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

OK, there is a couple of ways to implement a multi-timbral mode 
in a synth, and I am wondering what the XL-7 does.

The first (and my desired) way is to have an independent edit 
buffer for each instrument (channel, or part in some 
terminology).  This lets you do patch edits on the fly, while 
sequencing and have those edits remain in effect until you 
change patches on an instrument.

The second way is to have a single instrument edit buffer.  In this 
approach any changes made to a patch are lost when you switch 
to a second instrument to edit.

I am concerned that the XL-7 has method two - a common edit 
buffer for all channels.  The reason for the concern is that the 
Audity 2K module I have (which has the 2.01 firmware, which 
makes it pretty much in line with the rest of the P2K family) 
impliments method two, the shared edit buffer.

Can anyone answer this?

Thanks in advance,

drK

assuming that i understand you right it is an ndependent edit buffer 
for each channel.  I am able to make edits to a sound change channels 
and then tweak out the next preset and switch back and forth as i 
please.  But you do have to save the changes to the preset before you 
change patterns.  

Hope that answers your question

Mike

--- In xl7@y..., drk@d... wrote:
> OK, there is a couple of ways to implement a multi-timbral mode 
> in a synth, and I am wondering what the XL-7 does.
> 
> The first (and my desired) way is to have an independent edit 
> buffer for each instrument (channel, or part in some 
> terminology).  This lets you do patch edits on the fly, while 
> sequencing and have those edits remain in effect until you 
> change patches on an instrument.
> 
> The second way is to have a single instrument edit buffer.  In this 
> approach any changes made to a patch are lost when you switch 
> to a second instrument to edit.
> 
> I am concerned that the XL-7 has method two - a common edit 
> buffer for all channels.  The reason for the concern is that the 
> Audity 2K module I have (which has the 2.01 firmware, which 
> makes it pretty much in line with the rest of the P2K family) 
> impliments method two, the shared edit buffer.
> 
> Can anyone answer this?
> 
> Thanks in advance,
> 
> drK

--- In xl7@y..., mikexl7@y... wrote:
> assuming that i understand you right it is an ndependent edit 
buffer 
> for each channel.  I am able to make edits to a sound change 
channels 
> and then tweak out the next preset and switch back and forth 
as i 
> please.  But you do have to save the changes to the preset 
before you 
> change patterns.  
> 
> Hope that answers your question
> 
> Mike

Thanks Mike for the answer.  You understand my question I 
think.  Just for further clarification, when you tweak a sound does 
this include the "deep edits" (those accessible from the menu) 
as well as the "quick edits" (those done with the knobs)?

drK

I tried this in the store to see exactly how the XL7 handles edits 
to patches when you switch from part (channel) to part.  As 
pointed out before changes to the patch done with the 16 knobs, 
the so-called "quick edits" are retained as you switch from part to 
part.  So you can have up to 32 edits going at one time.  of 
course changing the pattern will cause these to be lost.

I was most interested, however, in the behavior when doing a 
"deep" edit on a patch.  Suppose for a moment that you want to 
do something like change the waveform in one layer, change a 
filter type, or even add or modify a cord.  This requires using the 
menus.

Unfortunately edits done at this level are not retained as you 
switch from part to part.  At least this was the behavior of the test 
unit in the store.

This is a pretty glaring weakness for my application and is 
simewhat surprising in that other sequencers (MC505) and 
most multitimbral sound modules work with multiple edit 
buiffers.  One the other hand the Emu Audity works like the XL7 
and I suspect that the P2K family does the same.  Ironically, the 
Emu EOS samplers (like the E4 Ultras) let you do this after a 
fashion because of its RAM patch storage.

My question to Emu: will this behavior be changed in a 
subsequent release of the OS?

drk