Ok.. this is not meant to be offensive to anyone with the 808 that loves it. I had one for about a week and it was the biggest mistake I have ever made. But I now realize that FOR ME it was a mistake...not all people. My problem is I feel sorry for all the people coming on here totally confused as to why it doesn't do what they need and want it to do.
I was just sitting here and I STILL can't believe that you need a PC to auto-chop and also to place your samples on separate pads. I mean its almost unbelivable. It boils down to this : Roland made an attempt to integrate the hardware and software world and instead of making it a "gentle" choice.. they "Force" you to use both in order to get what you need. The words "No Vaseline" come to mind when I think of this unit.
I got the MV8000 and its probably the best unit I have ever bought. It doesnt force you to use a PC. The 808 could have been beautiful. I Pray for those that have it that Roland makes some sort of "Fix" for the problems this unit has. I actually loved the sounds on the 808 which is why it was so hard to take it back. But I had to have sampling that would not totally kill my work flow.
So... in closing ..you be the judge.
Some people can probably make the 808 work like a well oiled machine. But if you need top notch sampling and need your workflow to go smoothly.... this may not be your unit.
Just my opinion.
MC-808 Disaster or Great Piece ?
-
SekondThought
- Posts: 50
- Joined: 12:35, 13 June 2006
- Location: United Kingdom
- Contact:
Re: MC-808 Disaster or Great Piece ?
Hey Doug!
You just knew I'd repy to this, right?
"My problem is I feel sorry for all the people coming on here totally confused as to why it doesn't do what they need and want it to do".
Well, I agree with you there 100%. I think quite a few people didn't really understand what the 808 was about simply because of the 909 and Roland's poor explanation of what it could and couldn't do.
The MC-909 was a much more stand alone device (like the MV-8000) and people expected more from the 808, not less, so when Roland (in order to keep costs down and sell more units because of a lower RRP) decided that the 808 would be a "computer buddy" type of device, which we are seeing a lot of these days, a lot of people felt cheated by the lack of features when it wasn't hooked up to a computer. I'm sure this isn't the last time we'll see Roland make a product like this, as they are also trying to make it look attractive to a new bread of people who normally just buy plugins but who may fancy some hardware to go along with it, a kind of hardware comback but with software features too. It has been hinted that Roland may add some of these features via a future software update, but who knows?
There are some things I don't like about it. I don't like the fact that when you switch a track to "EXTERNAL", so as to sequence an external MIDI device, it still plays the internal sound for that track when you are playing from the pads. I've been told that Fantom series works this way too, but I think the internal sound should be muted so as to only play the external device.
I don't like the way the faders rattle when using the automation. It seems to devalue the unit and when I first bought it, I thought they may just take time to wear in and then they'd become smoother, but no, they still rattle like hell, but then a more expensive motor system would have added to the cost, so I can (kind of) understand it.
Lastly, the fact that mine (like a lot of other peoples) came shipped with the wrong PSU which made the external input hum like an cheap 8-Bit sampler from the 80's was also very unwelcome (anyone remember the old Roland JS-30 desktop sampler from the mid 90's? Well, I had one of those and when I first tried sampling on the 808, it reminded me of it almost 100%).
You may think that after all that, I actually don't like it, when I do. I'm not so bothered about it having to be hooked up to a computer to get at some of the features, but what I am bothered about are the other reasons I bought it for that haven't yet lived up to the promise of what we were told to expect when it was on show at NAMM!
It's still a great unit (for the price), but it could have been so much better.
SekondThought
"Computers are cool, but hardware rules".
You just knew I'd repy to this, right?
"My problem is I feel sorry for all the people coming on here totally confused as to why it doesn't do what they need and want it to do".
Well, I agree with you there 100%. I think quite a few people didn't really understand what the 808 was about simply because of the 909 and Roland's poor explanation of what it could and couldn't do.
The MC-909 was a much more stand alone device (like the MV-8000) and people expected more from the 808, not less, so when Roland (in order to keep costs down and sell more units because of a lower RRP) decided that the 808 would be a "computer buddy" type of device, which we are seeing a lot of these days, a lot of people felt cheated by the lack of features when it wasn't hooked up to a computer. I'm sure this isn't the last time we'll see Roland make a product like this, as they are also trying to make it look attractive to a new bread of people who normally just buy plugins but who may fancy some hardware to go along with it, a kind of hardware comback but with software features too. It has been hinted that Roland may add some of these features via a future software update, but who knows?
