Conference napalm::commusic_v1

For comments on the TX16W see the tX16W note 1006.*

I like it but it has some zits.  And don't expect much more ongoing
devlopment for it.  Big library.  Sounds Good.  up to 50khz sampling.  
Expandable memory.

Individual outs are monophonic only (only one *voice*, not sound can be applied
to each single out.  The mix outs of course don't have that zit).

A excellent deal if < $1000.  Guitar Center had them recently at $699!

I also have a PX1000.  Also a good box..  The two together provide mongo
polyphony and lots of sounds.

Chad

    re: .0
    
    Amongst the reasoning for the "low" prices of used Kurzweil K250s are
    the facts that it has only 12 voice polyphony and that there are many
    more competeitive products than when it was first released.
    
    Of course, the fact that Kurzweil Music Systems continues to lose money
    in a big way doesn't exactly help foster long-term relationships
    between customer and supplier either.  A short article in The Middlesex
    News (Framingham MA) the other day indicated another heavy plunge into
    the negative numbers for the last quarter.  Ray Kurzweil was quoted as
    saying that the company was looking for creative financing to help out. 
    It even mentioned that the sale of the company was one of the
    alternatives that had to be considered.  Whether this would be good or
    bad for the installed base is left as an exercise for the reader.
    
    - John -

To paraphrase, there's a creative financer born every minute.  Funny how folks
tend to equate creativity and money.  Seems to me that by this axiom, Mass
politicans turn out to be among the most creative in the country ...

Steve

    RE: .1
    
    Thanks for your comments Chad! I actually read all of 1006 yesterday,
    but it had been a year since anyone had commonted in there. Somehow
    I missed the monophonic out business. I also just read in the Keyboard
    article that when you assign a voice to one of the monophonic outs,
    the voice is no longer available in the mix outs. Sounds like they
    made a very unreasonable assumption here about how to program the
    outputs. That would drive me bananas. I'd probably only use the
    monophonic outputs on very rare occasions. But, like you say, if
    you can get it cheap enough ...
    
    RE: .2
    
    So it IS true - only 12 note polyphony, eh? Well, if your going
    to spend that much $, you might as well get something with more
    voices, like even just one of the expanders.
    
    Also, I had a salesman tell me the other day that Kurtzweil was
    going out of business ... as in not even being bought out - I THOUGHT
    that sounded unreasonable. Of course, he was trying to sell me the
    TX16W. I'd hate to see Kurtzweil go out of business as in not even
    being bought out!
    
    Bill

<<< Note 2169.4 by NRADM::KARL "It's computerized, no thing c,an go wrong nothing c an g" >>>
>I also just read in the Keyboard
>article that when you assign a voice to one of the monophonic outs,
>the voice is no longer available in the mix outs. Sounds like they
>made a very unreasonable assumption here about how to program the
>outputs. That would drive me bananas. 
    
    that's how it SHOULD work.. let's say I have a 'preset' on my Emax
    that includes percussion (1 octave), electric bass (2 octaves) and
    lead guitar (3 octaves)... and that I assign the lead guitar samples to
    one specific output, intending to run it thru a borrowed Rockman.
    And so I run a cable from that output to the Rockman, and then into a
    free channel on my mixer...
    
    Unfortunately, the lead guitar sound is STILL PRESENT IN THE MIX
    OUTPUTS... just as loud as ever.  So how do I ensure that the only
    lead guitar heard comes thru the Rockman, and still have bass and
    percussion playing ?  I CAN'T !   So the behavior you think would be
    irritating is actually the way *I* WANT it to work...
    
    karl
    
    p.s. "Kurzweil" translates to "a brief time" - uh-oh!

