked up a R5 through Music Emporium for $525, I thought
    that was the best I could find until I read your note. Where did you
    find it for $500???
    
    Can't wait to play with my new toy!
    Mike___

    re .12
    Mike:
    	I'm out here in God's country...the Twin Cities in MN.  I have
    quite a bit from these guys, and so that might have helped.  Also,
    I think business is a bit slow for MIDIretailers.  Frankly, I was
    a bit surprised that my guy came right out with the $500 number
    as soon as I told him I was serious.  (I keep waiting to here that
    Guitar Center is blowing the R5s out at $399, R8s for $599).
    
    	I really like mine so far.  I have not had a lot of time to
    really create with it yet, but I owe a tape to some friends so I
    plan to work on some new and old stuff this weekend.  I particularly
    want to see if I can put together better rhythym sections than I
    previously could with the KAWAI R-50.
    
    	One sound I am going to have to work on a bit is the CRASH CYMBALS.
    They are just to high, IMHO.  I liked the R-50's Crashs better.
    Again, I think its because they are too high and will be futzing
    with them this weekend.
    
    Clusters,
    Bill Allen

    Well I guess I did get a good price then. 
         I tend to agree on the crash being high, but I can live with that
    with no problem considering how great and real everthing else sounds.
    The more I get into this machine, the more it blows my mind.
    
    Mike___

	As I mentioned in the HR16 note, I brought my new-but-brain-dead HR16
back and made an upgrade to the R5.  I am not disappointed.  To the contrary...

	The things that initially turned me away from this unit to the HR16
are so inconsequential now that I have had some time with it.  At the bottom 
line, I have this warm fuzzy feeling inside me that I'm not as likely to have
a last minute panic on the night of a show due to hardware failure.  This unit
feels quite solid.

	On the downside, I hate the adapter thingy they provide (plug->cord->
transformer->cord->plug).  At least it won't take up two places on the outlet
strip.  Also, as was hinted in the R8 note, the user interface is far from 
intuitive.  I've been using drum machines for some time now and this is the
first time I couldn't just sit down and enter things with minimal manual
searching.

	Even without understanding how the 'humanizing' techniques work (or 
employing them, for that matter), I have been able to come up with two excellent
songs so far.  I am thrilled with it.

	A big advantage, in my mind, over the HR16 is that it doesn't map pads
to midi note numbers.  In fact, I'm not sure of this yet, but I think you can 
enter a pattern with one kit, switch kits and still continue to enter on the 
SAME pattern.  So, as I had asked in the R8 note, it is true that ALL sounds
are available to you at ALL times.  The kits are only a convenience for 
performance and setting up.

	Another big plus for me is the availability of certain bass sounds, 
particularly an acoustic bass (which, I'll be darned if I can get a good one
on my TX81Z, either programming myself or buying from somewhere else).  I had
been disappointed in the past when looking at the R5 because it doesn't seem
to respond to note-offs, thus causing each note to complete to its full sampled
duration.  There *is* a parameter that can be set to cause the R5 to repond to
note offs, but I believe it is global, thus ALL drums would need to hear a note 
off as well as the bass.  I tried it on the 'fingered bass' patch and it was
too difficult to control.  I probably won't use the fingrd or slap bass because
of this, but the acoustic bass has a quick enough natural decay that it doesn't 
seem to matter.  That's just fine for me.  Saved me having to find a MIDIBass
(which I was all set to buy).  There would have been one other way for me to 
handle decay rate in the "Multi Inst" setup, by mapping the mod wheel to decay 
rate.  But I doubt I have the time to work up the chops required to do it well.
For now, I'll use the TZ to handle all basses other than acoustic bass.

	It's going to take me a *long* time to fully master this unit, 
especially the humanization features.  I have a lot of work to do in a 
relatively short time (drum parts for lotsa songs) so I may learn a lot on the 
fly, or I may have to wait until I'm caught up on song programming before I
explore all this machine is capable of.

