Conference napalm::commusic_v1

I think three things make for a better machine.

  1. The all imoportant: What application software is available TODAY?

  2. System Software. Do you like the user interface?

  3. Packaging. All else equal, do you like the package?

One thing that would not affect my decision is:

  1. CPU. 68000, 80280, MicroVAX, who cares? as long as the processing
  speed is reasonable. I don't care if it takes 7 seconds to do a
  quantize, or 9 seconds. Heck, I can wait 15. :-)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

 My answers for the Mac:

  1. The all imoportant: What application software is available TODAY?

     Everything that I will need for the next 5 years.

  2. System Software. Do you like the user interface?

     Of all of today's user interfaces, I like the Macintosh's the best.

  3. Packaging. All else equal, do you like the package?

     Of all the today's package's, I like the Macintosh's the best.
     I've got an 800K 3.5 inch floppy drive, a 20Mbyte hard drive,
     a CPU, and a monitor all in one neat little package.

/Mitch :-)

That was Sauter's rule.  It stated simply, "Don't buy futures".

If it doesn't do what you need it to do, don't buy it.

Todd.

    Thanks Todd, I knew I didn't say it say it first.  I'm not one
    to take credit that's not due, but why hasn't John spoken up to claim
    his legacy?
    
    Also, see my reply to the other note where this got raised.  Sorry,
    I don't have the number handy.
    
    len.
    

    I didn't say that both the Atari and the Mac CURRENTLY have the software I
    will need for the next 5 years.  Such a statement would be the
    foremost expression of naivete, especially from a software enginner
    (my job).  This is especially true for music software.
    
    While all decisions on futures involve risk (even the decision to 
    get a Mac) that doesn't mean that an evaluation of the relative 
    risks isn't appropriate to the decision.
    
    One thing I learned from experience was that "Installed Base"
    is the closest thing to a guarantee of future compatability,
    extensibility, migration, availability, etc. that there is.

    And I'm not just talking about computers eithers.
    
	db

I realize that this is sort of wasting disk space, but I thought it
would be appropriate to have the rule in it's own note...

            <<< QUILL::$222$DUA16:[NOTES$LIBRARY]COMMUSIC.NOTE;1 >>>
                        -<   **  Computer Music  **   >-
================================================================================
Note 51.8                     New Roland Drum Synth                      8 of 12
SAUTER::SAUTER                                       14 lines  14-MAY-1985 08:28
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

re: .6--The fact that you were upset when the RX-15 and TR-707 came out after
you had purchased the TR-909 makes be suspect that you broke my strongest
rule: buy a product only if you will be satisfied with it.  If there is no
product on the market that satisfies your needs, wait a few months, one will
appear.  If the product does do what you want then you will not be unhappy
when a better product is announced, because your needs are satisfied.

Of course, your needs may change with time.  When they do, redefine your
needs and return to the marketplace, looking for a product to satisfy them.

If you fall into the trap of constantly wanting the latest and greatest you
had better have a lot of money, because the manufacturers will drain you
at a high rate.  This is a fast-moving industry!
    John Sauter

    I guess I could claim authorship of len's corollary to Sauter's
    rule, as quoted by db - "find the software you want/need (the stuff
    that does what you want), and buy the machine that runs it", except
    that (even though I believe this), I don't recall when I said it.
    
    len.
    

   I looked long and hard at MACs AND STs.  The MAC definitely has more
   software available than does the ST - not necessarily in terms of
   types of software, but in quality of and machines supported
   (especially in the case of sampler support).  But is it really that
   much better a machine? 

   Well, I ended up buying an ST.  Why?  Lots of reasons, but I'll list
   the 4 major reasons below: 

   1. Learning curve. 

     In my experience, you can beat your head against the wall and
     wait and wait and wait until a good deal on "just the right
     piece of gear" comes through.  And while you're waiting, you
     aren't learning ANYTHING.  I bought a QX7 sequencer a few
     years back - not because it was exactly what I wanted, but
     because I knew I had to start SOMEWHERE.  Hands-on experience
     with a piece of crap is worth a lot more than a box full of
     spec sheets and memorizing features. 

     While the ST may not be the OPTIMAL machine, it can do most of
     what anyone could want near term, allowing hands-on experience
     without the mega $$$ needed to buy a MAC, which brings me to
     my next point ... 

   2. Initial Cost 

     A MAC is a a HECK of a lot more expensive than an ST.  Unless
     you're filthy rich (or single 8-), cost is a concern.  I
     couldn't even thing about buy a new MAC (or really, even a new
     ST at their going rates). 

     The best price I've found on a used MAC in this neck of the
     woods is around $1300 (for a 512K unit).  Need a sequencer?
     $400.  Need a patch librarian?  $200.  Have more than one
     synth/drum/whatever you'd like to library?  Add $50 per unit.
     For me, that amounts to around $2200 for a fully equipped MAC.
     That's a lot of money. 

     I paid a whopping $640 for a used 1040ST with twice the memory
     of a used MAC, and with all the software I need to buy, I'll
     STILL come out cheaper than buying the MAC with NO software. 

     Now, I can't get Performer or OPcode's slick librarians for
     the ST, nor can I get DigiDesign's sampler software for the ST
     (yet).  But who cares?  By the time I'm well versed enough in
     using software based tools, the tools just might be available,
     which brings me (again) to my NEXT point ... 

   3. Future products

     Len/John/whoever_the_sage_is are quite correct in not buying
     futures.  However, to completely IGNORE futures is almost as
     bad as BUYING futures. 

