WARNING ALEISIS QUADRASYNTH S4
Tony Chapman
If you want to use in multi-timbral mode (mix mode), dont expect
the following:
- Control over pan from external source
- Control over indiviual midi channel volume from external source
But expect the following:
- Hanging-on notes to occur whilst running sequences (in my case
from Cubase).
From Tony (nearly 20 years in studio/synth work) and not happy
that a synth with such sonic potential has been so badly crippled
at the point of manufacture and design. I challenge Aleisis to
refute these statements and to further confirm that their next
intended update will address the above problems. In the meantime
those of us who have supported them would like to know how much it
will cost us to have a multi-timbral synth that properly works
with a sequencer ... of which Cubase is one of the standards by
which many are measured! I, personally as a business, am not at
all happy at the money I have lost because of this machine's poor
midi implementation ... let alone that I now have 100's of pounds
sitting around and earning nothing!
Martin Brenner
He had problems out of warrenty and they repaired it for him anyway. The
trun around can be aa bit slow on occasion (two weeks for my friend) but
they are supporting ADATS well as far as I am concerned.
g.r. dorter (gdo...@julian.uwo.ca) wrote:
: I don't know what the product support is like in the US, but in Canada,
: if you ever need any repairs to an Alesis product, good luck. I sent in
: my Quadraverb for some simple repairs (total cost, parts amd labout, was
: $75 Canadian). I sent it in in October. I called a couple of times and
: was assured my unit was on the top of the pile. Finally in February I
: told them just to send it back without repairing it, because I needed it
: three months ago for a project I was working on. Only then did it get
: repaired, 4 months after I sent it in. So, at least in Canada, don't buy
: Alesis unless you don't mind waiting 4 or 5 months for simple repairs.
: --
: Greg Dorter University of Western Ontario
: 215 Bernard Ave. gdo...@julian.uwo.ca
: London, ON N6A 2M9 519-438-2287
: CANADA
Jeff Baust
of practice at it...
Chester Jankowski
<10052...@CompuServe.COM> wrote:
> PROBLEMS FOUND WITH S4 TO DATE:
> If you want to use in multi-timbral mode (mix mode), dont expect
> the following:
> - Control over indiviual midi channel volume from external source
Hmm... I just did a little test with my Quadrasynth, and it had no problem
responding to CC# 7 in mix mode.
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Chester Jankowski jank...@blues.epas.utoronto.ca
Music Graduate Students' Association University of Toronto
An idea whose time has come: Karaoke Busking
g.r. dorter
Victor Eijkhout
> Alesis has been first rate for ADATS for my 3 units and a friends unit.
You mean all three of your units have needed repair? Good grief.
I'll get a hard disk recorder instead.
--
Victor Eijkhout
405 Hilgard Ave ............................ ``And you don't have to put up
Department of Mathematics, UCLA ................ with dreadful human beings
Los Angeles CA 90024 .............................. sitting alongside you.''
phone: +1 310 825 2173 / 9036 ................ [British minister for public
home: +1 310 209 0068 .........................transport, on private cars]
http://www.math.ucla.edu/~eijkhout/
The Yirmenator
: I don't know what the product support is like in the US, but in Canada,
: if you ever need any repairs to an Alesis product, good luck. I sent in
Bad experience deleted.
Well, I had a better experience when my Midiverb III had a problem a
month after it went out of warranty. They gave me an RA number, and I
got it back within two weeks, no charge.
-Jeremy Fox
Matt Portune
> - Control over indiviual midi channel volume from external source
Both pan and volume work fine on mine.
--
/--------------------------------------------------------------------------\
| Matt Portune - IIGSi - mpor...@telerama.lm.com |
| "My GS makes a cray look like a Mac." ae...@dayton.wright.edu |
\--------------------------------------------------------------------------/
Quadrasyn
damn synth there is (for that kind of money what do you want) Name one
synth that can do more for less, and I buy it for you...