There are some things I don't like about it. I don't like the fact that when you switch a track to "EXTERNAL", so as to sequence an external MIDI device, it still plays the internal sound for that track when you are playing from the pads. I've been told that Fantom series works this way too, but I think the internal sound should be muted so as to only play the external device.
I don't like the way the faders rattle when using the automation. It seems to devalue the unit and when I first bought it, I thought they may just take time to wear in and then they'd become smoother, but no, they still rattle like hell, but then a more expensive motor system would have added to the cost, so I can (kind of) understand it.
Lastly, the fact that mine (like a lot of other peoples) came shipped with the wrong PSU which made the external input hum like an cheap 8-Bit sampler from the 80's was also very unwelcome (anyone remember the old Roland JS-30 desktop sampler from the mid 90's? Well, I had one of those and when I first tried sampling on the 808, it reminded me of it almost 100%).
You may think that after all that, I actually don't like it, when I do. I'm not so bothered about it having to be hooked up to a computer to get at some of the features, but what I am bothered about are the other reasons I bought it for that haven't yet lived up to the promise of what we were told to expect when it was on show at NAMM!
It's still a great unit (for the price), but it could have been so much better.
SekondThought
"Computers are cool, but hardware rules".
-
Doug Crazy
- Posts: 116
- Joined: 05:30, 11 June 2006
Re: MC-808 Disaster or Great Piece ?
LOL. Sekond... I knew you would reply...thats why I made it a point to be alot nicer this time. And your reply was a good read. Hopefully Roland will come thru with something to help ease the pain for those that are upset.
Time will tell.
Time will tell.
-
darknessfalls
- Posts: 58
- Joined: 18:21, 24 June 2006
Re: MC-808 Disaster or Great Piece ?
this box is proving more to get my head around than i'd initially thought, but now that my start/stop issue is solved i've been having some fun with it.
i saw that basically from afar that it looked like a little mixer so somehow i understood it was in some ways a devaluation from the 909 as far as not being a total stand-alone unit. since i have a laptop and also use the MC-808 in a space with our main music computer, it doesn't bother me (yet) to hook it up to do a few things once in awhile in order to save money and floorspace.
this is because i bought the MC-808 as a live unit. it's replacing my SP-505 because i need more patterns, more sample memory, and i thought the synth would be a bonus or even a lifesaver for parts unable to be played by a human being live. but since it sits on my pedalboard, size is a factor.
as far as the editing, basically i prepare my samples on a computer beforehand anyway, then dump them via USB onto the MC-808. this is much better than having to go through the sample/chop process via SPDIF. why edit the same sound twice? i think it'll be rare that i'll need to do any intense editing to the sounds one i transfer them.
so far i've had another weird moment after i started having fun doing some writing on the MC-808. i created a pattern, then decided i wanted to create another one based on the first. so i erased another pattern and copied the first. strangely, it copied the sequencer information but kept the original patches and tempo. i probably just did something wrong, but the way the MC-808 attaches this information together is one of the things i'm getting used to. [EDIT: it turns out that to save the whole shebang including name, patches and tempo, i need to WRITE to another pattern location, not COPY.]
disaster or great piece? too early to tell. some big annoyances but some nice features. i'll be able to answer better the more i try to get it to do what i want.
i saw that basically from afar that it looked like a little mixer so somehow i understood it was in some ways a devaluation from the 909 as far as not being a total stand-alone unit. since i have a laptop and also use the MC-808 in a space with our main music computer, it doesn't bother me (yet) to hook it up to do a few things once in awhile in order to save money and floorspace.
this is because i bought the MC-808 as a live unit. it's replacing my SP-505 because i need more patterns, more sample memory, and i thought the synth would be a bonus or even a lifesaver for parts unable to be played by a human being live. but since it sits on my pedalboard, size is a factor.
as far as the editing, basically i prepare my samples on a computer beforehand anyway, then dump them via USB onto the MC-808. this is much better than having to go through the sample/chop process via SPDIF. why edit the same sound twice? i think it'll be rare that i'll need to do any intense editing to the sounds one i transfer them.
so far i've had another weird moment after i started having fun doing some writing on the MC-808. i created a pattern, then decided i wanted to create another one based on the first. so i erased another pattern and copied the first. strangely, it copied the sequencer information but kept the original patches and tempo. i probably just did something wrong, but the way the MC-808 attaches this information together is one of the things i'm getting used to. [EDIT: it turns out that to save the whole shebang including name, patches and tempo, i need to WRITE to another pattern location, not COPY.]
disaster or great piece? too early to tell. some big annoyances but some nice features. i'll be able to answer better the more i try to get it to do what i want.
