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

I´m curious, what you think about that:

I was travelling by train last weekend and took the chance to read 
through the manual, that means: the programming section. I only did 
very basic sound tweaking, altered the factory stuff a little, never 
needed indepth programming. So I studied this chapter to find what my 
mp-7 can do for me.

I was a little "shocked" by the endless possibilities. And I know I´m 
never gonna use it. After reading it I felt like "damn, you need to 
be an engineer to use the real strengths of this machine". Unlike 
somebody else in this group I do not think this chapter is well 
written. Parts are simply overexplained but then again an overview 
and working examples are missing. 

I remember a market research study saying that most synthi users are 
tweaking their own sounds way less than you might think. If I took my 
limited time to compose songs and die care about all theses features 
I would never end up with a finished song (I am no pro, don´t have a 
studio, I only use my gear in late evenings - if my girl friend lets 
me, that is ;-)))

So my question is: Why did EMu put so much effort in sound fiddling 
possibilities and offer such a limited effect section? An extended 
but easy to use efx section is what most users are after, I guess. So 
do I. How many of you are really (!) working with the programming 
features of the XX-7? Maybe this is the way to go for minimal, 
industrial, techno. But R & B??? 

No offence, just a question. 

HEinrich

>I was a little "shocked" by the endless possibilities. And I know I´m
>never gonna use it. After reading it I felt like "damn, you need to
>be an engineer to use the real strengths of this machine". Unlike
>somebody else in this group I do not think this chapter is well
>written. Parts are simply overexplained but then again an overview
>and working examples are missing.

I'd welcome re-written documentation, or even another book.


>So my question is: Why did EMu put so much effort in sound fiddling
>possibilities and offer such a limited effect section?
>

I think they just consider themselves musical instrument makers and leave
the post-processing to the owner.
---
* Radio Free Entropy:  http://just-john.com/cn/rfe.shtml *

Agh! If you know BASIC synth theory you can easily understand the 
manual and program the XL-7, I mean, programming the XL-7 is so very 
very simple compared to many other synths. Why do you think people 
get synths like the Nord Modular?

Effects? Why do you need them inside a synth? Just plug the XL-7 into 
some external effect processors. And oh, btw I like the XL-7 sounds 
as well. But I try to explain why programming is so much more 
important than effects.

I care about programming. It's important in order to shape a sound 
the way you want. And if it wasn't for the programming, I would never 
get the XL-7. If you don't understand or care about programming, you 
can always find some cheap sound modules to plug in your midi setup.

//Nifflas

--- In xl7@y..., "heinrich22001" <hhuent@g...> wrote:
> I´m curious, what you think about that:
> 
> I was travelling by train last weekend and took the chance to read 
> through the manual, that means: the programming section. I only did 
> very basic sound tweaking, altered the factory stuff a little, 
never 
> needed indepth programming. So I studied this chapter to find what 
my 
> mp-7 can do for me.
> 
> I was a little "shocked" by the endless possibilities. And I know 
I´m 
> never gonna use it. After reading it I felt like "damn, you need to 
> be an engineer to use the real strengths of this machine". Unlike 
> somebody else in this group I do not think this chapter is well 
> written. Parts are simply overexplained but then again an overview 
> and working examples are missing. 
> 
> I remember a market research study saying that most synthi users 
are 
> tweaking their own sounds way less than you might think. If I took 
my 
> limited time to compose songs and die care about all theses 
features 
> I would never end up with a finished song (I am no pro, don´t have 
a 
> studio, I only use my gear in late evenings - if my girl friend 
lets 
> me, that is ;-)))
> 
> So my question is: Why did EMu put so much effort in sound fiddling 
> possibilities and offer such a limited effect section? An extended 
> but easy to use efx section is what most users are after, I guess. 
So 

> do I. How many of you are really (!) working with the programming 
> features of the XX-7? Maybe this is the way to go for minimal, 
> industrial, techno. But R & B??? 
> 
> No offence, just a question. 
> 
> HEinrich

Hmm, eem, I realized I was a little bit mean in my last post. Sorry 
for this!

All I want to say is that I think you should learn all features 'n 
stuff that the XL-7 can do, it's not as hard as it may seem - and you 
will not regret learning all features of the synth.