Chris Sherwood
>
> I really hate to score points in any way over someone who's been
> shafted like this, but I have to say: who here is surprised?
Not me, I agree on the QS / S4.
> budget effects processors (some of which are quite respectable).
Yup.
> The 1622 mixer was an expensive joke.
So I hear.
> The ADAT is an expensive joke.
But this is why I post -- I've never heard this before. In
fact, most agree that the ADAT is an industry standard for
8-track MDMs. And with the recent price reduction (assumably
to compete with affordable DAWs), it's even a decent buy.
The RD-8 and DA-88 have competing feature sets and *some*
say that the DA-88 is quieter (in the room, not on tape),
but then it cost more (always did).
No?
Chris
(Who would never own a QS/S4, but has a QV+ and Monitor Ones,
and hopes to pick up an ADAT soon).
--
"The blues ain't about feelin' better, it's about makin' other people feel
worse (and makin' a few bucks while yer at it)." -- Bleedin' Gums Murphy
Chris Sherwood
The Roland JV-880. You can purchase this for me from American Musical
Supply (1-800-458-4076) for only $595. Mail me for shipment details.
The JV-880 will do everything that the 'warning alesis' message
said that the S4 would not do (pan from external source, individual
multitimbral-channel volume control); plus, it is expandable to
14-meg of ROM, has both PCM and ROM slots, has resonant filters,
has portamento (with legato), every single parameter is available
for real-time manipulation with SysEx, has oscillator FXM
(frequency cross-modulation), three envelopes along with the
two LFOs (with 6 waveforms per LFO), and 3 modulation sources
(mod-lever, aftertouch, and expression pedal), each modulation
four parameters assignable to 12 destinations (3x4x12).
I don't care if the Alesis S4 has 64-notes or not--it is not the
synth that the JV-880 is, but it cost several hundred dollars
more. I'll await either you're proof that it *is* more synth,
or contact info for you to send me the JV-880.
Thanks,
Chris Sherwood
Nick Rothwell
> From Tony (nearly 20 years in studio/synth work) and not happy
> that a synth with such sonic potential has been so badly crippled
> at the point of manufacture and design.
I really hate to score points in any way over someone who's been
shafted like this, but I have to say: who here is surprised? I've
been in this business well under a decade, but it's become pretty
clear over the years that Alesis are pretty full of bullshit and
are incapable of manufacturing anything reliable other than their
budget effects processors (some of which are quite respectable).
The 1622 mixer was an expensive joke.
The ADAT is an expensive joke.
The QuadraSynth looked debatable even on spec, years before
release, and the interviews with Marcus Ryle confirmed that
to me before it ever hit the shops. And the huge price-drops
were more clear evidence that dealers were trying to get rid
of thr things.
I'd like to be able to give some consolation, but all I can say
is: watch and listen ot the market, closely, and all the time.
Kostas Papaioannou
In response to Tony Chapman's recent posting,
Tony, is this a known generic problem with the S4 or is it specific to the
operating system version that you are running?
I bought an S4 a month ago and, althought I have not tried the first two things
that fail ( Control over pan from external source, Control over indiviual midi
channel volume from external source), I cannot say I have encountered the
hanging notes with Cubase either. I am running Cubase compact on a 386 and the
S4 so far has behaved as expected.
I think it is only fair to give ALESIS good credit for what they have produced
- as you said, the S4 is a machine with great sonic potential. My opinion is
that the S4 has not been very popular (at least in the UK) probably of its
initial high price, and their for it has not been extensively "field tested".
At the same time we should all expect to see a prompt response from them. After
all, their business depends on their customers' business!
--
_____ _____
/ / / / Kostas Papaioannou, Snr Software Engineer
/____ / / /
/ / / / e-mail: kos...@sql.com
____/ /____/ /____ Software Ltd. or: K.Papa...@sql.com
\_
SQL Software Limited,
Northbrook House, John Tate Road, Hertford, HERTS SG13 7NN.