Re: MC-808 Disaster or Great Piece ?
"It has been hinted that Roland may add some of these features via a future software update, but who knows?"
...Roland ADD features with updates? I wouldn't bet on it, but your optimism is refreshing. Well, they DID add SMG on the MC909, which is better than nothing (no major bug fixes, no features).
"There are some things I don't like about it. I don't like the fact that when you switch a track to "EXTERNAL", so as to sequence an external MIDI device, it still plays the internal sound for that track when you are playing from the pads."
Jesus, STILL? It's an easy enough workaround, but it's not like they were unaware of this being an issue with many people.
...Roland ADD features with updates? I wouldn't bet on it, but your optimism is refreshing. Well, they DID add SMG on the MC909, which is better than nothing (no major bug fixes, no features).
"There are some things I don't like about it. I don't like the fact that when you switch a track to "EXTERNAL", so as to sequence an external MIDI device, it still plays the internal sound for that track when you are playing from the pads."
Jesus, STILL? It's an easy enough workaround, but it's not like they were unaware of this being an issue with many people.
-
SekondThought
- Posts: 50
- Joined: 12:35, 13 June 2006
- Location: United Kingdom
- Contact:
Re: MC-808 Disaster or Great Piece ?
Well...Doug, if you're reading this, you'd better get ready for a shock...
I'm letting go of my MC-808! Yes, that's right, I'm selling it. Why? Well, I decided to use it as my main source of sounds and sequencing on a new project I've just started upon and I never dreamed it would be such a headache as it turned out to be.
It all started off when I was trying to get some samples of Elektron's wonderful MachineDrum into my 808. I started by getting all the .WAV files together and getting the 808 set to "STORAGE" mode, so that I could dump them in. Then, I went to the 808 and loaded them so as to be able to put them into a rhythm patch. There were some loops in there as well that I wanted to get the individual sounds from and this is where the trouble started...I don't think I have ever wasted so much time for such a small result in my life...and after many hours of having to sift though numerous copies and edits of chops, and having to sellect both the left and right waves manually when it comes to making a stereo sample play back in stereo on a pad, I gave up, as it just wasn't happeneing and way too much time was passing with little or no result.
Now, some may think that I then switched on the computer and put the MC on eBay, which I didn't. I went back to it a few days later and spent over twice as long on it (almost 9 hours), and I almost (I say almost) had a drum kit together. Why give up then? Because it just takes far too long for it to be worth it. I could sit with an MPC-2500 and do what I wanted to do with the MC-808 in a couple of button pushes and get on with making music rather than spending almost half a day on it.
Whoever designed the 808 to work in such a slow (almost late 1980's / early 1990's) way should really go back to the drawing board, start over and give us a fresh design that works. The days when people would accept this way of working are long since over (thanks to computers and the speed things can be done at) and I am surprised that a company who could design something as amazing as the Fantom X6 and invent Skip Back sampling could think that people working in dance music production (who like to get ideas down faster than most) could be happy working like this. How about giving us an MC-1010 with Skip Back sampling, a nice clear colour display, a VA section based on the (excellent) SH-201 and professional features from machines like the MV-8000 and Fantom X range?
I'm sorry Roland, but I can no longer work this way. It's just not productive and by the time I've got samples in there, I've lost the spark of my idea and I get nothing done.
Doug!?! I hope you haven't fainted!
SekondThought
"Computers are cool, but hardware rules".
I'm letting go of my MC-808! Yes, that's right, I'm selling it. Why? Well, I decided to use it as my main source of sounds and sequencing on a new project I've just started upon and I never dreamed it would be such a headache as it turned out to be.
It all started off when I was trying to get some samples of Elektron's wonderful MachineDrum into my 808. I started by getting all the .WAV files together and getting the 808 set to "STORAGE" mode, so that I could dump them in. Then, I went to the 808 and loaded them so as to be able to put them into a rhythm patch. There were some loops in there as well that I wanted to get the individual sounds from and this is where the trouble started...I don't think I have ever wasted so much time for such a small result in my life...and after many hours of having to sift though numerous copies and edits of chops, and having to sellect both the left and right waves manually when it comes to making a stereo sample play back in stereo on a pad, I gave up, as it just wasn't happeneing and way too much time was passing with little or no result.
