I hear ya. And I can see where it would be useful depending on your style of programming. I'm just different when it comes to programming synths. I've been programming for over 20+ years and have come to the point where I usually know which specific parameter I want to go to by just hearing the sound, so I don't need an "overview" unless the synth has a very difficult or limited UI with countless nested pages and menus (i.e. FM or other digital synths, romplers, etc). I'm very familiar with programming the Xpander's architecture and it's interface. I find it to be layed out very well, easy to understand and access, and I love the large format of it's UI. So it's just as easy for me to hit one or two buttons and turn a pot as it is to launch an app and click a few parameters with a mouse.
Ultimately for me it comes down to the fact that when I want to interact with my instruments, I prefer for it to be a more "personal" experience and use them for how and what they were designed for. In some cases with certain instruments, the limitation of their interfaces can be part of their "character", dictating the outcome of what you create with them. On the flip side there are definitely some instruments that are just flat out ridiculous to program due to their clunky interfaces. For instruments like that, absolutely software interfaces have a clear advantage. I just never found the Xpander to be one of these types of instruments.
-o
On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 3:42 PM, Neil Loughran <neil_loughran@...> wrote:
Xplorer has the advantage of showing you every parameter and modulation mapping at a glance which is why I really love it…also it works both ways… you can edit on the computer and also the synth at the same time as the communication is bi-directional.Worth checking out.On 14 Apr 2013, at 21:15, Omar <holografique@...> wrote:yup, its two clicks for me as well, and it doesnt always happen, just seems random.
Xplorer looks cool, but I use hardware synths because I like using the different "hands-on" interface that each synth offers versus using a mouse and computer screen all the time. For me It keeps the "process" interesting and spontaneous.
On Sunday, April 14, 2013, Neil Loughran wrote:Look forward to hearing about that Omar. Its more like 2 clicks per parameter change on mine now I just checked it out…
it works great though and the encoders feel real nice on mine. Less noisy for sure..On the whole I agree… for me as long as the encoder works I am fine.I do most of my detailed programming via the Xplorer editor anyway.. so the encoders were more about being able to do the stuff not in the editor like voice PAN position and the like.On 14 Apr 2013, at 20:24, Omar <holografique@...> wrote:its all matter of choice. this isnt a debate about what makes your Xpander keep value, nor is a new part a compromise over an original as long as it meets the same specs. if you want to clean your pots then great. if someone wants to replace them with a new component then they have a choice. its better we have options than no options. especially if a pot completely stops functioning regardless of cleaning it. can we move on now?
And FWIW, Syntaur has found a new replacement pot that operates within the same spec as the original (1 click per value) and still provides the smoother less noisy detent. I will have them here soon to install on mine.
On Sunday, April 14, 2013, PeWe wrote:
Don´t know ...
If you have to turn the rotarys 3 times more for the same value change now,- which is exactly the case when 3 clicks produce a value change of + /- 1 only,- they will be worn out again much, much earlier than the old original ones.
But I learned here in the group, members prefer modern parts feeling smooth and being less noisy over the original behaviour.
Any new rotary encoder out there is a compromize vs the original ones,- so for me the clean job and replacing the Schmitts was the better solution.
It may be a temporary fix though,- but I don´t have to use the rotarys 24/7 a year.
Also think about that was the 1st clean job necessary after more than a quarter of a century,- so it´s possible repeatable.
And yes,- Servisol Super 10 is agressive to plastic,- I know that,- but it also depends how you deal w/ Servisol 10 for the clean job.
Don´t take much and remove everything left over AFTER the clean job.
When you flood the Xpander w/ Servisol 10,- that´s another story though.
For the heavier programming job, it´s probably recommended to buy Xplorer application for the Xpander/Matrix12 single-program editing and creations and use that in addition to make original encoders survive as long as possible.
I´m pretty sure any Xpander and Matrix-12 has a better value w/ all original parts inside working once you want to sell it.
Am 14.04.2013 17:49, schrieb Neil Loughran:
Yeah seems a shame to me as well…
Still its better than them not working at all I suppose.