><<< Note 2169.4 by NRADM::KARL "It's computerized, no thing c,an go wrong nothing c an g" >>>
>>I also just read in the Keyboard
>>article that when you assign a voice to one of the monophonic outs,
>>the voice is no longer available in the mix outs. Sounds like they
>>made a very unreasonable assumption here about how to program the
>>outputs. That would drive me bananas. 
>    
>    that's how it SHOULD work.. let's say I have a 'preset' on my Emax
>    that includes percussion (1 octave), electric bass (2 octaves) and
>    lead guitar (3 octaves)... and that I assign the lead guitar samples to
>    one specific output, intending to run it thru a borrowed Rockman.
>    And so I run a cable from that output to the Rockman, and then into a
>    free channel on my mixer...
>    
>    Unfortunately, the lead guitar sound is STILL PRESENT IN THE MIX
>    OUTPUTS... just as loud as ever.  So how do I ensure that the only
>    lead guitar heard comes thru the Rockman, and still have bass and
>    percussion playing ?  I CAN'T !   So the behavior you think would be
>    irritating is actually the way *I* WANT it to work...
>    
>    karl
>    
>    p.s. "Kurzweil" translates to "a brief time" - uh-oh!
>

I agree with Karl M.  Unfortunately on the Y* 16W, when I reroute out an out,
I get only one voice (1 note).  If I assign three note polyphony it comes out
three separate outs.  Also, only the lower 8 of the 16 voices can be assigned
to a separate out and its an all 8 or none on the separate outs, ie, all the 
lower 8 or none of the lower 8 are set to the separate outs, each to its own.

For drums and what not it is not so bad but for chords or other stuff, you
need to assign it out through either one or both of the mix outs.  The two mix 
outs aren't hooked together though so it is possible to use them as two separate
polyphonic outs.  You can also hook them together.

Chad

ps: and  �Kurzweil� is pronounced:   Koortz vile.  The oo is a pure sound,
not a dipthong.

    Given the price of the S550, and given the specs of the new EMAX
    sampler that's come out, I'd be going for the Emax (for an admitted
    extra few hundrex bux). 

-b

    RE: .7
    
    Your right, Brad, I just read about that in the latest issue of
    Keyboard. This looks like the way to go as far a a sampler, as
    opposed to a sample player. The EMAX II just got an excellent review
    in Keyboard. I have never heard any of the Emulator III sounds which
    are supposed to be available for the EMAX II, but I assume that the
    sound library is substantial!
    
    I'm wondering how much the library will cost, as I believe that
    the library is purchased separately - I assume in sets of sounds.
    
    How much will the additional cost be, I wonder, to really set yourself
    up with a decent sound library? Also - I believe the base unit comes
    with 1 Mb RAM, and the upgrade for an additional 2 Mb lists for
    $995.00 (includes expansion board with 2Mb). One thing I wasn't
    sure about is are there sounds shipped with the unit?
    
    Thanks Chad and Karl for your comments on how the channel assignments
    are supposed to work. At the deals these things are going for, it
    does sound like good bang for the buck. I think I'm leaning towards
    a 1000PX Plus at the moment, or just possibly the EMAX II, but I'd
    have to find out what this machine would REALLY cost me, with the
    extra RAM and sounds.
              
    Thanks!
    Bill

    
    It's easy.
    
    Either you want to sample.....
    
    or you dont, and just want to play back 'refined' samples that 
    someone else has spent hours on....
    
    Which is it?
    
    If just want to play.....buy a playback unit with a good library.
    
    Otherwise you need what's called a "sampler".    ;')
    
 
    ron
        

    One advantage to buying from an established dealer is that they can
    give you deals on access to their sound libraries for various samplers.
    I've gotten over 100 floppies for the EMAX from Synthony in Scottsdale
    AZ FREE OF CHARGE.  This is a library worth probably over $1000.
    
    karl

    RE: .9
    
    Gee, Ron, thanks - no foolin' - it's called a "sampler"? Well,
    I learn something new everyday!

    That is a good question, though - do I really want to sample?
    That is one of the questions I'm struggling with at this point.
    To be honest, I don't think that I want to do much sampling now,
    as I don't have the time! But I'm trying to plan ahead with my
    purchases, because I want to do it right the first time, if at all
    possible.