Now, some may think that I then switched on the computer and put the MC on eBay, which I didn't. I went back to it a few days later and spent over twice as long on it (almost 9 hours), and I almost (I say almost) had a drum kit together. Why give up then? Because it just takes far too long for it to be worth it. I could sit with an MPC-2500 and do what I wanted to do with the MC-808 in a couple of button pushes and get on with making music rather than spending almost half a day on it.
Whoever designed the 808 to work in such a slow (almost late 1980's / early 1990's) way should really go back to the drawing board, start over and give us a fresh design that works. The days when people would accept this way of working are long since over (thanks to computers and the speed things can be done at) and I am surprised that a company who could design something as amazing as the Fantom X6 and invent Skip Back sampling could think that people working in dance music production (who like to get ideas down faster than most) could be happy working like this. How about giving us an MC-1010 with Skip Back sampling, a nice clear colour display, a VA section based on the (excellent) SH-201 and professional features from machines like the MV-8000 and Fantom X range?
I'm sorry Roland, but I can no longer work this way. It's just not productive and by the time I've got samples in there, I've lost the spark of my idea and I get nothing done.
Doug!?! I hope you haven't fainted!
SekondThought
"Computers are cool, but hardware rules".
-
Doug Crazy
- Posts: 116
- Joined: 05:30, 11 June 2006
Re: MC-808 Disaster or Great Piece ?
Sekond !
After getting off the floor (from fainting) I re-read your post and after fainting again..lol. I finally got up enough strength to post this.
All jokes aside.. I understand what you mean with the 808. Me personally , I jumped into it too fast (as you stated) and I really can respect the fact that you gave the MC a good chance. Its such a shame also because BOTH of us wanted it to work. In my opinion I just think this particular product is a DUD. Some may love it but you said it best when you said that the amount of time it takes to do things on the MC-808 is just not acceptable by todays "computer" standards. I mean the workflow is so slow its almost humorous. The day roland creates an MV8000 Type unit with those 808-909 groove box sounds I think that will be a direct hit. I would gladly pay serious bucks for it. But we will see. Let me know what you get.
After getting off the floor (from fainting) I re-read your post and after fainting again..lol. I finally got up enough strength to post this.
All jokes aside.. I understand what you mean with the 808. Me personally , I jumped into it too fast (as you stated) and I really can respect the fact that you gave the MC a good chance. Its such a shame also because BOTH of us wanted it to work. In my opinion I just think this particular product is a DUD. Some may love it but you said it best when you said that the amount of time it takes to do things on the MC-808 is just not acceptable by todays "computer" standards. I mean the workflow is so slow its almost humorous. The day roland creates an MV8000 Type unit with those 808-909 groove box sounds I think that will be a direct hit. I would gladly pay serious bucks for it. But we will see. Let me know what you get.
Re: MC-808 Disaster or Great Piece ?
MC808 never should've been made. It's a "Me too" product....trying to be some sort of computer integration piece...well, why not just buy an awesome controller for that price, i.e. CME VX6 with motorized faders. Sorry, IMO MC909EX would've been the way to go...I hate this trend of products try to be both software and hardware, and thusly can't excel at either.
Re: MC-808 Disaster or Great Piece ?
after 2 weeks,.. getting to like this thing.. well happy it worked out for me maybe you should have invested more time,...
-
Doug Crazy
- Posts: 116
- Joined: 05:30, 11 June 2006
Re: MC-808 Disaster or Great Piece ?
As far as ME.. I only needed a short time to find out that it lacked MANY features I needed. The long time investigating the unit should have been BEFORE I bought it... but like a fool I rushed out and got it. So its my fault.
-
darknessfalls
- Posts: 58
- Joined: 18:21, 24 June 2006
Re: MC-808 Disaster or Great Piece ?
i spent months investigating the MC-808, but since it wasn't out yet, the info was very scarce and mostly parroting the official press release. some of its limitations you can't know until you try to use it. this is the hard part of being an early adopter of something.
i just don't know what other unit offers all these features though. it has so much sample memory (esp. expanded), it has more patterns than any other box out there, and those two things i really needed. my band doesn't have a drummer so i wanted the ability to have a flexible, programmable sampling drum machine so i didn't have to use presets and could put in a lot of changes and songs. the closest thing to come to this is the AKAI MPC-1000, but it doesn't have nearly as many features and costs almost the same.
for me the MC-909 was an option but the physical size and expense were two big putoffs. i don't care to get too much into editing on this anyway, all my sounds are done beforehand elsewhere, i just want to do some simple programming and now i have the option of adding some synths or using it as a quickie composing device - very cool. just talking about it i'm itching to go back to the studio and play with it more...