	I highly recommend it to any would-be HR16 buyers, it costs a bit more, 
is not as easy to understand, but I think its worth it.

	Dan

	On-board drum samples:

Dry Kick 1
Dry Kick 2
Wood Kick
Double Head Kick 1
Double Head Kick 2
Solid Kick
Room Ambient Kick 1
Room Ambient Kick 2
Mondo Kick
Electronic Kick

Wood Snare
Open Snare
Tight Snare
Fat Snare
Impact Snare
Jazz Snare
Ouch! Snare
Reverb Snare
Rimshot Snare 1
Rimshot Snare 2
Rimshot Snare 3
Electronic Snare
Brush Hit Snare
Brush Roll Snare
Side Stick

Dry Tom 1
Dry Tom 2
Dry Tom 3
Room Ambient Tom 1
Room Ambient Tom 2
Room Ambient Tom 3
Electronic Tom 1
Electronic Tom 2
Electronic Tom 3
Jazz Tom 1
Jazz Tom 2
Jazz Tom 3
FX Tom

Closed HiHat
Open Hihat
Pedal Closed HiHat

Crash Cymbal
Mallet Crash Cymbal
Ride Cymbal
Ride Bell Cymbal
Ride Cymbal Bell

808 Hand Clap
Timbale
Claves
Cabasa
Cowbell
Tamborine
Shaker
Mute High Conga
Slap High Conga
Open Low Conga
Agogo
Whistle
Bongo
Can
Surdo
Blast
Back Snare
Back Cymbal

Finger Bass
Slap Bass
Acoustic Bass

Rest

	Plus 26 "Copy Instruments" that are different versions of the above,
with altered pitch, decay, nuance, etc.  There's one that comes from the 
handclap that is lowered in pitch and lengthened in decay such that it sounds 
like a gunshot.  Neat stuff.  I immediately made a triangle out of the agogo
sample.

    Looks a great deal like the R-8.
    
    There aren't really "kits" on the R-8, there are "Pad Groups" (5 of
    them on the R-8, giving you 80 "virtual" pads).  The only way you
    can select pad groups is from the front panel, which doesn't matter
    because *all* of the machine's sounds are available *all* of the
    time.  All the pad groups do is determine the pad to sound mapping.
    
    len.
    

    Re: .16
    
    No 1/2 or 1/4 open hi-hat??? Not to play the A vs R game, but I find
    a 1/2 open hi-hat to absolutely indespensible, essential for rock
    drumming...
    
    Edd

RE < Note 2094.18 by WEFXEM::COTE "There, but for the fins, go I..." >

	No problem, 

	With the copy instruments available, and the decay editing available, I 
can make a 1/2 open hh, a 1/4 open hh, a 3/4 open hh, a 15/16 open hh, a 3/32 
open hh...

    Does it sound like a 1/n open hi-hat? Or does it sound like an open
    hi-hat getting truncated? 
    
    picky, picky, picky...;^)
    
    Edd

RE < Note 2094.20 by WEFXEM::COTE "There, but for the fins, go I..." >

	I'll have to try it to find out.  Or maybe Len or the other R5 owners
have an answer?

	Dan

Do the hi-hats respond to nuance???
:-)

Chad

    I believe the hihats *do* respond to nuance, at least on the R-8.
    Also, the decay is not an all or nothing proposition, i.e., it's
    like the release parameter on an envelope.
    
    len.
    

What?  No vibraslap?  Does ya hafta get an R8 to get vibraslap?

Steve

	I had a bit of a scare last night.  I was down-loading a couple of songs
I had developed on the R5 down onto a track of my MC500 (in-between button-
pushings, I was piecing together a wooden copy of a stratocaster electric guitar
for my not-quite-two-year-old).

	Around the time the contact cement was drying on the guitar body and 
pick-guard, the songs were playing into the MC500 in real time.  When the real-
time loads were completed, I played back the MC500 to be sure everything came 
through o.k. (I also wanted to see how different it might sound without the R5's
internal "humanization" features).  Upon playing back, I noticed a couple of 
instruments missing.  Played it again.  Definately not there.  Play the R5.  
Yup, they're there alright in the original pattern.  Scratch head.  Attach
pick-guard to guitar.