//Nifflas

--- In xl7@y..., "nifflas" <nifflas@m...> wrote:
> Agh! If you know BASIC synth theory you can easily understand the 
> manual and program the XL-7, I mean, programming the XL-7 is so 
very 
> very simple compared to many other synths. Why do you think people 
> get synths like the Nord Modular?
> 
> Effects? Why do you need them inside a synth? Just plug the XL-7 
into 
> some external effect processors. And oh, btw I like the XL-7 sounds 
> as well. But I try to explain why programming is so much more 
> important than effects.
> 
> I care about programming. It's important in order to shape a sound 
> the way you want. And if it wasn't for the programming, I would 
never 
> get the XL-7. If you don't understand or care about programming, 
you 
> can always find some cheap sound modules to plug in your midi setup.
> 
> //Nifflas
> 
> --- In xl7@y..., "heinrich22001" <hhuent@g...> wrote:
> > I´m curious, what you think about that:
> > 
> > I was travelling by train last weekend and took the chance to 
read 
> > through the manual, that means: the programming section. I only 
did 
> > very basic sound tweaking, altered the factory stuff a little, 
> never 
> > needed indepth programming. So I studied this chapter to find 
what 
> my 
> > mp-7 can do for me.
> > 
> > I was a little "shocked" by the endless possibilities. And I know 
> I´m 
> > never gonna use it. After reading it I felt like "damn, you need 
to 
> > be an engineer to use the real strengths of this machine". Unlike 
> > somebody else in this group I do not think this chapter is well 
> > written. Parts are simply overexplained but then again an 
overview 
> > and working examples are missing. 
> > 
> > I remember a market research study saying that most synthi users 
> are 
> > tweaking their own sounds way less than you might think. If I 
took 
> my 
> > limited time to compose songs and die care about all theses 
> features 
> > I would never end up with a finished song (I am no pro, don´t 
have 
> a 
> > studio, I only use my gear in late evenings - if my girl friend 
> lets 
> > me, that is ;-)))
> > 
> > So my question is: Why did EMu put so much effort in sound 
fiddling 
> > possibilities and offer such a limited effect section? An 
extended 
> > but easy to use efx section is what most users are after, I 
guess. 

> So 
> > do I. How many of you are really (!) working with the programming 
> > features of the XX-7? Maybe this is the way to go for minimal, 
> > industrial, techno. But R & B??? 
> > 
> > No offence, just a question. 
> > 
> > HEinrich

--- In xl7@y..., "nifflas" <nifflas@m...> wrote:
> Agh! If you know BASIC synth theory you can easily understand the 
> manual and program the XL-7, 

>>>>No, I do not.<<<<<<<<<<

I mean, programming the XL-7 is so very 
> very simple compared to many other synths. Why do you think people 
> get synths like the Nord Modular?

>>>>>>>>I believed the XX-7 was supposed to be a hardware/standalone 
sequencer and groovebox aimed as well for live use, not so much a 
synth<<<<<<

> 
> Effects? Why do you need them inside a synth? Just plug the XL-7 
into 
> some external effect processors. 

>>>>>>efx is something that matters in a all-in-one groove 
box/command station. If I used external efx, the routing of the xx-7 
would be still limiting to do so, no?>>>>>>>

......
Hmm, eem, I realized I was a little bit mean in my last post. Sorry 
for this!

>>>>>>>Don´t worry>>>>>>>>>>>>

All I want to say is that I think you should learn all features 'n 
stuff that the XL-7 can do, it's not as hard as it may seem - and you 
will not regret learning all features of the synth.

>>>>>>I´ll do my best<<<<<<<

Heinrich




> 
> --- In xl7@y..., "heinrich22001" <hhuent@g...> wrote:
> > I´m curious, what you think about that:
> > 
> > I was travelling by train last weekend and took the chance to 
read 
> > through the manual, that means: the programming section. I only 
did 
> > very basic sound tweaking, altered the factory stuff a little, 
> never 
> > needed indepth programming. So I studied this chapter to find 
what 
> my 
> > mp-7 can do for me.
> > 
> > I was a little "shocked" by the endless possibilities. And I know 
> I´m 
> > never gonna use it. After reading it I felt like "damn, you need 
to 
> > be an engineer to use the real strengths of this machine". Unlike 
> > somebody else in this group I do not think this chapter is well 
> > written. Parts are simply overexplained but then again an 
overview 
> > and working examples are missing. 
> > 
> > I remember a market research study saying that most synthi users 
> are 
> > tweaking their own sounds way less than you might think. If I 
took 
> my 
> > limited time to compose songs and die care about all theses 
> features 
> > I would never end up with a finished song (I am no pro, don´t 
have 
> a 
> > studio, I only use my gear in late evenings - if my girl friend 
> lets 
> > me, that is ;-)))
> > 
> > So my question is: Why did EMu put so much effort in sound 
fiddling 
> > possibilities and offer such a limited effect section? An 
extended 
> > but easy to use efx section is what most users are after, I 
guess. 