     I've heard rumblings that several software makers are planning
     on porting software from the MAC to the ST.  Most decent
     sequencers are beginning to support MIDI files, so
     transportability should no longer be an issue (sure, it
     won't). 

     Hey - by the time I'm ready to "graduate" to a bigger or
     better machine, XYZ Corp may have a MIDI VAXstation that will
     bury the MAC.  Then I have another problem, which brings me to
     my fourth and final point: 

   4. Resale value

     If I buy (even) a (used) MAC, I can count on my cash outlay
     being close to $2000.  If and when I decide to sell the thing
     (which would probably be in a year or so), chances are that my
     investment will have depreciated close to 50%, if not more.
     There aren't a lot of people jumping at the chance to buy used
     MIDI software, y' know.  By the time I'm done configuring my
     ST, on the other hand, my investment will be around $1200. 

     If I take a 50% hit on the ST, I've flushed $600.  On the MAC,
     I lose $1000.  That $400 difference will almost buy an HR-16
     now ... who knows what it'll buy in a year? 


   I won't knock the MAC - if I could have justified spending the extra
   $$$, I probably would have ended up getting one, because it's a real
   nice machine.  But I won't badmouth the ST - and neither should anyone
   else.  For what most small timers need (and as much as we hate to
   admit it, we ARE smal timers), the ST is more than sufficient. 


brad_the_verbose

    Actually, I'm not as decided as I may sound.  I'm still waffling
    between the ST and the Mac.
    
    	db

    While we're discussing this stuff, I may as well throw in my own
    rule, which is only applicable to a resonably small subset of the
    music community:
    
        The availible software for a particular machine will never do
    	exactly what you want, so buy a machine which is easy to program.
              
    
    Don't get me wrong, I would much rather use my equiment than program
    it, but all the equipment I have represents far more potential than
    capability.  For that reason, I chose the ST over the Mac (or the
    Amiga). 
    
    Even though the ST OS is somewhat buggy, it's simplicity (as compared
    to the Mac OS or the Amiga OS) results in a smaller educational
    cost for a programmer. 
    
    With the ST and the language of my choice, I can resonably quickly whip
    up programs for a wide variety of purposes (this is ``MIDI
    purposes.'')--channelizers, shifter, special purpose sequencers,
    etc..
    
    An Amiga or Mac owner can do the same, but I believe that it took me
    substantially less time to get to that point with the ST than it would
    have taken me with the other machines.
    
    If I were to do many hours of actual programming after I had learned,
    (like the professionals do) then the startup cost would not be an
    issue, but I don't, so it is.
    
    With all of these machines, you still have to have a strong stomach
    and tens of hours to waste to start really programming them, though. 
    
    
    Steph

    
    
    Re .7
    
    I have to agree with Brad in terms of the availability and price
    of the Atari machine. I don't agree with the issue of the software.
    I think most of what you need as a commusicer? is actually available
    now and at quite a reasonable price. The basic problem that I am
    trying to solve right now is a lack of disk drive on mys sequencer
    and the refusla to repatch the sync leads on the qx5 every time
    I want to save or load a song. Not to mention the time wasted.
    
    This leaves me 3 options.
    
    1 Mc500. Great Machine, but not quite as flexible an operating system
    as the Qx5. E.G. no time slips etc.
    
    2 QX1 going for a song in the u.k. but a bastard to use and operate.
    
    3 QX3. Not tried one yet but sounds like it might fit the bill
    
    4 Atari based system. About the same price as a dedicated MC500
    or Qx3 but with a much better sequencing operating system. plus midi
    labrarian programs, plus sample wave form editing  for the akai.
    
    5 Mac based system about 2.5 times the cost of the above.
      ( the user interface doesn't seem 2.5 times better than the atari)       
  
      Which would you chose.              
   
     In fact I have an Atari/Steinberg system out on loan over the
    Holidays. I'll get back to you with a report.
    
    					Paul.                                
    
          

    Thanks for the archeology, guys.  I didn't claim credit because
    without researching the early topics I couldn't be sure I'd said
    it first, and "credit" didn't seem sufficiently important.
    
    I'd like to add a third possibility to this St-vs-Mac list.  When
    I outgrew my Apple I starting looking for a better home music computer.
    The choice came down to a Macintosh with color, an Atari with memory
    expansion and 40MB of hard disk, or an Amiga with a 40MB hard disk.
    I haunted the computer stores waiting for one of these to appear
    (in the store; I don't buy futures) for about 18 months while I
    saved my money.  I gave up on the Atari after a while; I no longer
    remember exactly why--probably their lack of "slots" for interfacing
    high-speed peripherals.
    
    When the Amiga 2000 was announced I decided that it was what I wanted.
    I stopped waiting for the color Mac.  The day before yesterday
    (December 21) I finally got it all together:
    
    	Commodore Amiga 2000, 3 MB of memory, 68000 CPU
    	ST251 40MB hard disk
    	Sony KV1311CR monitor, originally bought for the Apple
    	IBM PC feature, using an auxiliary 8088 CPU
    	MIDI interface
    	Various minor hardware items: floppy drives, modem, etc.
    	Deluxe Music Construction Set (DMCS), from Electronic Arts
    	Soundscape, from Mimetics
    	A system-exclusive librarian, public-domain
    
    I first knew I had to go beyond the Apple when I encountered a song
    that I liked but which needed real instruments to sound good.  You
    guys know better than I do that some songs, like Bach, sound good
    on any instrument: the beauty is in the melody.  Others require
    the right instrument.  Try doing the 1812 Overture on a piano--the
    cannons just don't make it!
    