	I decided to start the process over again.  I cleared the MC500's memory
and proceeded to re-record the R5's song data in real time.  Play back.  Still
no bell_cymbal and hi-hats.  I went into the MC500's microscope mode and 
confirmed that they had never arrived.

	Now it was time to check the R5 (after applying contact cement to the
three wooden single-coil pickups, of course).  I went into the MIDI utility and 
checked out transmit channel.  On the R5, each instrument can transmit on a 
separately assigned channel.  O.K., they were all going out on ch. 10 (default).

	I went one more time through the R5 -> MC500 record process and after 
finding the same situation I was perplexed.  Take a minute aside, put the 
pickups on the guitar and think about it.  At least the guitar project was 
turning out nicely.

	I decided to fire up my C64 MIDI Monitor program and watch was happening
out the R5's MIDI OUT.  Got the program going and hit a couple of pads to see 
what came out.  No problem.  Hit the pad for the hi-hats and bell_cym.  Nothing.
Then I pulled up the MIDI Note_assign function on the R5 and it all became 
crystal clear - the R5 allows you to shut off midi transmission on any sound!

	So the evening was half productive.  I did finally get the songs 
downloaded, but my plan was to take ten minutes to do that and then work on a 
new song.  Sorry.  The hi-tech bug bit me last night.

	At least I finished what I wanted to do on the Strat.

    Never woulda happened with an HR16!!!
    
    ;^)
    
    Edd

    Maybe we should start a topic on an evening we started to do something
    totally routine and some dumb surprise made it all malfunction, and
    took hours to figure out.
    Except offhand I can't think of a good example so why should I start
    the note.
    Tom

    If you do, put it in Banter.

-b

    Speaking of the R5...
    
    I booted up my studio last Saturday night at about 10:15PM (my 
    first mistake).  Had a couple ideas for songs for my "X-mas Tape"
    I thought I'd try out.  Well, I ended up staying up 'til about 
    3:00AM; but that's another story...
    
    The point I wanted to make here was how easy it was to create patterns
    and tie those together into songs on the R5.  I used to enter every-
    thing from the keyboard (thru MIDI) with the R50 and then let the
    sequencer (SEQ Plus) handle the details.  I will probably go back
    to doing things this way, when I have time to read through the manual.
    For now, I have been real impressed with the quality of the stuff
    I can bang out impromtu on the pads.  I mean, these songs (MIDI-
    slaved to Seq+) are really not half bad, even without huminization!
    I am thinking that I may just end up using the R5's internal seqncr
    more than I did the R50's, particularly since I can take advantage
    of the humanization stuff.  
    
    I am still REAL impressed with the sounds and sound quality of this
    unit.  Although I will probably end up holding onto the KAWAI, the
    R5 does not appear to be something I will outgrow in a LONG time.
    There is just so much there that I haven't even explored.  So far
    the only nit I can find is that you run out of RAM space for your
    own patterns fairly quick.  I guess I could always push down to
    the hard disk (SEQ+) or a cassette (ugh!).  
    
    Santa Clusters,
    Bill Allen
    
    (Hmmmm... maybe I start collecting drum machines, yeah...)
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    NAAHHH!                          It's been done, already.  :^)
    

	Some new thoughts...

	Some time back someone (Edd, I think) asked about 1/2 open hihats and
I responded by saying that you can set up a copy instrument with a quicker decay
to simulate.  Well, its better than that...

	It appears that you can go into a PATTERN and change various 
charecteristics of any given sound FOR THAT PATTERN ONLY!  So, let's say you 
want to vary the hi-hat decay over a few patterns...  You simply hit the sound
edit button while in pattern mode and edit away!  For the next pattern, you do
the same, but vary the decay accordingly.  Nice feature!

