mc 808 or mc 909 pls advice

[Ill Collins]

I tried to use linear sequencing ---because of the sustain problem with the 909 in song mode is ridiculous. I had it hooked up to my Elektron sidstation and my V-drums as the master to both , and I got the "memory full" warning after 5 tracks as well. on a 16 measure pattern!!!



Theres one thing i do remember from that brochure is that it said it was an all in one music station. I cant seem to find it on the roland site anymore though.......curious..?

[Sadhaka]

There was a long thread dedicated to the restriction of events in a pattern over at Yahoo groups. Apperantly there's a limit to 30,000 events per pattern (was 10,000 before new OS). Here's a few of the thread posts:

http://launch.groups.yahoo.com/group/MC ... ssage/2947

http://launch.groups.yahoo.com/group/MC ... ssage/6029

http://launch.groups.yahoo.com/group/MC ... ssage/6006

[lekanut]

Thanks for the precisions...You know mike i don 't want only to speak about the bad things of the 909 because if you you re in pattern sequencing with not much midi events this limitation is not a problem because it s a good synth with a good feeling..sounds..etc..And i saw some posts in 909 forums from people who said the 909 crashed..mine never!
But you can believe me,roland really presents the linear recording possibilities and 999 meas as a argument in the brochure!Every 909 user can do the test with his 909 and tell the result here...and we ll see..
And mike,why making a groovebox with 999 measure lenght per pattern if it 's only a pattern sequencer?It 's not logical!
Roland presents the 909 on the market like a pattern oriented groovebox(yes sure) with linear recording possibilities(for people like me)to sell more units!But we are not stupids!
And i'm curious for the 808!
Is there the same limitation in the 808?Is there people who test it?

[lhm1138]

Sadhaka,

Good points, I first thought that may be the source of the dropout between patterns, but I tried different patterns with the exact same effects settings, same deal. I guess the 909's processor doesn't see it that way, though, and it probably is due to no "master effects" as you say. How's the interface on the Fantom?, I would consider one if the workflow was similar.

I like the 909 enough that I could find a way around it...either a synced computer, HD multitrack, or even an external synth. The user interface on the 909 is unparralleled, and I'm not the only person that thinks so. Just bummed me out a little because if it weren't for that, and the User RPS issue, the 909 would kill on its own as a live device. I doubt it's something that can be patched, seems like a dsp issue, it's the Linn9000 all over again. I would be pleased as punch if they came out with an MC909EX (remember the SP808EX?) that addressed the Sustain issue, User RPS, etc. Spread the tasking over 2 or more DSP chips, maybe the SHARCS that Creamware uses in their prosumer soundcards?

Anyways, I'm glad I'm starting to get some responses from Roland people...there's no wrong answers, it's just good to know that a company is hearing your criticisms. I like Roland gear alot, I've got more Roland equipment past and present in my studio than anything else, they make the friendliest UI's in my opinion. The whole userbase communication thing is important though....sure, it can be a pain in the ass when people want features that were never intended, but it's a valuable source of feedback for a company and shouldn't be downplayed.

Just a correction to what I said before, it's actually in USB mode or any menu mode that the 909 defaults back to Preset PTN 01, not the sampling screen. Everytime I transfer a sample via USB from my computer, come out of USB mode, BAM, back to that cheesy Preset PTN 1. Annoying.

Regarding the memory full thing, it may have been an older O.S. I haven't tested this out though, because if you do this to get around the songmode problem, it's a pain in the ass if you have to edit or anything...I guess one way to fix this is to add point markers of some sort, granted this is an "added feature", but it's one that becomes necessary to get around the song mode issue.

[winson123]

im still curious as well regarding the 808.

does the 128 polyphony fix the sustain drop out between patterns,
or is it really just a processing issue, anyone?

[lhm1138]

Also, so we don't send Mike to happy hour with all of our gripes regarding the MC, I'd like to address a few things I love about the 909.

Assignable metronome to any output you desire...great for setting up a click track to a drummer or whomever. Someone at Roland really thought that one through.

USB file transfer....flawless. I still can't get over how fast and easy it is.

Master/Remote/Slave modes. Never had a problem with it, synced it to both a Korg HD recorder and ProTools LE, relatively painless. Excellent!

The interface! Once again, the interface! Designed for musicians, not alien scientists from the planet Clinicia (cough, yamaha, cough cough).

Microscope mode, visual XOX programming. Wonderful.

And, well, you know the gripes by now. Oh, I don't like the pads that much, but it's way better than what the Rm1x had. The pads on the 808 are much better, though.

[mike acosta]

Thanks lmh

Mike Acosta - Roland U.S
www.rolandus.com
Heres a video on the MC-808
http://www.rolandus.com/products/produc ... arentId=84

[breakbeatah]

I've been a proud owner of my MC-909 for about three years, and have updated to 1.2. with several SRX cards that have been sold and traded. I've added the max amount of memory as well to 256mb. I've only recently started using Pro Tools LE7 and Cubase SX. I don't like Cubase's panning law default so most of the time I'm monitoring through Pro Tools; which has better sound anyway. My TTE fader is wearing out, but I've been scared to send it in since my extended warranty was with Guitar Center's recommended third party service. The lady taking the call didn't jack about what the hell I was talkng about as well as the several others I called. I feel that had I shipped my 909 it wouldn't have been fixed and probly returned back the same, scratched, or worse. It takes about two increments and a half for my TTE to start responding for its gain +. I understand that sliders always get worn out, but unless it's Roland tech support then I'll send it in.