    My impression is that with a sampler, you have a larger library
    available to you, that can be expanded when necessary, unlike sample
    playback modules, although I know that you can add additional sound
    blocks to the Kurzweils, for instance.

    Bill

    I have the Roland S-550 and I'm very happy with it.
    
    What I like about it:
    
    1) It's certainly at the higher end of samplers in terms of sound
       (at least according to the Keyboard Sampler issue)
    
    2) The Roland library is large and free.  I never intend to do much
       sampling of my own, but I wanted a very large range of sounds
       without having to pay for each particular thing.
    
       My experience with 3rd party sounds on synthesizers was that
       it's risky.  A lot of what is sold is of poor quality and hard
       to find.  I presumed the same was true of 3rd party samples.
    
       I can buy hundred blank floppies for the same price that I might
       pay for a group or two of third party samples and then use those
       floppies to copy the library from my favorite music store.
    
    3) The builtin video interface is quite nice.  Note that there is
       editing software for nearly all major brands of samplers EXCEPT
       the Roland.  The reason is because you really do get all you need
       with the unit.
    
    What I don't like about it:
    
    1) The manual, like all Roland manuals sucks big time!
    
       However, Alexander Publishing is coming out with a "3rd party
       manual.  (God help us when DEC's documentation becomes so poor
       as to create a market for "3rd party manuals" - the very idea
       makes me sick to my stomach).
    
    2) Questionable reliability.  The 1st unit was DOA.  The 2nd unit
       had problems which were fixed.  I have to admit though that it's
       worked almost flawlessly for a year now.  The only exception is
       that once in a GREAT while, I do get a system crash, but I hear
       this isn't unusual for samplers
    
    3) It sticks out the back end of my rack.  It's very big physically.
    
    4) Unlike most other brands, there is no Roland "hotline" to call
       for tips, advice, problems, etc.
    
    	db

    
    I have been looking into the Yamaha Tx16w partly because I heard the
    sound of it is really clean and it doesn't cost too much.  Does anyone
    have any comments?  I would be interested in sampling sounds myself. 
    How is the tx for that?
    
    Thanks,
    Peter
    
    

You might ask this question out on USENET.  I think there are a bunch of
folks who have these there.  I am the only one with one here I think and
I haven't done much sampling of my own.  I did do some and it wasn't
too hard, and V2 of the OS (which I have but haven't used to sample
with yet) is supposed to make it a lot easier.  I'm waiting until I can afford
AVALON, the Steinberg/Jones Sample Editor for the ST (it has gotten good 
reviews), before I do heavy duty sampling.  I also want to afford some
sound CDs to sample from.  I must admit that it is the only Sampler I've had
operating exposure to and so I can't say on a relative scale if it is
more difficult or not.  KEYBOARD I think said it was more difficult than average
to sample with (don't think they used V2 of the OS -- can't remember).  It
does have some Dynamic Filters and stuff that most samplers don't have.

Chad

    From what I've heard, the TX16W is one of the more difficult units to
    deal with. (This coming from a *Mirage* owner??)
    
    The thing that would scare me most about the Yamaha is support.
    
    Edd

    Why haven't you considered the Ensoniq EPS. Great sampler/controller
    combined.
    
    	Mark

    Well, I already have the Kurzweil 1000SE for my controller.  That
    handles most of my string, piano, and occasional chorus sounds.  I
    would like to sample (maybe off CD's) some sax's, and especially some
    guitars.  None of my synths have either.  About the EPS -- Keyboard
    Magazine gave the EPS two contradicting reviews.  First it said it was
    a pretty good keyboard and sampler, and then they said that there was
    "incessant button pushing" and that the amount of memory you get with
    it (basic model) is very little.  It also did rather badly in keyboards
    tests (well, actually, not _too_ badly).  What I have heard about the
    TX16W, though, is that although it is complicated to use (hey, I can
    struggle through it...I learned FM synthesis), if you know what you are
    doing, your samples will turn out great...all for one low price of $699
    at Sam Ash (is this a commercial?).  
    
