MPC1000 or MC-909 or RS7000 ?

[Onkel Dunkel]

I have a Emu XL-7 (multitrack sequenser sound module grovebox thingy). It was kinda the first seriuos toy for my new hobby and for a long time i used this as a stand-alone but i found out that it was too complicated and time-consuming to fidle around with menus all the time and when i got my Virus i realised that it wasn?t very good for controlling the Virus. Then i decided to learn how to use Cubase (i had only played a little round with Cubasis earlier). Actually my Virus was a big turnover in my understading of music-production since it keeps challanging me in a positive maner and has opened my eyes for the posibillities of software sequensers. Now i only use the XL-7 as a sound module. Besides that the Virus has giving me far more understanding about synthesis that the XL-7 could ever do. Hail to the Virus (i guess the last of it was a little off subject )

[hatembr]

Originally Posted by unio mystica

I think it?s even better than most software sequencers around. It totally kicks pro tools ass!!!

m8, sorry but can't believe it !!

[unio mystica]

Originally Posted by hatembr

m8, sorry but can't believe it !!

So let me explain why:

First of all Pro Tools is not much of a MIDI sequencer. It?s designed for audio sequencing and it?s much better that way. Cubase and Logic for example are much better when working with MIDI. Have you ever thought why no one who is someone (when talking about electronic music) always use Cubase or Logic? Because they are better and easier MIDI sequencers than Pro Tools is.

1. The quantizing of the RM1X and Pro Tools are almost identical. Though it?s easier to use it on the RM1X.

2. Everything has it?s own knob or button on the RM1X. The Pro Tools system works only with a mouse unless you deside to buy the control unit which costs a fortune. The RM1X is easier to use overall.

3. Working with RM1X is very easy and fast because it hides inside functions that nobody thought when they were designing Pro Tools. It?s really clever when you get to know how to use it well. You can easily edit and/or copy&paste or create automations on anything you like with a few touches of buttons. Pro tools is more complicated. The edit mode in the RM1X is also easy as can be.

4. The analog-style step sequencer. Pro Tools has nothing to compete.

5. You have no distracktions between you and your music when working with the RM1X (or any other hw-sequencer). Read this and you get the point: http://www.eqmag.com/archive/1204/1204_Features2.htm

6. There are many badly designed functions in the Pro Tools. The sysex function for example sucks. We were trying to make the Pro Tools send sysex messages in our school with about 20 students and one teacher (who wasn?t using it for the first time). We never did...

7. You really don?t need everything on the face of the earth to make songs. MIDI is extremely simple. Just put a note there and there and adjust the velocities and a little filter automation over here. Why did you think they have never developed a completely new system after MIDI arrived (Which was 1983 I think. A long time if you think how fast the technology evolves nowadays). So what do you need Pro Tools for? There?s nothing there that RM1X hasn?t. Without the easy use.

+ I?m about the only one on this forum who really uses Pro Tools (for Audio recording, editing and mixing at my school) and the RM1X (at my own studio for making songs). I know them both.

And why is Pro Tools better:

1. Polyphony is virtually infinite.

2. If you work with software only.

3. If you like to see everything on a big screen.

4. If you use a lot of audio material.

5. It?s more versatile.

6. It?s more accurate.

7. Pro Tools is Pro Tools.

[unio mystica]

Originally Posted by nordlead

Hatembr, its actually quite easy to sequence, but when I try to do something more complicated I do it in cubase first. Once finished I hit rec on my rm1x and play on cubase and, voila, my sequence is in my rm1x!

...And like he says, you can use them both if you like.

[Merlot]

Originally Posted by unio mystica

So let me explain why:

First of all Pro Tools is not much of a MIDI sequencer. It?s designed for audio sequencing and it?s much better that way. Cubase and Logic for example are much better when working with MIDI. Have you ever thought why no one who is someone (when talking about electronic music) always use Cubase or Logic? Because they are better and easier MIDI sequencers than Pro Tools is

Agreed

Originally Posted by unio mystica

1. The quantizing of the RM1X and Pro Tools are almost identical. Though it?s easier to use it on the RM1X.

Dont know b/c I haven't used RM1X in about 6 years.

Originally Posted by unio mystica

2. Everything has it?s own knob or button on the RM1X. The Pro Tools system works only with a mouse unless you deside to buy the control unit which costs a fortune. The RM1X is easier to use overall.

Whats wrong with using a mouse. Here it comes down to personal preference.

Originally Posted by unio mystica

3. Working with RM1X is very easy and fast because it hides inside functions that nobody thought when they were designing Pro Tools. It?s really clever when you get to know how to use it well. You can easily edit and/or copy&paste or create automations on anything you like with a few touches of buttons. Pro tools is more complicated. The edit mode in the RM1X is also easy as can be.

Am not arguing for pro tools on this one, but logic and cubase make automation, editing, copying and pasting, and everything else the RM1X can edit easier b/c everything is graphically represented, and not on a 2 line display with just values. Also, all it takes to edit in logic and cubase, is a mouse click.