    I got a Yamaha DX7 before it became popular out of sentiment: I
    worked with John Chowning at Stanford.  That got me turned on to
    the world of MIDI, and I've been building around it since then.
    Now that I have a good sequencer I have completed "stepping up"
    from my original Apple plus Mountain Hardware boards.
    
    I know you guys don't have the same musical taste that I do, so
    please don't flame me for revealing that the music that drove me
    from Apple to Amiga+DX7 was John Williams' "Theme from Superman".
    I spent some time with DMCS inputting the sheet music, and some
    more time with the DX7 working on a good voice for the melody.
    I'm still not completely satisfied, but I've already done better
    than the limits of the old system.
    
    I think the thing that finally tipped the balance in my mind between
    the Amiga and the other 68000-based systems was the large amount
    of public-domain software available for the Amiga.  I copied my
    entire library of DX7 voices from the Apple to the Amiga using a
    public-domain Amiga program.
    
    Having the IBM PC feature on the Amiga means that I can attach the
    Roland MPU-401 from the Apple and run the PC sequencer programs.
    There is software for copying files between the 68000 side and the
    8088 side, so if I can decode the file formats I should be able
    to write suitable filters to convert sequence files.  Even if I
    can't decode the files I can send data using MIDI, since each side
    will have its own MIDI interface.  That could be fun!
    
    So, I recommend that you consider the Amiga, in addition to the
    Macintosh and the Atari.  The QX3 also looks like a good machine,
    but since I don't need portability I don't have a need for it.
        John Sauter

    Well, my choice of 'hardware' was the Amiga too.
    
    But my principle (currently, my "only") application of the computer
    is music (sequencing, transcribing, patch librarian).
    
    From various things I've been reading, particularly the NAMM show
    review in Keyboard magazine, the Atari is rapidly becoming the standard
    music computer (no doubt because of the builtin MIDI interface).
    
    There were TONS of new software announcements (as well as futures)
    for the Atari, a fair amount for the Mac, some for the IBM PC, and
    not really anything significant for the Amiga.  It's really being
    overlooked as a music workhorse.
    
    John strikes me as the kind of guy who likes to write a lot of his
    own software.  I don't want to do that.  What little time I have
    for this I have to spend writing music, not software.
    
    For that reason, I've sorta ruled out the Amiga.  I'm sorta waiting
    for this mythical beast referred to as the "Mega ST".  I wanna see
    what it is, what it cost, and what affect it has on the 1040ST prices.
    
    Am I wrong about the Amiga.  I'm always willing to be straightened
    out, but I get the strong impression that there just isn't a lot
    of interest in it on the part of the music software developers.
    
    	db

    re: .12--You're right, I do like to do a lot of my own software.
    However, the Amiga 2000 has an IBM PC feature, so it can run the
    commercial software written for the PC.
    
    I think the popularity of the Amiga 500 will cause a significant
    amount of music software to be written for the Amiga, but that's
    "futures", and I don't buy futures.
        John Sauter

    Well I've actually gone out and priced some Macs.
    
    IMO, they are outrageously expensive.  Simply put, I can not afford
    to get a Mac, a Mac MIDI interface and all the software I need.
    
    One question about the Atari?  What kinds of tape sync can I get
    for it and how much extra do I pay for the hardware?  Tape sync 
    is important.  
    
    My goal is to have a system that allows me to experiment during
    composition with GREAT EASE.  At the moment it looks like unless
    I get a sequencer that can do tape sync (preferably SMPTE) I will
    have to use the FSK on my ESQ-1 to generate a clock signal, which
    drives the Atari, which THEN drives the synths.  Ugh.
    
    I'm beginning to come to the conclusion that the best solution for
    me right now is to expand my ESQ-1 sequencer memory up to 20K and
    stick with that.  One thing I will say for the ESQ-1 sequencer is
    that I can make experiments almost as fast as I can come up with
    ideas.  The only deficiency it has is that the step editing is
    pretty obfuscated and clumsy due to lack of the display and entry
    of the MIDI data.
    
    In fact, it looks like even if I got a computer based sequencer,
    I would probably use it mostly to assemble the final arrangement
    (and as a patch librarian, data dumper and transcriber).
    
    Maybe I should just wait.
    
    	db

    The current scuttlebutt in the industry does seem to be that the
    Amiga 500 has significantly changed things.  The 1000 suffered
    from the critical mass syndrome - nobody ('cept a few of us crazies)
    believed it would succeed (partly due to Commodore's unbelieveably
    inept marketing of the machine, partly because of Tramiel's flagrant
    lies about it), so just about nobody was willing to make the up
    front investment necessary to write music applications for it.  Well,
    the machine succeeded anyway, mostly on the basis of its incredible
    graphics, and now the 500 is selling faster than anyone (even
    Commodore) ever believed possible.  In particular, video users of
    the Amiga are driving the demand for music software, and now that
    there's a real market the beancounters can relate to, people are
    announcing the ports.  So the prospect for the Amigae (500, 1000,
    2000) is looking increasingly rosy.
    
    But don't buy futures.  And Macs are terribly overpriced for what
    they do.  But they sure do know how to market them.  The builtin
    Atari MIDI interface is no big deal, as an Amiga MIDI interface
    can be had for $50 or less.  Furthermore, Atari seems to be reduced
    to promising to be an Amiga "real soon now" (16 color 640 * 400,
    multitasking, hardware animation and graphics support, the blitter,
    etc.).
    
    len.
    

    (Flagrant lies?)
    