Second, and from what I've heard from other users, but the latest groovebox crashes too much. For a producer like me, I fiddle with knobs all the time, especially since I use this machine as standalone and for live performances. However, I hardly don't play out as much anymore since I'm scared the damn groovebox might crash. The only problem that's really unreliable during live PA's is the LFO tweaking. Whether I'm fiddling with the depth or waveform the groovebox will just crash within a couple minutes. I don't know why, but in the first year the MC-909 didn't do it as much, so I'm wondering if there's some wear within the transistors or something. Even switching through the patches from the SRX card (which you'll notice it's not as smooth as the integrated patches when scrolling with the rotary knob) it sometimes freezes as well.

I've been told that many workstations tend to freeze. Is this true? I don't have an extensive history with hardware gear so I really can't compare. You have no idea how embarrasing it would be during my techno sets (live PA) and the damn thing would crash. I'd have to improvise with my microkorg or any other external synth. However, you can't fool everyone, and more importantly it drives me insane. It leads me to not being confident with Roland gear. Maybe I'm asking too much, I dont know.

I'm the type of producer that can be versatile with different gear and different methods. Hell, sometimes I make tracks strictly with my DR-660. I like its old sound texture and ease of use!

I've been thinking about getting the new MC-808. The only reason why I'm really getting is because of the automated faders! This is highly beneficial during a live PA! Sure it's to switch patterns with the MC-909, but your faders stay static from the previous tweaking. This means you have to be very careful and improvise, especially during the live PA! If a channel was previously at 24 volume level, and the next patch has the default at level at 93, you have to mute the channel or think of a way to improvise or else the sensitivity of the fader will be extremely noticeable. With the new MC-808, it fixes all that! The faders all default to the patterns true state. Also, 128 and Fantom X engine.

In all, I don't want to get rid of my 909 groovebox because, well, it's bonded. Lot's of good memories, but at the same time I want to get the new 808 box! I have a feeling that the new groovebox series is going to be a monster!!!

In all, you have to have patience with the MC-909, and it's not meant for live PA. oh btw, my friend has used his edirol video equipment with my 909 since I loaned it to him for several perormances in California. said it worked great! v-link works great! it's a powerhorse machine!

Can I trigger the 16 channels (patches) with 16 midi tracks in Cubase, meaning each midi track triggering an assigned patch? For some reason each midi track trigures the same patch on the MC-909. Or is it too much for one midi channel (port) to handle?

Any thoughts on my getting the MC-808?

[Sadhaka]

lhm1138 : Yeah it doesn't matter if you have exactly the same pattern fx settings in 2 patterns (even down to exact parameters), because when a pattern switches in song mode there will always be that "cutoff" of the previous fx because the 909 has to momentarily "read" the new fx settings of the next pattern.

I have used a few groove boxes in my time, and unless there is global fx/parameter setup there will always be this slight glitching as a pattern switches in song mode. It cannot be any other way - the processor has to "read" the new settings of the fx in the next pattern, so only a global setup will get rid of this. The Emu XL7 was exactly the same and the Electribes.

I'm not hitting on the 909, I think it's a great product and I was considering copping one myself thinking that Roland would realize the problems with switching patterns in Song mode and use a different configuration, but unfortunately they didn't and I was hoping the 808 would be different, but it seems it's not either which is a shame because I love Roland sounds and hardware in general.

This is something that makes it unusable for my purposes. Others may not find it a problem depending on how they work.

[lhm1138]

Yeup. Def need an MC909EX. Maybe just use stripped down FantomX config. I believe Roland made the chip upgrade available to MK1 owners for a fee when they did the SP808EX. Yamaha did something similar with the A3000v.2. Man, I'd love to see that happen, but in the meantime I just have to do my best with this and find suitable workarounds.

[OneMB]

Hello guys

I'm new around here and I all ready read most of the topic on this section
I'm just wondering, how to control the turntable function on the MC-808
I've read the manual
Is it true we can only control the Pitch, BPM or Pitch + BPM by using D Beam?
Can we control it using other way?
Are all the Roland Groove Boxes have a TRS (Balance) Output
I think it's a good idea to state this information to the end users
Before someone ends up hooking it up with a direct box

I'm hoping someone able the answer to my questions
I really enjoy the videos on rolandus.com
Keep on rocking

[elvisdiablo@gmail.com]

Hello, are their any Plans for an mc-808 video owners manual or does one exist that I cannot find?

Please help. Thanks

elvisdiablo@gmail.com

[PipoTheClown]

Hi,

I just read this thread. I'm considering getting a mc-808 but now I've doubts. I own a mc-307, which I really like. It's probably not the greatest machine out there but it does what i want it to do. There's one strange thing however. When you create a song and pattern A has a certain delay effect added, when you play pattern A twice the delay-effect is "reset" when the song is going from pattern-to-pattern. It sounds like as if the delay-unit is re-initialized every time a pattern transition occurs (in a song). This is a very serious problem to me. Does the 808 have the same problem? Because if it has I don't think I'll get one although I think the 808 sounds amazing.

Pipo

[dr_boehm]

Hi Pipo,

yes it has the same problem (only in song mode).

Ciao, Dirk.

[TOTAL]

It is still the same. Personally I consider this to be the most critical issue in 808. Strange it has been the same for years.
I might be wrong, but fantom probably does not have this problem. Even stranger.


How do you deal with this problem on 307 when playing live (if you do)?


@ Dirk
No it is not only in song mode. Also in pattern mode.