|
Yamaha RM1X vs. E-mu XL-7 vs. Korg EMX-1
|
View this Thread in Original format
| BobTheSlob |
Well I'm going to get a groovebox pretty soon as my start into production, and I'm not sure which one to get. It seems like the best ones available (under the 700 dollar area) are the Yamaha RM1X, the E-mu XL-7 and the Korg EMX-1.
Does anyone have any experience with any of these? I've read all the reviews online and the gist is, they are all good.
The XL-7 has velocity sensitive pads, which the others don't and a lot of nice built in sounds. It seems like the best one, but it's 450.00 off eBay, used.
The EMX-1 is the newest one, still supported, and it has a lot of decent drum sounds AND a very nice built in synth, however the synth is monophonic. It's 499.99 at Guitar Center.
The RM1X is the cheapest one, but supposedly very competitive with the other one's despite it's price. It's polyphonic, has the ability to edit the velocity of each note so it's KIND of velocity-sensitive, and I can probably get it for like 200 bucks.
I'm thinking I'm going to get the RM1X, but I'd like some feedback. |
|
|
| emc^2 |
Hey dude: few (biased) opinions. I currently have XL-7 and PX-7 (same thing with protean drums). Here's what I have to say about that:
I had Machinedrum that I sold and got this instead. Why you ask? number of reasons - 1. editing is amazing 2. Expandability 3. velocity pads
If you're serious about drums, E-Mu are the best for the price. You have up to 4 banks you can extend on, 128 voices of polyphony, full midi implementation (ok no biggie) plus, real time control of just about every parameter. The sequencer and quantize function are awesome.
Yamaha are nightmarish for several reasons: 1. well-known LCD problems 2. no expansion 3. not quite as versatile as EMU 4. some bugs in sequencer (not sure - read harmony central reviews)
E-Mu drum heritage is long established (just think of 1200 series).
Furthermore, if you take the "7" series, you can add expansion modules to create the ultimate kit and drum patterns.
I have a PX-7 loaded with "Beat Garden" "XL1" "World Drums" (highly desirable and expensive module) plus "protean" drums. There are absolutely no difference between the "shell" on PX-7, XL-7, or MP-7.
The PX-7 has few buttons that have additional lettering above them for easier navigation but otherwise - they are all identical, except for the rom that comes with it. if you remove the rom chip, they are the same.
some of the other tricks you can do with the "7" series is if you have a Emu 6400 (i think) and Flash ROM, you can actually burn your own samples to rom chip and stick it into your "7". However, that is tedious and I wish e-mu had enough sense to put in the flash card reader for sampled sounds - it would have been the ultimate AKAI killer.
If you decide on XL-7, I can sell you one in a brand-spanking-new shape with manual and CD for $450 with shipping (provided you are in US). PM me if you're interested.
Ok, couple more things:
You have several ways you can program your patterns: classic x0x or real time and hybrid thereof. you have up to 16 tracks per pattern that can have different time signature, number of bars, kits, and sounds assigned. And then, you have a "song" mode, where you can link multiple patterns. Theoretically, you can use it as a complete workstation to create a track. you also have a USB hook up to system for library and OS upgrade functions.
The pads are velocity sensitive and drum sounds are intense. You can take all 16 tracks and layer and layer and layer and pan away. You can also pick individual drum sound, at individual step and modify it. So, let's say you have 4 hits of snare. On the 4th snare, you want it to be loudest and panned to the hard right. You also want to reverb it and reduce the "tone" - all can be done real time. With layering, imagine what you can do! I was able to create some very punchy beats with "oooomph" to beat 808! Also, as opposed to using "accent", as x0x drums, you can actually tune the volume for specific step. So, same analogy as above - pick a step, drum, and set the volume. This is great for creating a "live" feel to the drums, as real drummer may not hit the drum with the same "velocity" all the time. Quantize function allows you to set it from 1/1 to 1/64 (I think).
The MIDI master clock on that thing is impeccable - it is the master MIDI in my rig. All buttons send MIDI parameters and can be recorded real time. Kits can be consructed but takes a bit of mucking around. You also have a touch pad for morphing or other assignable functions. you also have another set of outputs to create a "surround" feel, if you have additional monitors. It is a very very versatile system.