    For the ST, Hybrid Arts SMPTE Track is a full-featured sequencer plus a
    box with a bunch of different syncs--MIDI, FSK and SMPTE.  I think it
    is around $600, list. 
    
    The also make the same think, but without SMPTE sync for around
    $500.
    
    It is a fairly old (by comparison) product, so it should be resonably
    stable.  I have never seen a bad review, but personally I'm not
    really wild about anyone's high-end sequencer for the ST.  I'm going
    to wait until the one that I write arrives in the stores.
    
    At any rate, for what it is worth, it seems like it is close to
    what your looking for, and if you compare it to the cost of an SBX-80
    and a sequencer ($1000 + $350), it is an excellent deal.  Try either
    LaSalle's or Wurlies for a test drive.
         
    Doesn't someone out there own this package (I seem to recall)?
    
    Steph
                                                                  

    Yeh, I've been using it for about 10 months now. I haven't had a
    problem with it and the new version is shipping now. Much more 
    enhanced. It's a great package and it's integrated with the rest
    of their ST software like librarians and scoring software.
    
    							Andre
    

    
    Whats the latest opinion about "Commodore Amiga vs Atari ST" for MIDI 
    purposes? I've been looking through a load of old NOTES, and have come 
    to the following conclusions:

    a) The best sequencing software was always brought out on the Atari first,
       and then sometimes ported to other platforms.

    b) This has made the Atari an industry standard, and is often peoples'
       first choice.

    c) The Amiga is considered generally, to be a better machine, but as it
       doesn't have as much of the best MIDI software available as the Atari,
       its less popular amongst MIDI users.

    Now, its 2 years since most of these notes were posted. So.. has anything
    changed? Which would you choose, if buying today?

    D���

    Following on from what Dave said, I see you need a Hi-Res monitor for
    the better ST s/w packages.  Do you need a special monitor, or TV
    modulator for the Amiga.
    
    ie. which is cheaper;
    
    Amiga (I already have a TV) + interface.
    
          or
    
    ST 1040 + Hi-Res Monitor.
    
    Then I suppose it just comes down to software. ('cause you get better
    games for the Amiga !!! :-))
    
    matty

I make no claim to be a disinterested party- I have had an Amiga since the
developer's kit was available, and I still believe it to be the best machine
in or anywhere near its class. I must hasten to add, I have none of the
gut-level ferocious dislike for other manufacturers' machines which seems so
prevalent, so Atarists please don't get too annoyed!

I find it interesting that the Atari is regarded as an industry standard, I
never got that impression. It would seem to me that that boring old PC and its
clones still represent the only "standard" as far as having the most available
software, holding all judgment as to its suitability for music in abeyance.
Sigh.

My continued preference for the Amiga is based on a number of things, including
out-of-the-box multitasking (with many years of experience, at this point),
proven scalability (Amiga 500 through 3xxx machines running the same software),
4 internal voices, built-in speech synthesis capability, bitmapped
graphics/windowing system, availability of networking hardware and software
(including Xwindows and Unix),... I guess I'm blathering a bit. I know the
voices are "only" eight-bit, but seriously folks- does anyone jab Roland, Korg,
et al for not having 25 lines and 80 columns? This is a general-purpose
computer/workstation, and having the ability to add a digitizer and a program
like SynthiaII and have four eight-bit voices in a synth boasting every approach
currently used for synthesizing sounds (e.g. subtractive, additive) is pretty
good in my book!

The extremely simple built-in MIDI interface on the Atari ST might lead one to
think it a better machine for music. However, I can select any of a number of
interfaces, according to my needs. My own is an ECE, with one in, three
switchable thru/outs, and synch out. If I wanted that on the Atari I'd have to
purchase an external anyway.

Anyway, past experience has shown that expressing an opinion is guaranteed to
produce a corresponding rebuttal (feel free to prove me wrong!), but that's my
side of the fence. Good luck looking, AMIGo (oops, that slipped out...)!

re .18  

and >                  <<< Note 1089.20 by TLE::TLET8::ASHFORTH >>>
    >                      -< One for the AMIGAnauts >-

	Me too - further...

	An article in December  "Amiga World"  reviews a dozen or so 
sequencer packages - gee, those product names look aweful familiar,
havn't I seen them in  Atari and Mac topics in this conference ?

	Yes, to the multi-tasking and scaleability comments...

	also,  the PD arena for the Amiga looks to be pretty full - 
Thanks for all the (Fred) Fish.  Perhaps I should explain; Fred Fish 
has to date put together some 410 or so floppy disks of PD software, 
and it ain't all games.  I picked up NorthC last month, its a PD C 
environment and it WORKS.  Also, SEDT is a very credible EDT look 
alike.  If you want to hack in C and don't quite like everything that 
Bars & Pipes provides.....   they also sell  "Rules for Tools"  a disk 
with all the header files and several source code examples from the 
standard tool-box that comes with B & P.

	and BTW  there's the bridge board if you want to run MessyDos,
or PcUtils for reading IBM & clone disks - with another Fred Fish 
distributed update for formatting Atari floppies, comes with its own 
editor so you can create a formatter for the next config of tracks, 
sectors, etc., 1.44, 1.52, Meg - whatever.  There's at least one
Atarti emulator (legality rathole alert)  and A-Max if you change your
mind and decide you should have bought a Mac because its the only
machine that the latest (whatever) runs on.  Gee, I dunno, there's 
tons of stuff - the Atari owners probably have as good of a case, I 
won't deny it, I just don't have reason enough to switch.