    Incidentally, how much do those CD's that you can sample off of cost?
    
    
    Thanks,
    Peter
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    		

    > ...how much do those CDs cost?
    
    McGill University gets up to $69 a crack...
    
    $700 for eleven volumes.
    
    Edd

    RE: EPS ...
    
    I took the EPS home for a 2 day "road test" last Spring, and actually
    found it fairly easy to use. Maybe I rely too much on what Keyboard
    says, I mean, who in real life is really going to analyze what comes
    out of that unit the way they did. I guess I wasn't considering
    it because they rated some others, like the S-550 so much better
    with regard to various aspects. The EPS did sound good, though.
    
    I wish I could take the S-550 home for a couple of days to try it
    out, and really compare. All I can do in reality is listen to
    other units in a store for maybe an hour at a time.
                       
    I'd like to try to find out more about the EMAX II. If I could find
    a really good deal on it, maybe that would do it for me for quite
    some time.
    
    I'll have to try to find some store that actually has one of these
    so I can get a demo.
    
    The search goes on ...

    Bill

    I know what you mean (taking keyboard so seriously in their tests), but
    for most of the time, they provide some insightful reviews.  I might
    have looked at the S-550, but it is a little too expensive.  Does the
    TX16w compare at all to the S550?  I would hope so, because if it
    doesn't, I will have to look around more.  The only real complaint I
    have about the EPS is that it comes with very little memory, and the
    first thing I would have to do is upgrade it.  I don't feel like doing
    that.  Also, doesn't it have a sequencer in it...because if so, the
    instrument is not worth it (I already have one).  Thanks,
    
    Peter
    
    
    

    RE: .20
    
    Peter,

    I believe that Keyboard rated the TX16W fairly well with respect
    to the sounds that come out of it. The big complaint seems to be
    the operating system, which was supposed to have been improved since
    the update to Version 2. It is also limited as to how you can configure
    the outputs - except for the stereo outs, the other 8 outs are
    monophonic - OK for a melody line or base line for example, but
    limiting for chords.
    
    At the price it's going for, you get a lot though, I think. After
    all, the Kurzweil expanders have only 2 outs, and you would have
    a larger sound library to draw from with the TX16W.
                                                       
    The EPS does have a sequencer. The EPS-M is configured a little
    differently, I believe -it might come standard with more memory,
    although I'm not sure of it. There may be some other differences
    between this and the keyboard version.
    
    Help this helps!
    Bill

    I am not too worried about the operating system because I would only
    sample sounds occasionally, not always.  "Operating Systems don't scare
    me!" (famous last words)  About the monophonic outputs: #1: I would be
    using the Tx for mainly guitar sounds, and sax sounds, and an
    occasional "other" sound...all of which are monophonic.  However #2:
    (this is a techy question) If you assign three outputs three separate
    voices (all of the same sound...ie: a chord in a piano sound), can you
    then play a chord without worrying about the outputs?  If not, I am not
    really concerned...I have lived with mix outs (no assignable ones) for
    all of my other synths...Hey, I can struggle a little longer (but it
    would be nice to have assignable outs!)
    
    
    Thanks,
    
    Peter
    
    
    

	Regarding the EPS,

	The memory upgrade isn't particularly painful - it's a cartridge which
	plugs into a slot in the back of the machine, and you have to remove
	two screws to take the cover off of it. If you get the SCSI adapter
	then you don't have to put the cover back either. Takes about 30
	seconds to do.

	The EPS has an 8 track sequencer (2.4 OS) with quite a bit of
	functionality.

	The EPS-M doesn't have the sequencer but has more memory (4x expansion
	I believe).

	/pjh

>	The EPS has an 8 track sequencer (2.4 OS) with quite a bit of
>	functionality.

