Conference napalm::commusic_v1

    From what I can tell, any programmability on the MV3 is very limited;
    in fact, from the ambiguity of the ads, I'm persuaded to think that
    this is a "preset only" machine like the MV2, but can do up to 3 of
    those presets at once (like the QV). 

    The QV can do up to 4 FX at a time, and can simultaneously deal with up
    to 8 MIDI CCs - almost all aspects of an effect set can be modulated
    via MIDI.  Incredibly powerful.  And only $50 more. The sound quality
    is also *very*, *very* good.  I have both an MV2 and a QV - the QV is a
    much higher quality box. 

    If Alesis discounts go like they usually do, I'd expect the MV3 to go
    for a more reasonable $275-299. 

-b

Some guy on USENET gave the MVIII great praise (and he has a QV too), saying 
that the reverb programs sounded better and more transparent.  He also mentioned
it being quite programmable.  Unfortunately I didn't save his note and it
is probably no longer on the servers as this was several weeks ago.

Chad

Looked over the manual today (but still haven't heard it).

I recall the following parameters as being programmable:
(I've forgotten a few)

Reverb: algorithm, level
Delay: time, regeneration, level
Chorus: algorithm (depth), speed
EQ: cutoff frequency (?)

Overall: configuration, MIDI continuous controller routing, MIDI mapping.

Delay is about 100ms max in configurations which use all 4 effects.
Delay is about 400ms max in configurations which do not use reverb (I think
only two such configurations).

15 possible configurations. I think only one CC routing active at a time.
128 MIDI mappings (ie, can only call up 128 out of 200 possible patches using
MIDI program change messages).

---------
So how does this compare with the Quadraverb? (Which I know nothing about.)

/Mitch

ps. Daddy's price on the QV is $499, so I'd expect "real" prices on the MVIII
to be more like $300, as Brad pointed out.

    
    The USENET review mentioned earlier said that the big diff between the
    MV-III and the QV is that you have limited use of multi-effects. 
    Apparently you can get things like verb and chorus going simultaneously
    but that's about it.  He felt it was useful as a reverb-only box to
    free up another unit to do other effects.  
    
    He also mentioned that he contacted Alesis to see why the MV reverb
    sounded better than the QV, and was told that they had developed some
    new algorithms.
    
    							Brian

    Boy.  Wonder if they'll try to update the QV firmware with the new
    algorithms?  Probably more involved than just blasting a ROM, tho.
    Sigh. 

    Not to disagree with Chad, but the QV is infinitely more programmable
    than the MV3.
    
    As for actual parameters - well, there's too much to list, acutally.
    There are 5 possible configurations, but each configuration is
    extremely flexible.  Things can be pre or post effected, you can have
    to 4 FX at a time, etc.  Here are the configurations, without a lot of
    detail: 

	QUADmode:	EQ -> Pitch -> Delay -> Reverb
	Config 2:	Lezlie -> Delay -> Reverb
	Config 3:	Graphic EQ -> Delay
	Config 4:	5 Band EQ -> Pitch -> Delay
	Config 5:	3 band EQ -> Reverb

    You'll get your best reverbs out of Config 5, where "there is more
    processing power available for reverb effects".  Same goes with C3 and
    delay - you can get up to 1.5 seconds mono or 3/4 second stereo delay.
    Pretty impressive. 

    As for other parameters, here's the deal:

	Reverbs: plate, room, chamber, hall, reverse
	 Params: 2 inputs (varied sources), input mix, pre-delay value
		 and mix, decay, diffusion, density, lo & hi freq. decay,
		 reverb gate (on/off), gate hold time, gate release,
		 gate level (level after gate closes)

	Delays:	 ping-pong, stereo, mono (400-1500 ms, depending on config)
	 Params: input source (pre/post EQ), input mix, delay time, feedback

	Pitch:	 mono/stereo chorus, mono/stereo flange, phase shift, detune
	 Params: input source (pre/post EQ), LFO waveshape (triangle/square),
		 LFO speed, depth, feedback, trigger flange (flange only),
		 detune amount (-99 to +99, about a � step each way)

		 In Lezlie, config, pitch section is used to simulate the 
		 effect.  In this case, params are motor control (on/off),
		 motor speed (slow/fast), stereo separation, high rotor
		 level (EQ boost), output level

	EQ:	 3 band parametric, 5 band parametric, 11 band graphic
	 Params: Frequency - lo, lo mid, mid, hi mid, hi (1 Hz steps)
		 Amplitude - ditto (.05dB steps)
		 Bandwidth - lo, mid, hi (.01 octave steps)
		 Adjustable bands (Hz): 16 32 62 126 500 1k 2k 4k 8k 16k

    Up to 8 MIDI modulation sources can be mapped to almost any of the
    above parameters, and also mix parameters (not listed above).  Each
    sources has its own amplitude setting.  These are stored per patch. 