	Oh, supposedly someone got an IBM-PC emulator to run under the 
Atari emulator - don't ask me why.  It seems the Amiga may be a very 
safe buy - if they don't port Finale I could probably run it anyway.

	Reg

    Well, I'll come out on the side of Atari, I guess.  Basically, I chose
    Atari over Amiga on price.  Amiga fans told me that the 500 would be
    too limited, and the 2000 was too much $$ for me.
    
    My main application was children's educational packages, and buying a
    520ST for $300, including the mono (hi-res) monitor, did the trick.  I
    picked a 520 because I wanted the RF modulator so the kids could use it
    with the TV. I then soon discovered that for MIDI, I really needed 1
    meg memory, so I found a 1040ST for another $150.  Now I don't have to
    share the CPU with the kids, either.  
    
    My cost was $450, this is used gear, of course.  I got a ton of PD
    software including a nice 32 track sequencer and patch editors for the
    synths that I own (these are all available here on the net in the
    MIDILIB area, BTW).  The only SW I've actually bought was the stuff for
    the kids!  
    
    As far as monitors go, on Ataris, the hi-res is the mono tube which is
    cheaper than the color tube anyway, so the need for a hi-res monitor
    really isn't an issue.  There still is a bit more MIDI SW for Atari
    than Amiga, but this is mostly market inertia; since a lot of MIDIots
    bought Ataris already, the market is a bit larger.  
    
    I will say, however, that if you really need the computer as a general
    purpose machine, Amiga is a better move today than Atari, since the SW
    situation is better.  If all you plan on running is MIDI applications,
    a second-hand 1040St is the way to go.
    
    
    								Brian

 I am also an Amiga nut; now you know it up front. I think the answer
 depends a bit on where you are located. In the US, Atari seems to be
 fading fast in terms of dealers and popularity. I understand that is not
 true in Europe and maybe elsewhere. 

 At this point I think the Atari still has the edge in number of
 MIDI software packages available. If you are looking for a particular
 patch editor for a less popular synth, chances are you will find it
 first for the Atari. If you are looking for quality MIDI software
 you can now (as of 1-2 years) find it for the Amiga. DR Ts seems to 
 provide similar packages for both Atari and Amiga. And the Amiga
 has some unique packages (my favorite is Bars & Pipes) that really
 make use of multitasking. If you also want to expand into multimedia
 or just have an animation running while your sequnecer plays your synth,
 you can't beat the Amiga.

 You can get an Amiga 500 for $500-600 (US) to use with a TV. Add another
 $110-200 for 2nd drive and/or $300 for monitor and you have a very capable 
 system. A 1 meg amiga DOES multitask although many MAC and PC owners are 
 skepticle until they see it. Even a 1/2 meg Amiga multitasks but not multiple 
 graphics intensive programs.

 If you add another few megs to the system above, you can easily format 
 a disk, show an animation and run your sequencer simultaneously. If 
 you get an extra serial port (easier on the Amiga 2000) you can download 
 software simultaneously too (because the MIDI interface shares the serial 
 port).

 The DEC Amiga community is active and supportive. There are
 many thousands of PD programs available. Currently, commercial
 software is cheaper than on the MAC and is sometimes a bit more
 expensive than on the Atari.

 Oh yeah, if you value portability over color/screen size and the rest, 
 Atari Stacy laptop and (standard shape) MAC will win...but you'll
 spend all of that time worrying about desk accessories ;-) ;-) 


 Dave

    Basically I need a simple but flexible computer based sequencer, and
    for that purpose the Atari suits because of its' price, because it has
    the MIDI interface and because there seems to be more MIDI software
    about.
    
    However, I've used the Amiga a lot for playing games on, and I think
    it's most impressive in comparison.  I didn't realise it could do
    Multitasking.  I would be nice to be able to have animation running at
    the same time as the Amiga controls the synth.
    
    Is there anything else to consider?  I don't want it for programming, I
    don't care if I get a database program that runs slightly slower than
    it would on an Amiga.
    
    Question for UK noters.  What's the basic price for a simple Amiga
    set-up?  400 quid for the Amiga 500, plus interface, then how much for
    some decent software?
    
    
    matty

re     <<< Note 1089.24 by IGETIT::BROWNM "Mistake! I dod that on porpoise!" >>>
>                            -< This is confusing. >-

>    Basically I need a simple but flexible computer based sequencer, and
>    for that purpose the Atari suits because of its' price, because it has
>    the MIDI interface and because there seems to be more MIDI software
>    about.

	"Simple but flexible", eh ?   OK.

		"More midi software about" ?  about what ?  More or better ?
    
>    However, I've used the Amiga a lot for playing games on, and I think
>    it's most impressive in comparison.  I didn't realise it could do
>    Multitasking.  I would be nice to be able to have animation running at
>    the same time as the Amiga controls the synth.

	This thing about multi-tasking... rather this thing about most 
people not knowing about the Amiga's capability...  rather this thing 
about CBM not advertizing...   [ Ten deep breaths ]

	OK, but to do some of the things that I would like done while 
I'm doing what I want to do, it needs a multi-port board.  Then I 
could down line load while printing and/or playing with MIDI - this
might be my next hardware purchase, there's just too many things that
need the serial port. 
    
>    Is there anything else to consider?  I don't want it for programming, I
>    don't care if I get a database program that runs slightly slower than
>    it would on an Amiga.

	beware the  "lack of expandability"  problem.  OK, for the 
foreseable future you don't need/want much, but if you get sucked into 
this stuff {You DID say "animation", right ?  -  I see multi-media in 
your future (-: } you'll want expansion capability.  68030 accelerator 
boards available up to 50MHz for ~$2,500 via mail order - this could drop 
fast when the 68040 boards come out ....RSN.

