SPX-90 vs. SPX-900

[r/a]

Does anyone know the differences between the SPX-90 vs. SPX-900? Any opinions?

Rod
The Slackmates

[Richard DePaul]

The diffirence is the longer of the delay time, no problem you can upgrade
the SPX-90 for few dollars

r/a <slack...@earthlink.net> a écrit dans l'article
<slackmates-27...@1cust1.max1.raleigh.nc.ms.uu.net>...

[Mark De Martini]

r/a wrote:
>
> Does anyone know the differences between the SPX-90 vs. SPX-900? Any opinions?
>
> Rod
> The Slackmates

The SPX-900 was in essence a kinda second-generation SPX-90. Sampling
rate was upped enough to support a 20kHz audio bandwidth (as opposed to
12 kHz for the 90) and a lot of features and some new programs were
added. Most of the reverb patches in the 900 have gates, most of the
programs include an EQ, and the reverbs have more editable parameters
(such as ER/reverb balance, reverb predelay adjustable separately from
ER predelay, and selectable ER patterns.) Definitely more flexible than
the 90.
The verbs still have that fizzy Yamaha character, but some of them are
cool- "Vocal" can be tweaked to a fairly pretty plate-y sound, and
"White Room" is pretty neat- if you have the time to spend playing with
the dimensions of their simulated room.

Mark De Martini
"Don't let it end like this. Tell them I said something"
-Last words of Pancho Villa

[Paragomc]

The SPX-900 is also capable of operating as a dual or multiple(up to 4 effects
in series). In the dual mode you can have 2 different reverb patches or reverb
and delay output seperately to l + r outs >( mono PA-1 send - 2 effects-
seperate returns).In multi mode I've recorded guitar direct into the console(
comp+chorus+dist+delay ) with good results. The 900 also gives you a lot more
control over the early reflection part of the reverb allowing more realistic
simulation of room ambience. the sampling function is much more usable.
Mostly, I use it live at foh and I don't leave home without it.
Dave Tulp
Paragon Sound/PMC
Media,PA