>	The EPS-M doesn't have the sequencer but has more memory (4x expansion
>	I believe).


Er, according to my EPS-M brochure sitting here, the EPS-M has an 8 track 
sequencer.

Memory is also listed at 1.7 megabytes (1 mega word) internal RAM

Chad

    Also,
    
              The EPS-m has 10 outputs. The EPS has 2 outputs but can be
    expanded to 10 with the output expander..(around 150 bux??)
    
           Frank

	not counting tax. $179 list. I have one, and the 2x expansion memory.

	/pjh

    But why spend the extra money?  I would rather pay a little more to
    have everything in one box...except a sequencer.  I already have one,
    and having a sequencer with the sampler just adds to the price of it. 
    I have narrowed my choices down to the Tx16w sampler or the EPS...so,
    can you tell me anything about the outputs?  Like the tx? or different?
    comment?
    
    Peter
    

Again, according to my brochure on EPS-m:

''
* Left and Right audio outputs for programmable stereo mix

* 8 polyphonic solo Outputs
''


Chad

	The EPS with the output expander allows you to assign any instrument to
	either the l-r outputs, panned, or any one of the solo outputs. You
	can also assign individual layers to any of the above. (layers are
	components of instruments, and wavesamples are components of layers).

	For instance, using the patch buttons you can assign layers such that
	"both buttons out" = stereo (l/r), "left button" = left only, "right
	button" = right only. Or the solo outs, or whatever.

	I use the solo outs a lot. Makes eq and fx much easier, although the
	mix part isn't so important (cc7 works great with the FaderMaster)....

	/pjh

    Sounds like you were impressed by various things that have been said
    about the S-550 but the price is a little high..
    
    Are you aware of the S-330 which is basically a 550 with half the
    memory?  It's not much of a compromise in terms of what folks like
    us typically need.  I have a S-550 but have rarely used the extra
    memory so I would have been very happy with a S-330, especially
    considering that it's smaller and would have left more room in
    my rack.
    
    Regarding the EPS and Keyboard magazine.  I don't disagree with
    anything that Keyboard said about it, but I think that people have
    gotten the wrong impression about the relative sigificance of
    the shortcomings they pointed out.
    
    To my ears, it doesn't sound quite as good as the Rolands.  In fact,
    until the VFX came out, *NO* Ensoniq piece really impressed me with
    its sound (and ask anyone, I'm known as a BIG-time Ensoniq fan).
    
    But its sounds EXTREMELY good, and feature-wise it's a very good
    piece for the price.  It's also one of the more friendlier systems
    (yes, you DO push a lot of buttons, but so what?)
    
    I went with the S-550 mainly because of the sound, and the rack-mount.
    When I bought mine, Ensoniq's party-line on rack-mounts went something
    like "not very likely".   I make that my #1 issue everytime I talk
    with them on the phone.
    
    	db

    RE: .30
    
    db, I was considering the S-550, but the latest issue of Keyboard
    had that fabulous review of the EMAX II - now I am actually considering
    spending some serious $ on that, but I would have to hear it first
    and do some heavy justification to spend the $.
    
    Actually, I was talking to Morgan at East Coast Sound (listed in
    the note on dealers), and he gave me a very attractive price on
    it. I'm sure he'd give the same price to anyone from DECMS, it was
    15% over cost (not the usual 10% which is the DECMS price for other
    gear bought there) - but the price was excellent - in the same ballpark
    as the S-550 seems to be going for. That was for the base unit with 1 Meg.
    His polocy is you can copy his library if you bring in your own
    disks - so we're talking a very good price.
          
    The problem, though, is that Keyboard doesn't think that 1 Meg would
    be enough with a 16 bit machine. The Upgrade to 3 Meg at East Coast would
    be only around $400 less than buying the turbo model which has 4
    Meg and a 40 Meg internal hard drive, but we are talking serious $ for
    either of these options, which puts this unit in another price category.