>    Question for UK noters.  What's the basic price for a simple Amiga
>    set-up?  400 quid for the Amiga 500, plus interface, then how much for
>    some decent software?

	See  BOMBE::AMIGA  there are a few UK noter in there you can 
"chat with"  for details on local prices and availability.

	Reg

Get an Atari.  I'm president of the local Atari user group, and we
would love to have more members.  :-)

The primary reason for staying with Atari is system cost.

So far as I have seen so far, to get the equivalent of the 640x400 pixel
rock-solid monichrome display that even the cheapest Atari has, you pay as
much for the Amiga "flicker fixer" as I would for an entire Atari ST system.

For my eyes, there's nothing better short of a VAXstation.

The Atari DOES have:
	- A good FREE C compiler/linker/librarian (Sozobon)
	- Lots and lots of free utilities (of the "Fred Fish" variety)
	- A VERY SUPPORTIVE network of user groups.
	- Lots of spreadsheets, word processing, desktop publishing,
	terminal emulation (including my multi-window/multi-session
	VT320 emulator), etc., stuff that you need.

The Amiga IS, in many ways, a better computer.  So is a VAX.  So is a
Cray.  We can't do multi-color full motion animation on the Atari with
the same aptitude that the Amiga does.  You pay for it.  Do you need it?
personally, I think color is for toys.  Music is done in black and white.

A 1040 or a 1040STe is very portable, if that's an issue.  One box,
plus monitor and mouse.  On the "road", you can run from the internal
floppy drive, but you'll want a hard drive at home.  The Stacy is even
MORE portable, but is costly and can be hard to obtain, as it is still
an FCC Class A device, and you may have to prove your basement is an
industrial site.

The biggest drawback is that Atari Corp appears to be run people no
marketing skills.  I plan on sending Sam Tramiel a copy of Guy
Kawasaki's "The Macintosh Way" as a New Year's gift.  (I'm serious - I
bought it last night and will be sending it out this week.)  Most Atari
users feel that if Atari could get it's corporate act together, this
could be a great machine, but Atari doesn't want to take any real
financial risk, and they treated their dealer network rudely, so as a
result they no longer have distribution channels that work very well
(Lecemere dropped them years ago, for example), and many of their most
supportive developers are running to other platforms in order to keep
food on the table.

    I was looking last night in a keyboard mag.  It was all 85% Atari, 10%
    Apple Mac and 5% Amiga, that's software and hardware.  For 299 pounds I
    can get a 520 Atari, public domain s/w, plug into my TV and then I'm up
    and running.  I can expand from there.
    
    I guy in a computer shop told me it is cheaper to get a 520 ST then
    expand to 1Mb than getting a 1040 ST?  He says the capabilities are
    exactly the same.  Is this right???
    
    Would I need a modulator for an Atari to ST link?
    
    matty

re          <<< Note 1089.26 by PRNSYS::LOMICKAJ "Jeffrey A. Lomicka" >>>
>                               -< Get an Atari >-


>					Music is done in black and white.

	sez who ?




	Ain'tcha ever heard of    BLUES  ?

>So far as I have seen so far, to get the equivalent of the 640x400 pixel
>rock-solid monichrome display that even the cheapest Atari has, you pay as
>much for the Amiga "flicker fixer" as I would for an entire Atari ST system.

If you choose the colors carefully you can get use this resolution
very easily on a standard color monitor. I run a terminal emulator
with 48 lines 80 columns regularly. Flicker fixer is nice ( and expensive)
but not necessary. If you gotta have _rock_ solid then so be it. I find that
using a sequencer is even easier on the eyes than text processing or reading,
which I can do for many hours without complaints at the 640x400 resolution.


(IMO) This makes the A500 very similar to the Ataris in price and 
portability.  


 >Music is done in black and white

If I had only a black and white monitor, I would miss or misinterepret
_lots_ of information on the screens of my sequencer. Sorry, I can't
even imagine it being as clear with shades of grey. 

>I think color is for toys.  That is an amazing statement from someone
in 1990! There must be at least 10 years of statistics around now
that claim otherwise.  Talk to a Software Useability Engineer today.
Do not pass go etc. ;-)

I realize many people get lots of good work done with black and white.
I am typing this on a black and white workstation monitor. But I know 
color can provide more information quicker. Ask a techie who does electrical
wiring if they would like small wires in 16 shades of grey.

Dave

    
    If your goal is strictly to use a home computer for MIDI applications
    ONLY, you will not go wrong with an Atari or an Amiga. The Atari
    certainly has the volume numbers for the "Home" Midi market. The
    built in Midi adapter was absolute marketing genius.
    
    As the size of the Amiga base has grown, so has the availability
    of MIDI software. The Amiga has numerous Amiga only Midi packages and
    most of the well known Atari programs have been ported and expanded
    ( like Dr T's line and Master Tracks Pro ).
       
    Whichever you chose don't fret about it for to long. Why be busy
    worrying when you could be just gettin' busy.
    
    Personally I chose the the Amiga.. because.
    
