Alesis Andromeda A6

Paulo thanks for your detailed response. I'm glad to
see someone agrees with me in regards to the tonal
characteristics of the MKS-70.

I think I am still interested in buying an A6, mainly
do to the fact that it is an analog, and one of the
most flexible..

One more question- Since you seem familiar with the Q
as well- Can the A6 be softer/rounder than the Q. I
have done alot of programming with the Q and always
find it a bit bright/harsh, at least for my own
tastes.

Tonally how does the A6 compares to the Q?

Thanks for all your feedback,
Josh

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus

Hi Joshua

That is a good question. In fact I know and agree 100% with you regarding
the Q...thats my gripe with it. BUt it compensates on the percussion and
electro sound front...

Regarding the A6, it can get almost as smooth as you want, and as
agreesive /harsh as you want also. But once again be careful not aspecting
instant gratification...

Lets put it simply...if you get the A6 and spend your time using/listening
the presets..you will (very soon) feel you made a very wrong decision
buying it...believe me I almost thought like this if it wasn't for some
(very few) gems/beautiful sounds in the presets (IMO).

I tell you that because I see that in that tone regard I think we are in
the same wavelenght.

Preferably you should spend quality time with one A6 before jumping in
because of that fact. It can usualy get "to americano..." and not Roland
Smooth...but if you understand it, then you get to its smooth inners and
some beautiful sonorities coming from the sem filter when with some amount
of resonance, that get a sonoritie...somehow softh and "rustie"/oldie that
is simply beautiful IMO.

I do not have a NL3 but by the demos I listened and a 1 hour experience
with it on an show made feel it is somehow a bit harsh also. Do you think
it is?

Best,
Paulo

peabreu(AT)sapo.pt
will get your contact sooner.

Joshua Fuller said:

> Paulo thanks for your detailed response. I'm glad to
> see someone agrees with me in regards to the tonal
> characteristics of the MKS-70.
>
> I think I am still interested in buying an A6, mainly
> do to the fact that it is an analog, and one of the
> most flexible..
>
> One more question- Since you seem familiar with the Q
> as well- Can the A6 be softer/rounder than the Q. I
> have done alot of programming with the Q and always
> find it a bit bright/harsh, at least for my own
> tastes.
>
> Tonally how does the A6 compares to the Q?
>
> Thanks for all your feedback,
> Josh
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes
> http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> To visit your group on the web, go to:
>  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Andromeda_A6-ION/
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>  Andromeda_A6-ION-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
>  http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>

Paulo,

Thanks for your feedback. In my opinion the Nord 3 sounds a little more similar to a 
Roland as oppossed to the Waldorf.

I love my Q and XT, and they have a signature sound, but there is something about 
the Nord 3 and Rolands that just sound/feel softer to me. See I would say the 
waldorfs are very masculine sounding, where as the Rolands and Nord 3 have a bit of 
a softer feminine quality.  Nord 3 can be brittle and aggressive, however I think it is 
better at softer and mellow textures. It can do great FM sounds. Really percussive/
woody sounding textures. Although I said percussive, these percussive sounds can be 
very warm, almost organic in a sense.

At the same time there is really no comparison between the MKS-70 and the Nord 3. 
If there was it probably would just be- the Nord 3 sounds closer to a Roland MKS-70 
than a Waldorf does.

Also- The nord lead/lead 2 are much different sounding than the nord 3. In fact they 
don't call the Nord 3 "lead", it is now the "Nord 3 Performance Synthesizer".

-Josh

OK

Thanks a lot. I got it ;)

Best,
Paulo

dnaflr2@... said:

> Paulo,
>
> Thanks for your feedback. In my opinion the Nord 3 sounds a little more
> similar to a
> Roland as oppossed to the Waldorf.
>
> I love my Q and XT, and they have a signature sound, but there is
> something about
> the Nord 3 and Rolands that just sound/feel softer to me. See I would say
> the
> waldorfs are very masculine sounding, where as the Rolands and Nord 3 have
> a bit of
> a softer feminine quality.  Nord 3 can be brittle and aggressive, however
> I think it is
> better at softer and mellow textures. It can do great FM sounds. Really
> percussive/
> woody sounding textures. Although I said percussive, these percussive
> sounds can be
> very warm, almost organic in a sense.
>
> At the same time there is really no comparison between the MKS-70 and the
> Nord 3.
> If there was it probably would just be- the Nord 3 sounds closer to a
> Roland MKS-70
> than a Waldorf does.
>
> Also- The nord lead/lead 2 are much different sounding than the nord 3. In
> fact they
> don't call the Nord 3 "lead", it is now the "Nord 3 Performance
> Synthesizer".
>
> -Josh
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> To visit your group on the web, go to:
>  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Andromeda_A6-ION/
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>  Andromeda_A6-ION-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
>  http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>