    You say you don't need all the memory that you get with the S-550?
    I wonder if I would have all I need with just the basic 1 Meg model
    of the EMAX II?

    Also, I just caught an ad for an AKAI S1000PB (Play back version).
    I'm going to send away for some info on this, just to add to the
    confusion.
    
    The EMAX II is sounding good though! Apparently this machine can
    transpose over 5 octaves with no distortion of the original sample!
    Does this mean that you have to do less sampling? Or would you still
    have to sample at various scale intervals to preserve the timbre,
    harmonics, etc. that occur at various pitches on an instrument?
    
    More food for thought!

    Bill

<<< Note 2169.31 by NRADM::KARL "It's computerized, no thing c,an go wrong nothing c an g" >>>
>    The EMAX II is sounding good though! Apparently this machine can
>    transpose over 5 octaves with no distortion of the original sample!
    
    "no distortion" .NE. "no munchkinization"
    
    tanstaafl. caveat emptor. laissez-faire. 
    
    Hell, if they'd just double the memory and polyphony (and lower the
    relative price) of the Emax (I) it'd be a good deal.  I've never agreed
    with that stupid Keyboard 'rate the samplers' issue - the Emax sounds
    just as good as the vaunted Kurzweil to me...
    
    karl

    .. come to think of it, Keyboard even rated Kurzweil very poorly - 
    the K250 couldn't reproduce a square wave.
    
    I sample and listen to square wave tones all the time.
    
    karl

I have 1.5 megbyte (1 megaword) in my TX16W and would love to have 3, 4.5 or 
even  6 megabytes of memory.  The reason being that you can have a lot more in
the machine at once, even if you aren't playing all those sounds at once.
For studio playing its no big deal loading up new stuff when you need it but
if you are playing live, I'd bet that the extra memory would come in handy
(if you planned on using the sampler a lot -- if you just want a piano out
out of it for your whole set then...).  Even for Studio use, if you want to
layer a lot or have many different voices the extra memory is sometimes needed.

Chad

>    You say you don't need all the memory that you get with the S-550?
>    I wonder if I would have all I need with just the basic 1 Meg model
>    of the EMAX II?
    
    It really depends on "how" you like doing things.
    
    Actually, I try to avoid using the sampler.  If I can get what I'm
    looking for out of one of my synths, I generally use the synth
    because it's easier to deal with (you can have 120 different sounds
    available on-call, as opposed to loading sample disks).
    
    I find that I only need to use the sampler to get things that there
    just aren't good synthesized versions of and to do certain kinds
    of special EFX I'm fond of such as reversed sounds (particularly
    crash cymbal but the REVERSE feature of the S-550 is an untapped
    goldmine of new and interesting sounds - you can do a lot just by
    changing the playback of many library samples from FWD to REVERSE).
    
    My eventual goal is to have something like a Proteus or U-220 to
    handle the "standard" sampled sounds which require "realism", and
    use the S-550 mainly to gain access to the neat stuff in the Roland
    library that no one would normally put in ROM or on a expander card.
    
    One of these days, boy would I ever love to get the Roland CD reader
    to hook up to the sampler.  That would make life so much easier.
    Hopefully when my band starts gigging, something  like that will
    be possible.
    
    	db

    RE: .35 -
    
    Regarding the CD reader - the EMAX II has a SCSI port "that will allow
    it to access up to seven" outboard drives. Does this mean that it
    can access a CD reader? To be honest, I'm a little fuzzy as to what
    this buys you. It saves on switching floppies to load sounds - right?
    Does it save you siginificant load time? If so, perhaps I could just
    get the basic unit and buy a hard drive later on, depending on my
    needs, and could avoid the flapping floppies syndrome, load time,
    etc.

    The EMAX II will read E-mu's HD300 and RM45 drives, and Sony's 600
    MEG and Ricoh's optical drives. I don't know what thes buy you,
    though, besides mondo storage.
       