     1. Always been a sucker for elegant HW and SW architecture.
    
     2. Although MIDI is the main application, there are days when the
        muse isn't there. I can always do a little sampling, work on
        an animation, digitize a picture, work up a flyer for
        a band, ray trace a 3d graphic, let the kids type a book report, 
        zap some aliens and explore some dungeons. The only thing I refuse
        to use the Amiga for is speadsheets and databases. ( BOOOOORINNG)
                                                 
     3. Oh yeah....  I like Color.
    
    BTW. It is possible to do sequencing on a 512k single drive
         stock Amiga. I did it for a year. BUT just like the Atari
         1 MEG is much better.
                             
    
    brien
              
    

Re .29 - Don't read THAT much into my statement that "color is for
toys".  Color *can* be used in marvelous ways - but you PAY for it.

If you DO want color, I still think you should want an interlace-free
high res (at least 400 line) monitor, and use it on an Amiga.  This
business of trying to choose low contrast colors to minimize the screen
wiggle is NOT for me.  My eyes shake enough without help from the computer.

On the Atari, going color cuts you from 640x400 to 640x200, which I
find inadequete for 25 rows of text editing, let alone serious work. 
There are 1024x960 sized color add-on units for the Atari, but they are
not in widespread use, and for the price, you can get VGA support on
the Amiga anyway.  If color graphics are very important to you, it
would be hard for me to persuade you to go with Atari.

However, if money is important, 640x400 interlace-free black and white
at 70 frames/sec starts to look real nice on the Atari.

I noticed .29 also talked about "shades of gray".  There are no such
things on Atari computers.  You are either BLACK and WHITE, or your are
color, and some colors look like grey.  If you are going to use
multiple bitplanes, you may as well use a color tube!

For good advice on Atari configurations, availability, and prices, join
us in MAY14::ATARIST conference.  There are often used systems for sale
by people there that could meet your needs nicely.

Also, some more pro-atari comments from our old friend Chad Leigh:

From:	DECWRL::"[email protected]" "Another town one more show!" 19-DEC-1990 05:07:22.33
To:	prnsys::lomickaj 
 
The current state of the art is Notator/Cubase/Vision/Prof Comp, not]
Master Tracks Pro or the Dr Ts stuff.  The Amiga doesn't have anything
in this league yet that I know about.  Tha Atari and Mac do. (Check out
Cubase -- looks dynamite).  Anyway, a little more ammo for you :-)
Master Tracks Pro and Dr Ts is old stuff.
 
Chad
 
% ====== Internet headers and postmarks (see DECWRL::GATEWAY.DOC) ======
Received: by decpa.pa.dec.com; id AA29380; Wed, 19 Dec 90 02:08:42 -0800
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 1990 03:08 MST
From: Another town one more show! <[email protected]>
Subject: HI
To: prnsys::lomickaj
Message-Id: <[email protected]>
X-Envelope-To: [email protected]
X-Vms-To: IN%"[email protected]"

>    I guy in a computer shop told me it is cheaper to get a 520 ST then
>    expand to 1Mb than getting a 1040 ST?  He says the capabilities are
>    exactly the same.  Is this right???

Well, sort of.  The modern options are usually 5020STfm or 1040STe. 
The 1040STf doesn't seem to be in production anymore.  (The "e" means
extended, and inmplies "fm", the "f" means floppy, and the "m" means
modulator.)

Both feature internal disk drive and internal RF modulator for your
television.  Both are 640x400 monochome (requires Atari monitor), or
640x200 x4 colors (blurry on a TV, find on any RGB monitor) or 320x200
x16 colors (okay on a TV).

Over the 520, the 1040STe offers 1MB of memory, a color map of 4096
possible colors (versus the 520's 512 colors, but you still only get 16
at a time.)  The STe also has analog joystick ports, and hardware for
DMA output of digitized sound.  (8-bit linear samples, stereo, at 4
sample rates up to 56Khz.)  The "analog" joystick ports are pretty
general purpose for hooking up random TTL logic.  Also, the STe is
easily and reliably upgraded to 4MB RAM using cheap SIMM modules.  Toad
Computer's price is $549 (US).  (Monitor extra).

The 520STfm is $379 with 512K, and $499 with 1MB, so yes, it's $149
cheaper than the 1040STe with 1MB.  For $149, you miss out on the
digitized sound, the joystick ports, and an easy memory upgrade path
beyond 1MB.  (Although pgrades do exist.  Toad Computer will sell a 4MB
520STfm for $699.  4MBSTe is $849.)

If you get a second hand 1040STf - without an "m", it's the same as the
5020STfm with 1MB EXCEPT THERE IS NO RF MODULATOR or composite video
output.  You have to use RGB or the Monochrome tube.  I've seen these go
second hand for around $400, sometimes less.

All those prices are system unit/keyboard/mouse/720K floppy only,
without monitor.  These are advertised prices at Toad Computers,
800-448-TOAD, as appeaars in the December issue of Current Notes.

For reference, a 1MB Stacy laptop is $1539, and that includes the
internal 640x400 monitor and a 20MB internal hard disk drive. 
Otherwise, the Stacy is equivalent to the 1040STf (no "m".)

>    Would I need a modulator for an Atari to ST link?

As seen above, usually no.

	hmph. I recently traded my color monitor for a b&w monitor. For music
	applications, color isn't really an issue for me, resolution is.

	fwiw, the only Dr. T's software that I think looks better in color
	is Fingers, and that's only to keep track of the little running
	number streams. KCS is essentially the same product, only sharper.
	The scoring programs (copyist/quickscore) are both MUCH better in b&w
	because you can get more on the screen and the transcriptions are
	physically sharper. And the SampleMaker graphs are much easier to
	see in hi-res. 

	Of course, now I don't do animations with the Atari anymore, but since
	I have a 25MHz 386/387 with a VGA->NTSC board, that hasn't been an
	issue for me.