	I'm not sure, but it MAY even allow you toalter sound characteristics
on a note-by-note basis!  So, conceivably, you could set a hihat to gradually 
open over a measure of quarter notes.  

	This is much more functionality than I am prepared to use right now.  
But it's nice to know its there.

	I DEFINATELY recommend the R5 to anyone who wants great sound and great
control, but can't swing for the R8.

	Dan

    To continue with the HR-16 note Q, how much (seriously) is a used R-5? 
    Can you find them?  How about new?
    
    Mike

    	I have seen them for around $400.  But there aren't too many on the
    used market.  I paid $550 for mine new.  You can get them for less if
    you shop around (Sam Ash, East Coast, Guitar Ctr, etc.).
    
    	Dan
    	

    	Called Rogue Music, they sell them (fixed price) for $379.  I think
    they have a 3 month warr., too, will call and confirm...
    
    Assuming the architecture is the same as the R8:
    
    	Is there any way to easily change the performance setup (like
    patches)?  I would love to put woodblocks, bass, and two toms on there
    for live performance, but what if I want a different tom sound?  How
    easy is it to swap sounds in the performance mode?
    
    	Of the built in sounds (68 or whatever) can you change their pitch
    and repeat them?  Like len said, you can assign a sound to a pad, then
    a MIDI note number, then de-assign it.  Can I, for instance, make MIDI
    note numbers 10-15 FX Tom, pitched differently?  In other words, can
    the same sound be assigned to different note numbers, without using a
    copy instrument?  I hope so, it would be much tidier.
    
    Mike_who_will_spring_the_extra_$80_for_it_(used)

    Sorry!  Used price $379.
    
    Mike

    	Roland does things differently than Alesis regarding assigning of
    sounds.  With the HR16, you build a "pattern kit" and for the space of
    that pattern, the sounds you have assigned to the pads are all you can
    get.  With Roland's new machines (R5, R8 and R8m), all sounds are
    assigned to MIDI note-numbers, not pads.  This is another reason why I
    went for the R5 over the HR16.  All sounds can be accessed at any time
    (up to its polyphony limit, which is presently unknown to me).  
    
    	The only thing you need to know about pad setups is that you are
    given 5 (I think) "kits" by which to assign the 68 samples (along with
    the copy samples - more on that later) - these are not to limit sample 
    access, but to provide a practical means by which to play certain
    groups of samples.  You can change "kits" in the middle of patterns
    (which you can't do with the HR16).  
    
    	Think of the built in sequencer as separate from the kit
    assignments.  If you want to play a straight ride pattern, you pull up
    your basic "bread'n'butter" kit.  But say you want to add something out
    of the ordinary half-way through the measure, you simply press the
    "kit" button and call up the kit that has the sample(s) that you want
    and continue on as if nothing were changed.
    
    	To recap - with the HR16, the "Kits" are integrally a part of the
    sequencer pattern.  With the Roland machines, they are separate.
    
    	Along with the 68 sampels, you have "copy" instruments - where you
    take one of the 68 samples and change it to whatever you want (within
    the limits of the programmable parameters).  Actually, you can do that
    with any of the samples, but this allows you to take a sample and
    duplicate it, changing it slightly or drastically.  A good example is
    the gunshot sound in the copy instruments.  When I looked up what sound
    it was based on, I was surprised to find that it was based on the
    handclap sample, but it was tuned down very low.  Now, they could have
    gone into the original handclap sampel and tuned it down low to make
    the gunshot, but then they wouldn't have had a handclap sound.  With
    copy instruments, you can take any sample and make as many variations
    (up to 22) as you want.
    
    	There's more...
    
    	There are performance setups as well (4 of them on the R5).  There
    you can take a single instrument sample (say, for example, the agogo) 
    and assign one or more MIDI signal (MIDI note number, Mod Wheel, etc.) to 
    change various aspects of it - pitch, decay, etc..  Thus you could build a
    pitched instrument (like a vibraphone) out of a sample.  Perhaps the
    most obvious would be taking one of the bass samples and making them
    able to respond to MIDI note numbers.  The onboard demo that comes with
    the R5 does something like this to create a synth/clav/elec_piano type
    sound.
    