    Hope that helps, Mitch.

-b

    RE: .2, .4
    
    I have a QV on order, and the most important thing to me is the
    reverb, as I own a Roland DEP-5 for multiple effects. Now I'm
    hearing that the MV actually has better reverb - just when I thought
    it was the best decision to go with the QV!
    
    Well, I guess this could throw a monkey-wrench into the works and
    I should go give the MV III a listen.
    
    Bill

    Depends on what you call better.  The QV is very smooth.  The MV2 has a
    bit more *variety* ... I suspect that you can achieve similar variety
    with a bit of astute programming and config 5 (instead of Quadmode). 

    I can't comment on the MV3, since I've enver heard one - but I'm very
    happy with my Quadraverb. 

-b

    Did I miss something?  What advantage does the MVIII have over the MV
    II besides programmability and maybe a few other things?  With as cheap as 
    MV IIs are going now, couldn't you get two used MV IIs for the price of a 
    new MV III?
    
    Steve

    The MVIII will do 3 effects at a time, is programmable and has better
    algorithms for reverb than the MVII which will only do 1 effect and has
    100 non-modifyable presets.

    Well, shut my mouth ...  :)  Now, I understand the question.  Nothing
    like competing with yourself for business ...
    
    Steve

Another note: I believe while the MV III goes to 15Khz, the QV goes to 20Khz.
Might be important for some effects...

	Jim

    In case anyone is interested, it is fun to create a robovoice.
    The procedure is simple:
    
    Take a very short delay time and a very high regeneration. The delay
    will form its own frequency.
    
    Try it!! Reminds of Battlestar Galactica...
    
    Frank.

    I've used a ring modulator to simulate a robot voice.  It sounds
    so much like the computer voice in ELP's "Karn Evil 9" that I tend
    to believe that's what ELP used.

    Actually I was interested in what way others use the MIDIVERB to create
    special effects such as a robovoice.
    
    BTW did you build a ringmodulator for this purpose?
    
    Frank.

>    Actually I was interested in what way others use the MIDIVERB to create
>    special effects such as a robovoice.
    
    I knew that - I just thought anyone intrigued by the idea of creating
    a robot voice might also be interested in other ways to do it.
    
    > Did you build a ring modulator for this purpose?
    
    Actually, I just built it for the heck of it.   This was about the
    only useful thing I found it could do.  The nature of a ring modulator
    makes it very difficult to do anything musical with the pitches except
    perhaps for a sorta ring modulator style chorusing effect.

Still on the ring modulator tangent...  Back in the modular system days, I
found that I could get musical sounds out of one by making the carrier and
modulator oscillators both track the keyboard.  I got some nice timbres that
way.  Hmmm.  What if I took a ring modulator and feed it a sample as one input
and used another synth (same MIDI controller) as the second input?  I was about
to say that one couldn't use this trick in these MIDI days.


	Eir�kur

    Apparently a ring modulator was actually used to create the real Cylon
    voice - according to an electronics mag. I read. Well, so they
    _reckoned_, anyway. It too had a project for one (a
    ring modulator, not a Cylon!) 
    
    Greg.

This seemed like a reasonable place to tack on a query about the Microverb III,
which lacks the programmability and MIDI accessibility of the MIDIverb.

Anyone have one? Anyone who now has a MIDIverb? I've noticed that many times the
customization features on a given device represent quite a small amount of its
true usefulness (read: they're not used), and I wondered if the presets on the
Microverb cover all the major DSP bases well enough to make the "tweaking"
available on the MIDIverb less important. (I'm ignoring the MIDI-capable aspects
of the MIDIverb for the purposes of this comparison.)

Thanks in advance for any info.

Cheers,
	Bob