> So 
> > do I. How many of you are really (!) working with the programming 
> > features of the XX-7? Maybe this is the way to go for minimal, 
> > industrial, techno. But R & B??? 
> > 
> > No offence, just a question. 
> > 
> > HEinrich

I'm really sorry for being so mean in my other posts.

I think I realize we use the xx-7 for completley different things and 
need completley different features :)

//Nifflas

--- In xl7@y..., "heinrich22001" <hhuent@g...> wrote:
> --- In xl7@y..., "nifflas" <nifflas@m...> wrote:
> > Agh! If you know BASIC synth theory you can easily understand the 
> > manual and program the XL-7, 
> 
> >>>>No, I do not.<<<<<<<<<<
> 
> I mean, programming the XL-7 is so very 
> > very simple compared to many other synths. Why do you think 
people 
> > get synths like the Nord Modular?
> 
> >>>>>>>>I believed the XX-7 was supposed to be a 
hardware/standalone 
> sequencer and groovebox aimed as well for live use, not so much a 
> synth<<<<<<
> 
> > 
> > Effects? Why do you need them inside a synth? Just plug the XL-7 
> into 
> > some external effect processors. 
> 
> >>>>>>efx is something that matters in a all-in-one groove 
> box/command station. If I used external efx, the routing of the xx-
7 
> would be still limiting to do so, no?>>>>>>>
> 
> ......
> Hmm, eem, I realized I was a little bit mean in my last post. Sorry 
> for this!
> 
> >>>>>>>Don´t worry>>>>>>>>>>>>
> 
> All I want to say is that I think you should learn all features 'n 
> stuff that the XL-7 can do, it's not as hard as it may seem - and 
you 
> will not regret learning all features of the synth.
> 
> >>>>>>I´ll do my best<<<<<<<
> 
> Heinrich
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > 
> > --- In xl7@y..., "heinrich22001" <hhuent@g...> wrote:
> > > I´m curious, what you think about that:
> > > 
> > > I was travelling by train last weekend and took the chance to 
> read 
> > > through the manual, that means: the programming section. I only 
> did 
> > > very basic sound tweaking, altered the factory stuff a little, 
> > never 
> > > needed indepth programming. So I studied this chapter to find 
> what 
> > my 
> > > mp-7 can do for me.
> > > 
> > > I was a little "shocked" by the endless possibilities. And I 
know 
> > I´m 
> > > never gonna use it. After reading it I felt like "damn, you 
need 
> to 
> > > be an engineer to use the real strengths of this machine". 
Unlike 
> > > somebody else in this group I do not think this chapter is well 
> > > written. Parts are simply overexplained but then again an 
> overview 
> > > and working examples are missing. 
> > > 
> > > I remember a market research study saying that most synthi 
users 
> > are 
> > > tweaking their own sounds way less than you might think. If I 
> took 
> > my 
> > > limited time to compose songs and die care about all theses 
> > features 
> > > I would never end up with a finished song (I am no pro, don´t 
> have 
> > a 
> > > studio, I only use my gear in late evenings - if my girl friend 
> > lets 
> > > me, that is ;-)))
> > > 
> > > So my question is: Why did EMu put so much effort in sound 
> fiddling 
> > > possibilities and offer such a limited effect section? An 
> extended 
> > > but easy to use efx section is what most users are after, I 
> guess. 
> > So 
> > > do I. How many of you are really (!) working with the 
programming 

> > > features of the XX-7? Maybe this is the way to go for minimal, 
> > > industrial, techno. But R & B??? 
> > > 
> > > No offence, just a question. 
> > > 
> > > HEinrich