Emu XL-7 & MP-7 User's Group

Hi bohemian_grooove,

I can appreciate everyone's right to their own opinion, however subjective
and ignorant it may be, and perhaps your public forum manufacturer slagging
was more for entertainment's sake rather than factual content, however there
are some serious flaws in your argument.


> YAY! another mono 8 voice synth from Roland

Roland's flagship 'sequencer/sound module' box, the MC-505, was released
around 4 years ago. It's a 64 voice, 8 part (plus another 8 parts using the
'realtime phrase sequence') multitimbral synth. This matches the specs of
the 'non-turbo' E-mu modules. Why do you think the MC-909 replacement should
be any less?


> that takes a tech writing
> masters degree to decipher the manual and an engineering degree to
> navigate.

The MC-505 manual is, in fact, very thorough and well explained, and
organised into logical chapters with a full index.

I can't help suspecting many people blame their inability to grasp topics of
a difficult nature on user manuals, when it's simply through their own
inexperience. In time, things start to fall into place.


> aside from sampling...it prolly ain't got nothin on the
> E-MU.

Considering the MC-505 offers a '4 layer' sample + synthesis approach, not
unlike that used by all E-mu modules, it also adds individual part
adjustment of reverb and delay sends, plus a third 'insert' effect, as well
as offering the unique ability to mix parts from different patterns (to
allow proper mixing of several songs into a performance, for example).

I'd say the Roland already has something E-mu should take into
consideration. I fully realise E-mu's effects architecture is hardware
limited, however some sort of 'megamix' feature would be most welcome to
make it truly a live performance 'dance' tool.


> my last main synth was an XP-50 i've owned since 96. after 6
> long years i was just beginning to figure out how it all worked

You're right, 6 years is a considerably long time to work out how a
relatively basic synth. How would a 'better' manual have helped?


> when i
> noticed last july i could get an XL-7 from mars music for $750 -$200
> rebate from E-MU (yes..$550 =)

I bought an Amiga 500 with a 7.6MHz clock speed back in 1996 for around
AUD$750. I then added 512MB of RAM (total now 1MB) for around another
AUD$300 or so. Technology advances, prices drop, that's life.


> after a couple hours of using the
> thing i wanted to kick myself in the ass for not buying an E-MU
> sooner.

The XL-7 didn't exist in 1996. In the meantime, you've spend 6 years
learning all about music technology and have been able to receive the XL-7
with open arms. MIDI, filters, envelopes, and so on, is a tricky subject for
anyone new to synthesis, and so I can't see the XL-7 being too different.

And the successor to the XL-7 should be even more amazing. Let's just hope
the soft synth revolution doesn't prevent it from becoming a reality. The
E-mu sampling and RFX effects technology is already in existence, and they
now have the sequencer to complete the picture.

The Roland 'groove' series has paved the way for new creations, such as the
XL-7, to come into being. Even today, the MC-505 holds its own as a
sequencer, if not for a tired sound set. It's a credit to Roland also to be
releasing premium quality metal hardware in this near all-plastic age, plus
operating systems that perform near perfect first go.

In the meantime, let's see what the Roland MC-909 has to offer instead of
making obviously ignorant and speculative statements.

Phil