i just don't know what other unit offers all these features though. it has so much sample memory (esp. expanded), it has more patterns than any other box out there, and those two things i really needed. my band doesn't have a drummer so i wanted the ability to have a flexible, programmable sampling drum machine so i didn't have to use presets and could put in a lot of changes and songs. the closest thing to come to this is the AKAI MPC-1000, but it doesn't have nearly as many features and costs almost the same.
for me the MC-909 was an option but the physical size and expense were two big putoffs. i don't care to get too much into editing on this anyway, all my sounds are done beforehand elsewhere, i just want to do some simple programming and now i have the option of adding some synths or using it as a quickie composing device - very cool. just talking about it i'm itching to go back to the studio and play with it more...
-
Doug Crazy
- Posts: 116
- Joined: 05:30, 11 June 2006
Re: MC-808 Disaster or Great Piece ?
ooooohhhh if I could just have the mc-808 sounds incorparated into my MV 8000.... I would be deadly.
-
speedtribe
- Posts: 110
- Joined: 18:42, 11 March 2006
Re: MC-808 Disaster or Great Piece ?
now they stopped making new 909, so there is no other choice except 808.
-
darknessfalls
- Posts: 58
- Joined: 18:21, 24 June 2006
Re: MC-808 Disaster or Great Piece ?
ok i wanted to post some things i learned in this thread as well as the other one because it deals with some overall issues of wonkiness of this box. i think i understand it a bit better now.
it seems the samples that i import from the computer are loaded into the TMP folder are just that: sitting in a folder, not unlike a dropbox on a server into which multiple users can dump files. they can't be used in there because this folder is outside of the normal system structure. to me, this is a design flaw and you should be able to import/export directly to the final location of your samples.
so this is why you have to "import" samples. you can use the "IMPORT ALL" button to avoid doing this individually, it saves a lot of time. however if any unsaved samples (i'll get to that soon) exist in the box, they will be wiped out. also if you reimport a sample of the same name it might overwrite the one in memory - this is just a guess though.
i believe once samples are imported to either the USAM (user) or CSAM (card) areas, you can erase them from the TMP folder. i'm not entirely sure how just yet, fortunately i have a 1GB card so i have time to figure that out.
once the samples are in USAM or CSAM, they have an asterisk in front of the names, which means they're TEMPORARY. you must save them or they will be gone once you power off. it seemed at first i couldn't save them where they were but i think "SAVE ALL SAMPLES" takes care of this.
next i found that the samples only played as if in the "gated" mode on my sp-505; that is, the samples only sound when you press the keys and cut off immediately when you lift your finger. i got around this by editing the "DURATION" of each part after laying it down, but this seemed like an unnecessary step.
i then discovered that by getting into the synth engine while selecting a sample, you can have synth parameters affect the sample, such as ADSR and filter settings. however, once you apply such settings, the sample once again has an asterisk (meaning "temporary" changes), so you have to "WRITE" them before you select another sample or lose them. once you use synth parameters to alter a sample, you can only write a sample to a PATCH location, not a SAMPLE location. this is why it seemed i had to save to 3 places (the TMP folder, the U/CSAM location, and the patch location). in theory i can clean up after myself and it will be in only one place - i think. i'm not sure how to do that yet, if it is "delete" or "unload". the manual's language is very confusing.
ON THE PLUS SIDE: i found when programming that it has some interesting approaches to quantization. first, you can choose it to be dead-on quantized to a time signature of your choosing, or you can let it record you as is. if you choose the latter, you can not only quantize after the fact, but also choose how *much* the quantization affects what you played on a scale of 0 to 100. so choosing say, 50, might leave it a little more human-feeling but still seem in better time than what you played (if you did it really badly).
there's a bunch of other quirks, but i'm learning my way around them. i'd say this is a very powerful device, but that it is unfortunately:
1. counter-intuitive to someone who's worked with sequencers and grooveboxes before, and
2. has the most irritating, confusing, cross-referenced manual i've ever HAD to read in order to get anything done.
these two factors make the learning curve much steeper and harder. maybe if i had just sat down with the "quick start" section and gone through the tutorial for each action, i'd have understood more. but i like a machine where i don't *have* to do that - and if i do need to read the manual, it's easy to find what i need to know and apply it.
i bought this months ago and thought i'd have mastered it by now and have all our songs programmed in and ready to go for our new live set. instead i'm still scratching my head and taking hours to get something done. a lot of the time was wasted trying to figure out the MIDI IN problems (see the "MIDI IN PROBLEMS VERY ANNOYED" thread: http://forums.rolandclan.info/index.php ... d=3&page=1) which meant i wasn't actually using it. and i have to admit it gets a little easier each time now.
