> -----Original Message----- > Larry, you say you'd never own a 6R again... why is that? > > Ok, let's see what I can remember. The 6R came out at a time (87?) where the whole world was beyond midi-fying everything as was switching over to the Keyboard + Module format. Look at all the modules you can control with a REMOTE keyboard! Yamaha was big on this; Ensoniq was a real player at the time, too. Oberheim took their Matrix 6 apart and sold the keybed separately (with some additional logic) as the Xk-1. Being the type I was, I bought the separate components, Xk-1 and M6R, rather than the M6 synth. Still have the Xk, BTW. It's built into a "project" of mine that I still use. I really can't fault them for eating up 2U of rack for 6 voices. After all, for the electronics of the time, that wasn't such a problem. Every synth manufacturer was offering their wares in modules. I have many yet today. But the #1 irritant for me was the fact that midi did NOTHING on the 6R. Patch and note... that was it. The sales pitch was that through the matrix mod section, anything could be routed to anything... and that's true... except it's making virtue of necessity. You HAVE to route it to make it do anything. So where lots of other modules had volume and pitchbend already integrated, the 6R did not. If you want to control volume via Midi, you have to route the midi signal to VCA2, thus LOSING a useful component of your synthesis engine for the mundane task of volume. Either that, or run 40' of roundtrip noisy cable from my synth rack to a rocker pedal by my "remote" keyboard. This is silly. If the emphasis was all this 'remote control' then why make it so hard to remotely control the thing?? And I was even using a pretty darned good graphic editor (Opcode Galaxy) that made programming really sweet. When used in the same rack with a Yamaha TX802 and a Kurzweil 1000PX, it was definitely the boat anchor to mess with. On other modules, including the M1000, midi volume just *worked* and it was not a chore to get it to work. Pitch bend just *worked* and it didn't have to be programmed-in every patch. I don't know the first thing about decisionmaking at the factory, but it appears that feedback got to them. When the M1000 came out, it seemed they were trying to make up for past sins. 1U in size. That was great. It had 1,000 patches built in. Name the module that comes close to THAT. Rubber buttons instead of membrane switches. And midi integration on more than just patch/voice. It was basically what the 6R SHOULD have been. So I have 2. Love 'em. And with the pricepoints being so similar; the rack size being half; plenty of choice patches; my editor/librarian software still works; and a useful midi volume; why would I ever want to go back to a 6R? Ain't gonna happen. Thereya go. Howzzat? Larry
Message
RE: [oberheim] Re: Matrix 6R Spillover vs. Matrix 1000 Group Mode
2010-11-15 by LarryS
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.