I also had a conversation about Korgs, and inspite of tube-driven marketing crap, (if my memory serves me right) the tube is there for decoration purposes. the distortion is... digital. I will have to confirm some info here but I do believe that schematic-wise, transistor tube is there for decoration.
ok, I think I'll shut up. :D
also, check out reviews on harmonycentral.com and sonicstate.com
Cheers! |
|
|
| Freak |
I tested the Yamaha RM1X before it was released many moons ago (long story).
I thought it was garbage personally- sounded very cheap.
Quite limiting too. I know all grooveboxs are limted in some respects, but this was moreso. |
|
|
| Axolotyl |
Think before you buy one of these things. They are touted as the one stop solution to making EDM, but in reality they lack the control you'll need to make a decent track unless your happy making old school techno. The sounds and filters are usually the biggest let down followed by the limited memory and sequencer.
I had an mc303 and found the thing nearly useless when I upgraded to a software sequencer. My mate had the 505 and its gathering dust now.
If your happy spending the dosh just for something to muck around on or for jamming live, then go for it. But yeah, just thought I'd warn you incase your were under the delusion that these are actually used for semi-serious production.
=)
If I was going to go for one, it would be the Korg though. Like you said it has a better soounding synth than the others. |
|
|
| fr0st |
| check out the roland mc909 and the sp 606 i think those are the model names... |
|
|
| BobTheSlob |
| I just find it so hard to ever get started on a software sequencer. Reason 3.0 just doesn't get me anywhere. I just muck around and never get a start to a song. I've heard that these grooveboxes allow for easy starts and some decent inspiration. Just play around till you find something that you like. |
|
|
| mikefasssy |
| quote: | Originally posted by BobTheSlob
I just find it so hard to ever get started on a software sequencer. Reason 3.0 just doesn't get me anywhere. I just muck around and never get a start to a song. I've heard that these grooveboxes allow for easy starts and some decent inspiration. Just play around till you find something that you like. |
so whats the difference with software?
software: unlimited resources of samples + synths
hardware (groovebox specific): unlmited samples...maybe one 4/10 synth.
read a manual or something man. |
|
|
| skycrush |
| quote: | Originally posted by BobTheSlob
I just find it so hard to ever get started on a software sequencer. |
If you haven't already check out Orion before you give up on software sequencers - it's really easy to work with and it has a pattern based approach to making tunes so its sort of like grooveboxes in that respect |
|
|
| ErikC |
| The Quasimidi Polymorph is the coolest groovebox ever. However it is very hard to come by.. |
|
|
| FirstBorn |
| quote: | Originally posted by Freak
I tested the Yamaha RM1X before it was released many moons ago (long story).
I thought it was garbage personally- sounded very cheap. |
The RM1X's on-board sounds are not good at all but if you look past those, you get an incredibly powerful hardware sequencer. I own one and use it as the engine room of an all-hardware studio, and have very few complaints.
| quote: | Originally posted by Axolotyl
If your happy spending the dosh just for something to muck around on or for jamming live, then go for it. But yeah, just thought I'd warn you incase your were under the delusion that these are actually used for semi-serious production. |
I use mine for professional production. :D |
|
|
| DeZmA |
| quote: | Originally posted by Freak
I tested the Yamaha RM1X before it was released many moons ago (long story).
I thought it was garbage personally- sounded very cheap.
Quite limiting too. I know all grooveboxs are limted in some respects, but this was moreso. |
That's why Justin Berkovi is using it live :rolleyes:
It's not enough to make professional trance with, you'll need extra gear but it has a kickass sequencer, one of the best hardware sequencers out there. |
|
|
| FirstBorn |
| quote: | Originally posted by DeZmA
It's not enough to make professional trance with, you'll need extra gear but it has a kickass sequencer, one of the best hardware sequencers out there. |
Definitely - although as a sequencer, it is strong enough to make professional tracks with. However, as you say, you need extra gear to go with it because the RM1X's own sounds are very poor. |
|
|
|
|