since i don't intend to use this as a main device for creativity, it's not as bad that it's not a hugely easy machine. i did create a cool little techno pattern very easily based on a somewhat modified patch set that was already there. but Sekondthought, i can see why you'd be irritated if this was going to be your main music-making device.
for me the payoff will be when it's all done and everything works and sounds great. in fact i'm going to go and use it soon, i'm all interested in doing it now after talking about it.
it seems the samples that i import from the computer are loaded into the TMP folder are just that: sitting in a folder, not unlike a dropbox on a server into which multiple users can dump files. they can't be used in there because this folder is outside of the normal system structure. to me, this is a design flaw and you should be able to import/export directly to the final location of your samples.
so this is why you have to "import" samples. you can use the "IMPORT ALL" button to avoid doing this individually, it saves a lot of time. however if any unsaved samples (i'll get to that soon) exist in the box, they will be wiped out. also if you reimport a sample of the same name it might overwrite the one in memory - this is just a guess though.
i believe once samples are imported to either the USAM (user) or CSAM (card) areas, you can erase them from the TMP folder. i'm not entirely sure how just yet, fortunately i have a 1GB card so i have time to figure that out.
once the samples are in USAM or CSAM, they have an asterisk in front of the names, which means they're TEMPORARY. you must save them or they will be gone once you power off. it seemed at first i couldn't save them where they were but i think "SAVE ALL SAMPLES" takes care of this.
next i found that the samples only played as if in the "gated" mode on my sp-505; that is, the samples only sound when you press the keys and cut off immediately when you lift your finger. i got around this by editing the "DURATION" of each part after laying it down, but this seemed like an unnecessary step.
i then discovered that by getting into the synth engine while selecting a sample, you can have synth parameters affect the sample, such as ADSR and filter settings. however, once you apply such settings, the sample once again has an asterisk (meaning "temporary" changes), so you have to "WRITE" them before you select another sample or lose them. once you use synth parameters to alter a sample, you can only write a sample to a PATCH location, not a SAMPLE location. this is why it seemed i had to save to 3 places (the TMP folder, the U/CSAM location, and the patch location). in theory i can clean up after myself and it will be in only one place - i think. i'm not sure how to do that yet, if it is "delete" or "unload". the manual's language is very confusing.
ON THE PLUS SIDE: i found when programming that it has some interesting approaches to quantization. first, you can choose it to be dead-on quantized to a time signature of your choosing, or you can let it record you as is. if you choose the latter, you can not only quantize after the fact, but also choose how *much* the quantization affects what you played on a scale of 0 to 100. so choosing say, 50, might leave it a little more human-feeling but still seem in better time than what you played (if you did it really badly).
there's a bunch of other quirks, but i'm learning my way around them. i'd say this is a very powerful device, but that it is unfortunately:
1. counter-intuitive to someone who's worked with sequencers and grooveboxes before, and
2. has the most irritating, confusing, cross-referenced manual i've ever HAD to read in order to get anything done.
these two factors make the learning curve much steeper and harder. maybe if i had just sat down with the "quick start" section and gone through the tutorial for each action, i'd have understood more. but i like a machine where i don't *have* to do that - and if i do need to read the manual, it's easy to find what i need to know and apply it.
i bought this months ago and thought i'd have mastered it by now and have all our songs programmed in and ready to go for our new live set. instead i'm still scratching my head and taking hours to get something done. a lot of the time was wasted trying to figure out the MIDI IN problems (see the "MIDI IN PROBLEMS VERY ANNOYED" thread: http://forums.rolandclan.info/index.php ... d=3&page=1) which meant i wasn't actually using it. and i have to admit it gets a little easier each time now.
since i don't intend to use this as a main device for creativity, it's not as bad that it's not a hugely easy machine. i did create a cool little techno pattern very easily based on a somewhat modified patch set that was already there. but Sekondthought, i can see why you'd be irritated if this was going to be your main music-making device.
for me the payoff will be when it's all done and everything works and sounds great. in fact i'm going to go and use it soon, i'm all interested in doing it now after talking about it.
thanks
for posting that darknessfaLLS. Considering that my main creative device is a pen and a Telecaster and I am not used to using a groove box, sampler, or sequencer I think I'll be ok. I've been pouring over the manual in advance of getting this thing. You are right about how badly the manual is put together. It makes the technical writer in me cringe.