Tel: +44 (0) 1992 501414
Fax: +44 (0) 1992 501616
dwh...@psu.edu
>
>JV
Um;
Correct me if I am wrong, but the JV-1080 costs like $1600 and the S4
costs $1000. Big price difference if you ask me.
David.
Don Stegall
Well ... since a list of new features in the new upgrade that
was posted yesterday included Pan as one of the new features,
I would have to say that most any recent synth can do more from
a sequencing standpoint. Fer instance, the SC-88 supports Pan
and has 64 voice polyphony, and costs about the same as the S4.
Don't have one ... would like one ... please email me for
shipping instructions.
I can get two Maui's with 4 Meg on each of them for less than
the price of an S4, and they will at least respond to Pan.
I'll be getting a Q anyway, just so I can do software for it.
Boy ... you're going owe a lot of people a lot of gear.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------
Don Stegall - Playroom Software - 76702.1603 @ compuserve.com
Creators of Makeover for Windows, OSFrame, and MidiKeys
-------------------------------------------------------------
g.r. dorter
>Well, I had a better experience when my Midiverb III had a problem a
>month after it went out of warranty. They gave me an RA number, and I
>got it back within two weeks, no charge.
My experience relates to Canada (can't tell from your address where
you're from). Alesis won't accept foreign shipments,
so the repairs are done by a 3rd party in Cananda. It seems that they're
too busy fixing ADATs to fix anything else.
Quadrasyn
>
>>What is this nonsense "Warning Alesis" crap. The Quadrasynth is the best
>>damn synth there is (for that kind of money what do you want) Name one
>>synth that can do more for less, and I buy it for you...
>
Sorry, no winners.
The S4 costs $699
JV 1080 $1359
Morpheus $1179
remember: "more for less", not less for more.....
What I'm trying to say is the Quadrasynth has so many great features, and
the only problem with that PAN stuff, is going to be corrected. So be
reasonable..
say something nice too...
Eric Moon
Quadrasyn <quad...@aol.com> wrote:
>
[zap!]
>
>remember: "more for less", not less for more.....
>What I'm trying to say is the Quadrasynth has so many great features, and
>the only problem with that PAN stuff, is going to be corrected. So be
>reasonable..
>say something nice too...
Thank you, Mr. MarketDroid!
--Eric
[it wasn't *not* nice, was it?]
John Vulich
Jeff Baust
to CC10 for panning info, but then depends on the settings
of the patch for what it does. That is, it doesn't simply move
from left to right and back again...it depends on the individual
pan settings of the tones. If the pan setting is set to RND, you
get what amounts to random fading in and out. To get a patch
to work as expected, you may have to rewrite it to a RAM location,
editing the pan settings of each tone accordingly.
Also, for a box that originally sold for close to a grand, it's a bit
surprising that in the "Multi" mode, you can't set the send levels
to the reverb and chorus, only On or Off. Again, the original patch settings
determine the resulting sound. And, of course, CC91 simply controls
the On/Off settings, so you can't have dynamic control over reverb
send levels (a feature available on the Dr. Synth, by the way).
And finally, if you want to use all 4 outs instead of a stereo pair,
it steals DSP horsepower from the reverb and chorus, which are
disabled in the 4OUT mode.
Nick Rothwell
> But this is why I post -- I've never heard this before. In
> fact, most agree that the ADAT is an industry standard for
> 8-track MDMs.
Oh, it IS: mainly because Alesis seeded the market years before
the units were available. I've heard from ADAT users and have
used one (1) in a heavy-pressure session. It feels flimsy - it's
like using a consumer VCR - and this unit went belly-up on us
several times with no obvious fix and not a lot of help from
Alesis. I finally fixed it by pulling the mains cable while holding
down several buttons.
> The RD-8 and DA-88 have competing feature sets and *some*
> say that the DA-88 is quieter (in the room, not on tape),
> but then it cost more (always did).
> No?
