Yamaha DTXpress/DTXplorer/DTXtreme

--- In DTXpress@yahoogroups.com, "drumsonly2002" <dan@n...> wrote:
If the TD-20 is following in the footsteps 
> of the pre TD-20 line they will have the true drum sample hidden 
and 
> overlaid with CSMOS (spelling). Must be the way the drum sample is 
> recorded, and how it's processed through the module. I am curious 
as 
> to the samples on the TD-20. Do they exibit that "processed" vs 
> natural rich warm sample that Yamaha has captured in their drum 
> modules? I did a lot of listening to various modules except the D 
> Drum and TD-20 and for me the best sounding samples are achievied 
by 
> Yamaha technology.  If Yamaha has a flaw it is one thing. Not hyped 
> up like Roland. I am 
> hoping you post a review of the sound samples of the TD-20 vs DTX.

Well, that's the knock on the Roland "sound." The samples themselves 
are beaufiful, and well recorded, but the COSM overlays degrade them 
beyond recognition. When Jude compared the quality of the pristine 
Roland TD-10 samples with ddrum's, he found them to be a lot less 
noisy, but the ddrum's lack of processing (any room "effects" are 
already included in the original sample) tends to warm the heart of 
edrummers looking for acoustic-like sounds. Ddrum's compression 
scheme may be old and laden with artifacts, but its sampling method 
still pays obvious dividends. Clavia's intentions are different from 
Roland's, and Yamaha's. The analog triggering section is a profound 
difference.

My short experience with the TD-20 does not change my mind. It sounds 
processed to me; in fact,it is by design. However, I wouldn't be 
surprised to find many sounds on it that knocked me out, if I were 
willing to do the work. But I'm not at this point. If someone dropped 
it on my doorstep, I certainly wouldn't refuse it, but I don't know 
how much it would be able to cut into time spent with my ddrum module 
over time, or make me less interested in the Yamaha DTXT2U. 

One person's comparison of sounds from one module to another is 
always to be taken with a grain of salt. The ability to articulate 
sound characteristics may be an art in itself, but little beyond 
subjective enthusiasm or disdain ultimately gets transmitted, which 
still has some value in terms of confirmation or reassurance. But in 
the absence of a neutral standard, such comparisons tend to come up 
short as opinion. Let's say that that all modules had a voice 
called "Ludwig 1970s' chrome shell snare." Then a definite comparison 
would be at least feasible. But modules have other fish to fry, 
forcing individuals into vaguer impressions based on loyalty, bells 
and whistles, marketing, etc. I, for one, lean distinctly toward the 
Yamaha on every score (they actually make acoustic drums), but I 
wouldn't presume to call it better in some absolute sense, though to 
me its price, its sounds, its ergonomics, and its features make it a 
good buy--to say the least--vis a vis the Roland. I also think that 
Yamaha's e-drum section is more responsive toward consumers like us. 
We actually get to talk to the principals involved (check out 
DTXperience as a case in point), and they come across when we notice 
problems. What price can you place on that?

Ed