| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 2439.1 | no excuse for buggy software | KEYS::MOELLER | Don't like my noting ? Call 1-(800)EATWITHELVIS | Mon Sep 10 1990 15:18 | 18 |
| Brad, I hear your frustration. The JX analog sounds are really rich
and one doesn't hear them enough anymore.
However ! Your comments remind me of someone who bought a Jeep five
years ago and now wants it to look and ride like a Mercedes, and is
angry with the manufacturer because there's no in-chassis upgrade.
The market for our toys is SMALL ! And most of these instruments are
one-time things, unless the manufacturer seizes on it as an
'architecture' ala' DX FM synthesis or Roland's LA stuff.
(ahem) I have none of your gripes about my gear.. there's been more
hardware upgrades and software updates to the EMAX family than I can
count. And Kurzweil did pretty well with the soundblock concept for
the 1000 modules, despite the high initial cost. Maybe that's what I
got for buying American.
karl
|
| 2439.2 | Ensoniq has it together | DREGS::BLICKSTEIN | This is your brain on Unix | Mon Sep 10 1990 15:19 | 20 |
| Brad,
I don't think you can buy any more Ensoniq products that aren't easily
software upgradeable (load OS from floppy).
And unlike most companies, Ensoniq has been updating their loadable
OS's pretty regularly.
No one at Roland can seem to tell me how to reliably get informed of
and obtain updates for the S-550 software even though there have been
a few such updates.
But one good thing I will say about Roland is that they seem to be
heading towards a standard media format for sample data such that
one sample card works for a lot of different Roland units. Cards
for my U-220 also work on a bunch of other sample-players and even
some synths such as the D-70. That's definitely the way to go.
Sigh, I just wish Ensoniq made more stuff - I really think those guys
know what they're doing, they just aren't doing enough of it.
|
| 2439.3 | sorry | KEYS::MOELLER | Don't like my noting ? Call 1-(800)EATWITHELVIS | Mon Sep 10 1990 15:22 | 4 |
| >Sigh, I just wish Ensoniq made more stuff - I really think those guys
>know what they're doing, they just aren't doing enough of it.
Isn't Ensoniq made in the USA ?
|
| 2439.4 | The golden rule | CSC32::MOLLER | Give me Portability, not excuses | Mon Sep 10 1990 15:23 | 18 |
| My feelings exactly. I guess there is more money to be made in
selling new product versus upgrading ROM's. I have a lot of older
gear & while it works fine, I don't expect to ever see an upgrade.
Along the same lines, sometimes an upgrade messes up features
that you were using. The upgrade to the MX-8 would change the
way it does velocity compression, and I prefer the old way & that's
the way it's going to stay. A freind of mine got very upset when
Ensoniq changed an internal function of the sequencer (and let them
know about it as soon as he found out that his months of sequencing
was now crippled).
I have found that you have to buy your musical products with the
thought that it will eventually be obsoleted & you will be left
sitting a the most recent update for a loooooooooooonnnnnnnnnnng
time.
Jens_who_still_plays_guitar_using_a_tube_amplifier_and_won't_change.
|
| 2439.5 | yeah, but ... (I really hear you) | DYPSS1::SCHAFER | I used to wear a big man's hat... | Mon Sep 10 1990 15:39 | 24 |
| A few specific responses to illustrate my point ...
Kurzweil: see the banter in 1066.
Ensoniq: if they were *really* playing ball, they would have come out
with an additional ROM set for the ESQ1. They would have made their
sequencers SYSEX compatible (using SYSEX as a common format or
something). Etc.
Emu: if they're *really* going to do things right, they'll come out
with an upgrade for the Proteus that allows it to accept cards or some
type of external sample loads. I'll wait to see what happens.
I'm not complaining that my "Jeep doesn't ride like a Mercedes" (I
kinda like that!) ... what I am complaining about is that I can't get
an FM radio for my Jeep. I understand that our market is fairly small,
but one would think that, once a machine is built, further enhancements
would be only incremental expense (e.g., the JX postulate in .0).
Heck, I even wish that my Oberheim would respond to MIDI sustain, and
it's 10 years old. Maybe I'm dreaming ... but I'd *still* like to see
a multi-timbral 32 voice JX series synth in a single rack space.....
+b (whining indiscriminately)
|
| 2439.6 | Ensoniq IS playing ball | DREGS::BLICKSTEIN | This is your brain on Unix | Tue Sep 11 1990 11:06 | 21 |
| > Ensoniq: if they were *really* playing ball, they would have come out
> with an additional ROM set for the ESQ1.
Ensoniq's story with the ESQ-1 is that there is no more room in
the OS memory for enhancements.
Ensoniq IS playing ball with their newer products, ALL of which have
soft-loaded operating systems. At least to the best of my knowledge.
> They would have made their sequencers SYSEX compatible (using SYSEX
> as a common format or something).
I don't see any need for SYSEX compatability. What I want is a
conversion utility, and at one time an Ensoniq person told me that
they may provide such a utility for converting SQ-series sequences
to the VFX-SD. However, they were not going to let that hold up
the release of the VFX-SD and I don't blame them for that.
I will grant you however that if they were going to provide such a
thing, I'd likke to think that we'd have it by now.
|
| 2439.7 | Be Thankful For The Crumbs You Get | AQUA::ROST | Mahavishnu versus Motormouth | Tue Sep 11 1990 12:50 | 38 |
|
Re: Ensoniq
Having a disk based OS leaves the door open to third party OSes, which
happened for the Mirage. I think Ensoniq stumbled a bit by not making
the EPS and VFX sequencers identical (note the new EPS-16 is VFX-like
in that respect) and also in making the VFX, VFX-SD and SQ1 not truly
patch compatible.
However, they *did* provide patch and sequence upgradability going from
the ESQ-1 to the SQ-80, and have a sample upgrade path from the Mirage
to the EPS to the EPS-16, which is more of an effort than some other
manufacturers have made.
Re: Roland
Korg and Roland are about tied for worst upgrade paths:
Poly 800 --> DW6/8000 --> DS-8/707 --> M1
Juno 60 --> Juno 106 --> Alpha Juno --\
--> L/A
JX3P --> JX8/10 --/
It's tough to keep an architecture happening for a long time. Yamaha
4-op lasted, what 6 years? That's probably the record. Now that the
D-70 is here (and not patch compatible with the D-50) Roland is at it
again. If you think the JX got slighted, go find some Roland S-10
sample disks or ROM cards for the Korg P3 or patches for a Casio VZ.
Depending on third party support is just your typical vaporware
situation. It they deliver the goods, great, but until you can see,
hear and touch it, it's not real.
Brian
|
| 2439.8 | It's possible | DREGS::BLICKSTEIN | This is your brain on Unix | Tue Sep 11 1990 16:22 | 14 |
| Brian, I think it's possible that you may see an ESQ/SQ-to-VFXSD
sequence converter at some point. I got the impression that someone
was working on that.
There was also speculation about a ESQ/SQ to VFX patch "converter"
which would attempt to approximate an ESQ patch on the VFX. Many
of the ESQ/SQ samples have reasonable analogs in the VFX. However
the synth architecture is fairly radically different so it's not really
a "conversion" so much as an AI-like approximation.
With the Ensoniq rep listening, I told a Daddy's salesman that when
that conversion software arrives he can write me up a slip for a
VFX-SD. That's really the only thing stopping me from getting
a VFX-SD.
|