    Bill

    It just occurred to me that when I was quoted the price on the EMAX II
    upgrade to 3 Meg by Eastcoast, that they may have made a mistake
    which I'm going to check on with E-mu. According to the Keyboard article,
    although this is not clear either, it sounds like the add on board comes
    with an additional 2 Meg of memory - Eastcoast I believe was assuming that
    the board had no memory - that you had to buy the 2 Meg in addition to the
    board.

    If the board does come with 2 Meg, which seems logical to me, that would
    probably be the route I would go, and I would forego the hard drive for
    now - i.e. I would not get the Turbo model. I could even just
    get the base unit and do the add on later if I didn't go with the Turbo
    model.
                                
    This would bring the cost of the unit more in line with the maximum that
    I want to spend right now.

    Bill

    
    Forgot to mention that they want $800 + for the board - it HAS to
    have the 2 Meg built in for that price (list is over 1K).
    
    Bill

    Rationalization is a terrible thing.  Let the buyer beware ....

-b

    I just got it from E-mu that the upgrade board for the EMAX II has
    2 Meg on it, so the cost of the upgrade from 1 to 3 Meg is the
    cost of the board only.
    
    Bill

    More stuff - 
    
    If anyone else out there is interested in the EMAX II, here's sone
    more info I just got on it:
    
    Some 3rd party memory chips are in the works and will cost a lot less
    than E-mu's. I'm sorry but I didn't catch the name of the 3rd party!
    I got that from Rick at Manny's.
    
    He also was talking about some hard card storage device that he
    thought would be the way to go on a hard disk vs. the internal
    Turbo disk.
    
    Here's a new one - he said that E-mu is coming out with a stereo
    sampling updated model. What will this mean? Price going up?
    availability going up or down? Will both versions be available?
    Will ANY version be available?
    Is the advantage of stereo sampling that you get a stereo patch
    somehow? And how often would you use this option anyway?
    
    Thanks!
    Bill

    Continuing with my monologue ...
    
    A new title for this note, eh? Degenerates to something, was it?
    Well, whatever you want to call it. Anyway, I have to make this
    note brief, but I gave a listen to the EMAX II this weekend (Turbo
    model at Caruso's).
    
    This model comes with 10 4 Meg banks installed. They were nice and
    clean. The Bombay Band bank was very good, you could baciscally
    create your own Indian sounding music wiht this bank - excellent
    tamboura, sitar percussion, plus sitar slides that you you could
    weave together to create a basic melody. Nice, but I don't need
    it now and know very little about the structure of Indian music.
    
    The brass was excellent, especially things like trumpet slides (up
    and down), brass in fifths, and other stuff.
    
    Saxes were excellent, with lots of breathy variations, plus an
    initial slide up to a note, - I don't remember a growl sax.
    
    Strings were OK, but I prefer the sound of the Kurzweils. There
    was a Pop Composer bank, a couple of synth banks with some D50 type
    sounds, plus some percussion.
    
    To do this unit right, you would have to make a sizeable investment,
    IMO. With 4 Meg on board, each 4 meg bank had about 22 patches,
    plus some had a demo sequence. As far as disk storage, you may want
    more than 40 Meg, as it really didn't hold that many patches (maybe
    200 or so). I suppose that would get you by, but not with a huge
    library.
    
    If I were to purchase this unit, I think I would wait until the
    available library for the EMAX II increases, and memory comes down
    in price, perhaps through 3rd parties, which I have heard are working
    on that now.

    I don't know if I could justify investing that kind of money into
    it at this point - we are talking close to 4K or more.
    
    Regards,
    Bill

<<< Note 2169.42 by NRADM::KARL "It's computerized, no thing c,an go wrong nothing c an g" >>>
>                             -< Heard an EMAX II >-
    >As far as disk storage, you may want
>    more than 40 Meg, as it really didn't hold that many patches (maybe
>    200 or so). I suppose that would get you by, but not with a huge
>    library.
    
