Emu XL-7 & MP-7 User's Group

Hi Folks
         First of all thanks to everyone who responded so promptly on 
this topic, that certainly gave me a lot of information especially 
the posts from Andre. I had one question on what was said in that 
port - which is copied and pasted below----

----------------------------------
If you are using these without a computer and you
> don't mind the sounds the 505 wins hands down, since it is more 
mature and has
> shortcuts to all functions. If you plan on sequencing with a 
computer the XL7
> takes the cake, since it has a better interface for that
------------------------------------

Q) I thought the sequencing capability is good on an XL-7 , if  I use 
a software sequencer then 
1) How easy is it to port between the PC and how easy is it to input 
external samples into EMU? How easy is it to input samples into the 
505 from the computer?

2) Also if I use the software sequencer than am I using the EMU to 
create only my basic drum patterns, modify the built in samples and 
export it to the PC where I do my sequencing? I am not sure what 
strengths lie in the EMU apart from this if I dont use the unit as a 
sequencer?

thanks again for all your help
vsr






--- In xl7@y..., "Andre Lewis" <andrel@s...> wrote:
> Well IMHO the XL-7 is a little easier to get into at first, but the 
MC505 has a
> lot going for it as well.  The main reason you would want the XL-7 
is for it's
> sounds and that you can add different soundsets to it.  As far as 
synths go, the
> synth engines are very similar with the exception of the modulation 
matrix (IE
> patchcords) on the XL7, but this might be harder to follow and you 
may not use
> it as much.  The 505 has the equivelant engine of the JV series and 
XV series of
> Rolands, in fact the controllers on the JP8000 map directly on the 
505.  The 505
> is way more complex overall but has nearly the same general style 
synth engine
> (4 sound layers x effects per layer + filter per layer + 1 of 8 
LFOs per layer +
> amp, pitch and filter envelope per layer + FM modulation). The 505 
has a better
> sequencer in that it has a really solid architecture and very well 
done drum
> mode, allows you to mute drum portions without assigning a 
designated track to
> them (The xl-7 requires you to assign each sound to a channel, 
therefore a kick,
> hihat, snare, tom, cymbal, clap and ride will take up 7 channels if 
you plan on
> muting/unmuting realtime).  If you are using these without a 
computer and you
> don't mind the sounds the 505 wins hands down, since it is more 
mature and has
> shortcuts to all functions. If you plan on sequencing with a 
computer the XL7
> takes the cake, since it has a better interface for that.  They 
both have
> quirks, though the 505 really is a comprehensive beast, but very 
deep and it
> will take far longer to learn some aspects.  Live sequencing and 
recording =
> 505.  Soundset = XL7.  Effects = 505.  Appregiators = either (The 
505 has only 8
> user apregiators, however has things like chord mode where the bass 
notes are
> apregiated but the uper notes are chords) so it's a tossup.  
Controllers = 505
> (Dedicated knobs and sliders for most functions) (XL7 = 18 knobs, 
no sliders -
> 505 = 26 knobs and sliders).  Keypad = XL7 with it's dynamics and 
aftertouch.
> Extras = 505.  Pattern sequencer = 505. Track count and extra midi 
channels for
> other gear = XL7. Crashes = both. Timing = both.  You have to play 
with both of
> them a little to get the best timing.  Beats mode doesn't compare 
to RPS or
> megamix, but RPS doesn't transmit midi.  The main drawbacks of a 
505 are that:
> 1) it's complex, maybe too complex. 2) The sounds sound a little 
thin by default
> unless you tweak them. 3) The two line display makes editing note 
events suck.
> 4) The 505 has no dedicated thru.  5) You only have 8 channels + 
RPS, however
> this can effectively be the equivelant to 16 channels depending on 
how you use
> them.  6) The filters can blow out your speakers and tend to 
overload your
> inputs if overdone.  7) The filters and other knobs can sometimes 
have noticable
> steping.  8) The sequencer can get bogged down with too much 
controller info and
> slows down, though this is easily fixed by shifting events over a 
few clocks.
> 8) there is only 3 effects busses, 1 reverb, 1 delay and one 
multiblock.  If you
> skim this list you will see that there are many small workflow 
issues and minor
> bugs for the XL7, and it misses a lot of the functionality of the 
505, however
> it has one thing the 505 doesn't:  A team of dedicated people 
willing to listen
> to the customers and release new features regularely.  The 505 has 
years of this
> style of sequencing under it's belt, but it's not perfect.  the XL-
7 is still
> relatively new but has the ability to really grow into it.  I 
personally have
> them both and have no interest in getting rid of either.  In fact 
they work well
> together and accentuate each other.
> 
> Hope that wasn't too confusing ... ?
> Andre
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: vsr123 [mailto:vsr123@y...]
> Sent: Monday, June 24, 2002 1:27 PM
> To: xl7@y...
> Subject: [xl7] Help MC-505 vs. XL-7
> 
> 
> Folks
>       I couldnt find a similar post and am new to this group. I was
> wondering if any of you had suggestions regarding a XL-7 vs. an MC-
> 505 unit from a beginners perspective? Which one is easier to pick 
up
> and understand? I am interested in trying some of my own mixes of
> other tracks/samples and then maybe trying something on my own.
> 
> thanks in advance for your help
> vsr
> 
> 
> 
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> xl7-unsubscribe@y...
> 
> 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to 
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/