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

does anyone out there have eloader for mac os 9. or 10.
thanks ripperesynth
----- Original Message -----
From: "pranaearth" <pranaearth@...>
To: <xl7@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, September 22, 2002 12:45 AM
Subject: [xl7] Re: Shots of the new Roland MC909


> Yeah, I absolutly didn't mean to come across as so serious :) And
> after you said that about Mr. Aikin, I did realize that he's been
> doing this so long that he probably taught God about
> synthesis...lol. I mean I'm still learning my XL7 (not even had it a
> month) and there are some things that I really picked up on quickly,
> and I can't help think back to when I used to own a MC303 and how
> some things were easier on the 303. Different, not better, I guess
> I'm trying to say.
> And really, isn't it about the music anyway?
> I'm gonna get back to trying to make some.... :)
> prana
>
>
> --- In xl7@y..., "Ravi Ivan Sharma" <noision1@h...> wrote:
> > I could see Aiken saying that at the time. He is so smart that he
> can use most synths regardless of their UI with his eyes closed. His
> perspective definately was from a seasoned synthesis pro's
> perspective, not a beginners. I based my hopefully obviously wide
> and sarcastic comments on a brief and unscientific runby of the
> comments at sonic state. Also I was exaggerating a bit obviously for
> effect, just in case someone out their might laugh. Sorry to all the
> serious people. :()
> >
> > As I said, I don't know much about the XPs including the later
> ones, which I don't doubt got better as you say. I think Roland is a
> great company.
> >
> > Ravi
> >   ----- Original Message -----
> >   From: pranaearth
> >   To: xl7@y...
> >   Sent: Saturday, September 21, 2002 3:21 AM
> >   Subject: [xl7] Re: Shots of the new Roland MC909
> >
> >
> >   Well, here is a thought, Jim Aikin from Keyboard magazine (whom
> I
> >   don't consider to have lower than average intelligence) said
> that if
> >   he had to take one synth with him on a desert island, it would
> be
> >   the XP50. Now I played the synth and hated the UI. However,
> knowing
> >   Roland, I waited 6 months for the upgrade, which was the XP80
> and
> >   then the XP60, which had greatly improved UI. I bought one and
> have
> >   loved it from day one. I still have it in my studio. But I would
> >   have to agree with the XP50, that was one B***H to get around on.
> >   Just my 2 cents worth.
> >   Prana"In XL7 heaven"earth
> >
> >   --- In xl7@y..., "Ravi Ivan Sharma" <noision1@h...> wrote:
> >   > Wow. Bohemian.
> >   >
> >   > Sorry you had such a bad experience with the XP-50. Despite
> the
> >   fact
> >   > that I have a pretty healthy complement and IMO good sense
> about
> >   > synths, I don't know crap about the XP-50 except that perhaps
> I
> >   used
> >   > one once in a rehearsal studio in NYC. Other than that I
> always
> >   just
> >   > passed it by (and all the other XP synths too)in the stores
> >   because
> >   > absolutely nothing about them caught my eyes (or ears).
> Frankly I
> >   > always wondered who was buying them while things like the
> Waldorfs
> >   > were around and better korgs, etc. (those are the ones still
> >   > demanding a half decent used price btw).
> >   >
> >   > Anyway after reading about your poor experiences (and
> especially
> >   the
> >   > part where you said you paid a lot of money over months and
> months
> >   > to a guy for lessons on how to use it . . . . sorry to hear
> that
> >   > too . . .), I had to go check out some reviews of it online to
> see
> >   > whether you were just completely off your tree or not.
> >   >
> >   > Well, the reviews are quite mixed--which tells me the synth is
> >   > likely as I suspected perhaps intuitively (or luckily):
> probably
> >   > crap. The reviews sum up into two camps as far as I can see
> >   > (discounting the completely off the wall true believers or
> madman
> >   > reviews): Either the reviewer seems to love it to death and
> >   defends
> >   > it, but usually has a textual style of writing that seems to
> >   > indicate they are a little lower than the average intelligence
> of
> >   a
> >   > monkey, OR the reviewers are pretty pissed at the instrument
> and
> >   > appear more mad at themselves for being so dumb to pick it up
> in
> >   the
> >   > first place, hoping to learn from their obvious mistake-
> meaning
> >   they
> >   > are smarter than the first bunch.
> >   >
> >   > So, you are right. You made a mistake. But don't make the
> mistake
> >   to
> >   > lump everything into one pile. Every company has some
> clunkers.
> >   Also
> >   > these things are complex instruments. Many companies have only
> >   just
> >   > begun to realize that less than total gearheads want to play
> them
> >   > too and can be a good source of purchasers. So things like the
> >   MC505
> >   > and even the Emu XL7 and MP7 are abounding. They have
> deceptively
> >   > easy interfaces. I say deceptively because at first, many of
> the
> >   > true close-minded gearheads (nerds)(just as bad as the truly
> >   > clueless, IMO) thought that things like the MC-303, 505,
> >   electribes,
> >   > etc, etc, must be crap and not *real* because they were so
> easy,
> >   any
> >   > idiot could pick one up and press play (infringing on their
> >   > nerdiness). But the reality is that those tools are just
> easier to
> >   > use, yet among the most powerful music machines around. Both
> MC-
> >   505
> >   > and the XL7 have the most rocking, deep and highly evolved
> >   synthesis
> >   > engines around. The Roland style of sample playback synthesis
> is
> >   > VERY similar to that of E-mus except that E-mu shows more of
> its
> >   > background as a modular synth company way back when with far
> more
> >   > modulation sources and destination than the Rolands (although
> >   Roland
> >   > had modulars too--but they never were their sole focus, like
> with
> >   E-
> >   > mu. The MP7/XL7 seem to kick the ass of the MC-505 in the
> sound
> >   > department because of this and mainly because they are have
> room
> >   for
> >   > expansion ROMS, so the vast majority of users -- who are non-
> >   > programmers (it ain't that easy)--won't get too bored. But as
> >   > discussed here before, despite the fact that the XL7/MP7 has a
> lot
> >   > of sequencer channels, the MC-505 has some pretty useful
> smooth
> >   > moves when it comes to sequencing that the E-mus haven't even
> >   > touched yet (maybe they will soon hopefully). For novice
> players
> >   or
> >   > those who are not using either machine to its fullest, many of
> >   these
> >   > differences are lost. No doubt, the best "turn it on, hit the
> >   > buttons and make it go" groovebox out right now are the E-mus,
> but
> >   > get deeper into real stuff, and things get to be less clear.
> The
> >   MC-
> >   > 909, if it has expansion roms, and it doesn't trash all what
> was
> >   > good about the MC-505 could reign king for a while. Just keep
> your
> >   > finger's crossed, because when Yamaha announced the RS7000
> there
> >   was
> >   > a lot of hope too. But Roland's background is better (despite
> the
> >   XP
> >   > boards) than Yamahas in this realm so I am more hopeful.
> >   >
> >   > Get over the XP, learn from errors and move on. (and don't
> waste
> >   > time flaming each other either, who's more stupid? The first
> >   flamer
> >   > or the second?). Remember, you are only as smart as the person
> you
> >   > respond to. I am not proud. :)
> >   >
> >   > Ravi
> >
> >
> >         Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> >               ADVERTISEMENT
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> >   xl7-unsubscribe@y...
> >
> >
> >
> >   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> Service.
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> xl7-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>