    Bill.. the hard disk in the Emax was never intended to hold your
    entire library !  That's why it still comes with a floppy drive.
    The hard disks are to expedite LIVE PERFORMANCE, as well as to 
    hold your fave samples for studio work.  
    
>    To do this unit right, you would have to make a sizeable investment,
>    IMO. With 4 Meg on board, each 4 meg bank had about 22 patches,
>    plus some had a demo sequence. 
    
    I also challenge your contention that you have to load this beast with 
    memory - with a 3 second load time for each 512K 'bank', just - 
    load from hard disk.  With this fast a load time it makes no sense to
    have megasamples preloaded in memory, while the polyphony limit remains 
    at 16 voices (well, 32 in 'dual' mode).
    
>    If I were to purchase this unit, I think I would wait until the
>    available library for the EMAX II increases, 
    
    I guess you haven't heard that the hundreds of E-Mu factory EMAX (I)
    samples work just fine in this machine - not to mention hundreds (well,
    dozens) of 3rd-party floppies.
    
    karl

    Thanks Karl for a different perspective, which is one reason
    I love reading this notes file.
    
    What you say is true of course about the disk strorage. As far as
    memory, if the 4 Meg banks that I heard held about 22 or so patch
    banks, I would assume that 1 Meg would allow you to hold 5 or so.
    I guess that would be enough. I'm just used to being able to flip
    through X number of patches on a synthesizer until I get the right
    sound. But if load time for a 512K bank is only 3 seconds, what's
    the difference I guess. I talked to E-mu on Friday, and one thing
    I was told was that there will be 1 and 4 meg patch banks available.
    What I didn't find out is whether or not all the 4 Meg banks will
    be available split ot onto 1 Meg banks.
    
    Also, I did know that the existing library will work on the EMAX II.
    I just haven't heard many of them, which is something I should try
    to do.
    
    Thanks!
    Bill

    Would someone tell me what's up?
    
    I'm dropping only modestly serious bucks on a new I*M-PC compatible
    computer, and I'm loading it up with memory at what seems to be an
    excellent price: $100 / meg. My question for this conference is 
    
      <<< Why aren't samplers getting dirt cheap, like memory?? >>>
    
    I don't follow this REAL closely, but aside from ever-increasing
    amounts of ROM for sample PLAYERS, I don't see any evidence that the
    falling memory prices are showing up in samplers. I want one semi-bad,
    but I'm going to wait for the prices to fall. Will they?!?
    
    By the way, this PC is quite hot: 200 meg storage and 8 meg memory with
    a 386 (in a box the size of a toaster!). Has anyone seen anything that
    will turn my new PC into a sampler? Or maybe record-to-disk? I'll have
    one slot left after installing the MIDI board.
    
    Thank you all for your kind help - Hoyt
                                                  

>      <<< Why aren't samplers getting dirt cheap, like memory?? >>>

You can get a Yamaha TX16W for, what was it Chad?  $700?

-Dan

    Note 16.195 lists a Guitar Center blow-out EPS special for just over
    $1,000.
    
     Bill

    There ARE smokin' deals out there for sample units over a year old. 
    It's like PCs are commodities and there's incredible pressure to sell
    them near cost.  Samplers are not commodities as far as I can see.
    
    karl

What price range are we talking about for a base model EMAX II?
I'm not looking for having a large number of samples available
in memory at one time, but I am looking for the capability to
sample my own sounds and have them available under MIDI control.
(I've got 4 sound effects ready to go to use in our toy design
demo.)

I'm taking a look at the EMAX II because this is the sampler
that VPL Research was using in their virtual reality demos at
SIGGRAPH.  Since they're the most experienced people working
in my research area, with plenty of musicians at the company,
I would guess that the EMAX II would be a safe choice for my
needs if the price is reasonable.

It's not definite that we'll expand into samplers from the
synthesizers we already have on this project, but it's something
I want to look at.

Also, any pointers to good EMAX dealers in the New England area?

Thanks,
Michael