    	One more thing - Although I haven't done this personally, I get the
    impression that you can edit the various parameters of a sample on a
    pattern-by-pattern or note-by-note basis.  Thus, you wouldn't have to create
    a special instrument in either the performance section or the copy 
    instruments if you just wanted to make a single or occasional change in
    either pitch or decay, etc.  You simply call up the edit function while
    in a particular task (pattern create, song create, etc) and begin
    editting.  The changes are remembered for *that occurance only* and
    when the occurance has passed (song, pattern, etc.), you still have the
    original sample or copy instrument.  It could be tedious to do, but
    it is an incredible option to have!  Once again, I don't *know* this to
    be so, but I get the impression from the manual that it is possible.
    Once again, Roland's manuals leave a lot to be desired as far as
    comprehension and organisation are concerned.  With a machine this
    complex, it is even more frustrating trying to find out information.
    
    	Dan
    

    Awesome report, Dan!  That sort of answers my question.  At least it
    clarifies its power as a drum machine.  
    	What I really need is the spec of the MIDI implementation (would be
    using it as the main SGU for drum sounds in an electronic MIDI kit).
    
    	For instance, through MIDI mind you, if I wanted several tuned
    timbale sounds and all the performance (pitched) slots were taken up
    with toms, bass etc., would I have to make copy instruments for all of
    them?  Or could I take the main timbale sample, assign it a MIDI note,
    then specify the pitch I want some other way?  I guess I answered my
    own question.  
    	So, if you want several tuned variations, and you used all four
    performance slots already, you must make copy instruments, of which
    there are 26.
    	Now what if you like the nuance of Impact Snare, but want it tuned
    up a little, can you edit the main sound therfore not using a copy
    instrument slot?
    
    	Am I missing the point?  Maybe through MIDI and the organization of
    the "pad banks," you can have as many different sounds (including
    varied pitch of originals) as MIDI note numbers.  ?  I'm still a little
    confused; does anybody know what I mean?
    
    Mike

    Is the internal structure of the R5 exactly like the R8?  Can I 
    take any info from the R8 note and assume it's true for the R5?
    
    Mike

    	I'm not sure how to answer this.  They use the same sounds, the
    same way to produce those sounds.  They have some differences when it
    comes to the internal sequencer - I believe the R8 has macros of some
    kind (Len?).  I know that the R8 has more internal memory, and is
    expandable via a card interface.
    
    	Dan
    

    	What I meant by the same sounds is that they produce the sounds in
    exactly the same way (as far as I can tell).  Many of the sounds are
    identical between the two machines, but not all.  On the R5, they tried
    to give you more variety because there was no expandability.  
    
    	Dan
    

    Oh, I figured that.  What I meant was in the sequencer abilities, the
    way to address sounds, MIDI implementation, etc.
    
    In elaboration, is the R5 an R8 with different ROM sounds and no card
    slots?
    
    Or are there significant operating differences?
    
    Mike

    > sequencer abilities, 
    
    	They have some ground-work similarities, but the R8 has
    enhancements that the R5 does not have (or, perhaps better said, the R5
    was built without some of the functions the R8 has).
    
    >the way to address sounds, 
    
    	As far as I understand, this portion is identical.
    
    > MIDI implementation
    
    	I believe this is mostly the same, but some of the additional
    functions of the R8 may be addressed via MIDI.  This would alter the
    MIDI implementation (naturally).
    
    > etc.
    
    	I can't recall the specific differences beyond something to do with
    the R8 creating macros, having a card interface (thus not
    closed-ended), and a few of the sounds being different.  Perhaps if you
    came across an article or review of the R5 (which came out later than
    the R8), it would outline the differences.  They were insignificant
    enough for my needs to not warrant paying the extra for the R8.  It is
    the first drum machine purchase I have ever made that has left me
    completely satisfied (i.e., not drooling over the next product to come
    on the market).
    
	Dan