	For music applications, I'm still very pleased with the Atari. My
	total investment in hardware has been less than the cost of any one
	of my keyboards. The software investment has been, overall, pretty 
	reasonable, considering how many different pieces I have of Dr. T's
	stuff.

	/pjh

     
     This may not be the place to continue this but, where could
     I really compare these different sequencers on different platforms
     in the greater Boston area?
     
>The current state of the art is Notator/Cubase/Vision/Prof Comp, not]
>Master Tracks Pro or the Dr Ts stuff.  The Amiga doesn't have anything
>in this league yet that I know about.  Tha Atari and Mac do. (Check out
>Cubase -- looks dynamite).  Anyway, a little more ammo for you :-)
>Master Tracks Pro and Dr Ts is old stuff.
     
     Is there a store with a pro who could demo this SOTA stuff? After all
     we are supposed to choose the software we want and then get the
     computer to run it, right? The Amiga has at least two high end
     programs not available on other platforms that may or may not compare
     with something like Cubase. The problem is the learning curve and the
     religious fever. Who would know what is really SOTA without regard to
     platform? Maybe a letter to Electronic Musician? ;-)
     
     I suppose there is some irony in talking about $400(?) programs in a
     note that discusses the limitations of $500 computers (becasue we don't
     want to pay too much %-}) ...
     
     
     Dave

    Dave,
    
    Check out the last 2 years worth of issues of Keyboard and Electronic
    Musician.  If I remember correctly, all of the sequencers in questioned
    (Notator, Cubase, Vision, Performer/Professional Composer) have been 
    reviewed in depth.  Also, last month's monster issue of Keyboard
    (the buyer's guide) gives an extensive list of all the features,
    hardware requirements, etc. of every decent sequencer on the market.
    
    Dan (Atari and Notator owner)

     Regarding magazine reviews:
     
     OK, which ones got 10s? ;-)  I am impressed with these reviews
     and have read some of them, but I do generally distrust magazines
     and to a certain extent distrust MIDI "old timers". 
     
     This is part of the religious fever aspect as well as why DEC may be
     in trouble. There are many experts in DEC who haven't seen how PC
     sales can kill our mini sales, even if our minis are better is some
     ways. Lots of old timers (sometimes I qualify) hate to use wimp
     interfaces after using command line successfully. An expert command
     line user gives a jaundiced review, VMS users hate unix, unix people
     hate VMS, Amiga and Atari owners look down upon PC and Mac owners. ;-)
     ;-) 
     
     Do you fully trust the magazine reviews? A recent column said you can
     only transfer a SMF from the Amiga to PC & Atari by uploading to a BBS.
     I know and most Amiga owners know that an excellent $30 program
     can format read and write PC/ATARI disks. There are also  several PD
     programs for this. This kind of reporting does not inspire confidence
     for their reviews of sequencers.
     
     Dave

    I read the Buyers Guide in keyboard.  The stats are fine if you are an
    experienced user already, but as a novice it would have been nice to
    hear some comments on how the program `felt', how easy it is to learn,
    what support you get from the manufacturers etc.
    
    Question.  I've heard samples on an Amiga and I wasn't impressed.  They
    were fun, but there was so much background noise they were practically
    useless.  With the Atari 1040STfm, using a sampler program, what sort
    of quality can you get?  Can you use them as MIDI sound sources?  Does
    it depend on the sampling s/w how the samples sound quality-wise?
    
    
    matty

    Ok, Ok... so much for suggestions.
    
    I could demo Notator if you're interested (and if you live near
    Nashua, NH).  Drop me E-mail if so.
    
    -Dan
    

     >Does it depend on the sampling s/w how the samples sound quality-wise? 
     
     I think the problem is hardware (8 bits vs. 16 bits). There are software
     programs that can work with 16 bit samples but the hardware is not
     in the computers (except NeXt, maybe others) so the computers
     don't "play" the samples triggered by MIDI. I suspect this
     may become "affordable" in the next few years but not yet.
     I'm sure that most of the computers with 8-bit sampling can
     be used as MIDI sound sources with the right software.
     
     "affordable" is of course relative. I think you can get a sampler
     on a board for the MAC now, but it costs as much as or more than
     a sampler like those discussed in this conference. $$
     
     Dave

1.  For what it's worth, I would be glad to show Dr. T's Tiger Cub to
anyone willing to drive to Maynard for the demo.  You can try it "hands
on".  I don't have any of their fancier stuff, but I have their demo
disks that show some things.

2.  Without additional hardware, the Atari 1040STfm cannot play samples
that sound any better than AM radio.  The sound generator chip is the
Generial Instruments video game chip, which can be used as an 8-bit
logarathmic DAC.  There is no control over the filtering (what
filtering?) on the output, and you have to do all the sample timing in
software.

The 1040STe, on the other hand, sounds pretty good, especially when
using 56K stereo samples.  8-bit linear is not a lot of dynamic range,
but within that range it can sound okay.  The correct output filter is
always selected when you choose your sample rate, so you don't hear any
aliasing, and there is a "microwire" software interface to internal
BASS, TREBLE, BALANCE, and VOLUME controls.  It sounds kind of like an
FM radio station with a compressor/limiter before their transmitter. 
The limitation, of course, is RAM.

I haven't seen any programs that trigger ound samples from Midi sources,
but that doesn't mean they aren't there.

    I'll drive up to Maynard - all I need is a plane to get me over to the
    US, then a car to drive from there, oh, and a licence! ;-) ;-)
    
    Merry Christmas
    
    
    matty