Originally Posted by unio mystica

4. The analog-style step sequencer. Pro Tools has nothing to compete.

Logic has the hyperedit, and there avst plugins for step sequencers.

Originally Posted by unio mystica

5. You have no distracktions between you and your music when working with the RM1X (or any other hw-sequencer). Read this and you get the point: http://www.eqmag.com/archive/1204/1204_Features2.htm

Good article. From the first paragraph though: "there?s also no denying that technology makes possible music that was never possible before, and can even provide the means to streamline its production. "
Comes down to personal preference and work style on this one, and how far you want to push your music.

Originally Posted by unio mystica

6. There are many badly designed functions in the Pro Tools. The sysex function for example sucks. We were trying to make the Pro Tools send sysex messages in our school with about 20 students and one teacher (who wasn?t using it for the first time). We never did...

Dont use pro tools, so I would be speaking out of my ass on this one.

Originally Posted by unio mystica

7. You really don?t need everything on the face of the earth to make songs. MIDI is extremely simple. Just put a note there and there and adjust the velocities and a little filter automation over here. Why did you think they have never developed a completely new system after MIDI arrived (Which was 1983 I think. A long time if you think how fast the technology evolves nowadays). So what do you need Pro Tools for? There?s nothing there that RM1X hasn?t. Without the easy use.

If it makes life easier, why would you not want to use it? Pro tools in my opinion is easier to use due to the graphical representations of the waveformms, or piano roll in the case of MIDI. I am no music scholar, so the visualization of the piano roll makes it easier instead of imputting C#4, D2, Bb7, etc.....

Originally Posted by unio mystica

And why is Pro Tools better:
1. Polyphony is virtually infinite.
2. If you work with software only.
3. If you like to see everything on a big screen.
4. If you use a lot of audio material.
5. It?s more versatile.
6. It?s more accurate.
7. Pro Tools is Pro Tools.

Those are enough right there to make me want to use a software sequencer.[/b]

[unio mystica]

Originally Posted by Merlot

Agreed

Dont know b/c I haven't used RM1X in about 6 years.

Whats wrong with using a mouse. Here it comes down to personal preference.

Am not arguing for pro tools on this one, but logic and cubase make automation, editing, copying and pasting, and everything else the RM1X can edit easier b/c everything is graphically represented, and not on a 2 line display with just values. Also, all it takes to edit in logic and cubase, is a mouse click.

Logic has the hyperedit, and there avst plugins for step sequencers.

Good article. From the first paragraph though: "there?s also no denying that technology makes possible music that was never possible before, and can even provide the means to streamline its production. "
Comes down to personal preference and work style on this one, and how far you want to push your music.

Dont use pro tools, so I would be speaking out of my ass on this one.

If it makes life easier, why would you not want to use it? Pro tools in my opinion is easier to use due to the graphical representations of the waveformms, or piano roll in the case of MIDI. I am no music scholar, so the visualization of the piano roll makes it easier instead of imputting C#4, D2, Bb7, etc.....

Those are enough right there to make me want to use a software sequencer.[/b]

You are right on the section 2. It?s all about how you wish to work.

You are also right when it comes to editing with Cubase or Logic (3.). They are easier. But Pro Tools isn?t.

4. Right again.

5. You got a point there, but it?s again all about how you wish to work.

7. And the same thing again. All about how you wish to work.

back to the topic

Choose the yamaha or the akai: Check them both out before desiding

[unio mystica]

Originally Posted by Merlot

Those are enough right there to make me want to use a software sequencer.[/b]

Right. It has many posibilities but if you make electronic music I would choose either Cubase or Logic or a Hardware sequencer. Pro Tools is so damn bad at MIDI-sequencing.

[Merlot]

Originally Posted by unio mystica

Pro Tools is so damn bad at MIDI-sequencing.

Agreed. But for audio it cant be beat. Once again, it all comes down to how YOU want to work. Good conersation!

[unio mystica]

RM1X doesn?t even have audio-sequencing capabilities. I was talking about MIDI all the time. Remember that this conversation began about hardware-sequencers.

Good conversation indeed.

[ledge]

Originally Posted by unio mystica

So let me explain why:


6. There are many badly designed functions in the Pro Tools. The sysex function for example sucks. We were trying to make the Pro Tools send sysex messages in our school with about 20 students and one teacher (who wasn?t using it for the first time). We never did...

Odd, I had no problems with this after some initial issues with getting protools to play anything, (talk about a complete resource hog, if you ever get a DIGI002 save yourself a lot of pain and reinstall your entire OS from scratch, although the latest versions of protools (6.4 on) seem to be a bit more forgiving.)

Yes midi is not the best on it but it has been getting better and there seem to be a few really nice features added in 6.7 but that is a goddamn upgrade for me It now seems to have a step sequencer but I can't comment on it as I don't have 6.7