Er, no :-) In the UK, the ADAT and DA-88 used to have the exact
same list price (they're both distributed by a monopoly importer,
so there's no price variation). They used to cost $6000ea; I
believe the ADAT is cheaper now, but would still go for the DA-88
myself. I suspect the DA-88 market is composed of disgusted ADAT
owners.
Nick Rothwell
I'll still waiting for him to send me a Morpheus.
Nick Rothwell
I'm still waiting for him to send me a Morpheus.
Harry Hache
>
>Nick Rothwell (ni...@cassiel.com) wrote:
>: ....but it's become pretty
>: clear over the years that Alesis are pretty full of bullshit and
>: are incapable of manufacturing anything reliable other than their
>: budget effects processors (some of which are quite respectable).
>
>I disagree.
>
>: The ADAT is an expensive joke.
>
>I fully disagree with you here.
>
>: The QuadraSynth looked debatable even on spec, years before
>: release, and the interviews with Marcus Ryle confirmed that
>: to me before it ever hit the shops. And the huge price-drops
>: were more clear evidence that dealers were trying to get rid
>: of thr things.
>
>Several posts on this board seem to contradict this opinion. I don't
>own a QS, but I've read postings from many satisfied owners.
>
>: I'd like to be able to give some consolation, but all I can say
>: is: watch and listen ot the market, closely, and all the time.
>
>Every company has its goofs. You've missed some very good stuff
>by writing off Ensoniq based on your unfortunate VFX experiences.
>Don't do the same with other companies as well.
>
>Bill
>
Sounds like we have a pissed owner... I love my quadrasynth, it works
well, sounds great - I do wish I could figure out the effects
programming, and it would be nice to conform to GenMIDI, but otherwise
it was great bang for the buck.
If you are so damn unhappy, vote with your wallet and don't buy anymore
Alesis gear!
ar...@vir.com
> >fact, most agree that the ADAT is an industry standard for
> >to compete with affordable DAWs), it's even a decent buy.
> >say that the DA-88 is quieter (in the room, not on tape),
> >but then it cost more (always did).
>
> DA-88 seems to be the "industry" standard.
>
> JV
>
>>>>
Sorry... I wase working at studio marko the bigest post prod film studio I quebec(they do french dubing of american films for euro and around the world) the had 16 DA-88 and all of them had traking problems. A rep
came from ca to try and find the problem. nothing seemed to be wrong. After he left the owners of the studio got fed up an returned the units. (erly dec 94) an changed them for ADATS..... No problems to report since
then....
End of story
Peace
John Vulich
>> The ADAT is an expensive joke.
>
>But this is why I post -- I've never heard this before. In
>fact, most agree that the ADAT is an industry standard for
>8-track MDMs. And with the recent price reduction (assumably
>to compete with affordable DAWs), it's even a decent buy.
>The RD-8 and DA-88 have competing feature sets and *some*
>say that the DA-88 is quieter (in the room, not on tape),
>but then it cost more (always did).
John Vulich
>Um;
>Correct me if I am wrong, but the JV-1080 costs like $1600 and the S4
>costs $1000. Big price difference if you ask me.
lists for around $1500, I forgot about the rackmount. Either way I'd take the
JV over the Quad anyday!!!
JV
David O'Donoghoe
>> : clear over the years that Alesis are pretty full of bullshit and
>> : are incapable of manufacturing anything reliable other than their
>> : budget effects processors (some of which are quite respectable).
>
>
> : The ADAT is an expensive joke.
> I disagree.
Bill, *why* do you disagree?
Its all very well having an opinion, but how about some mind numbing logic to back it up?
How is Nick going to realise the errors he has made in criticising Alesis?
I also don't particularly like the QSynth. Not enough programmability for me.
(i.e. the filters suck!)
Yes there are satisfied users out there, and with the latest spate of price drops, I imagine many more units will be sold.
Everything has a price!
In the end it all comes down to the question:
"Does it perform the intended function?"
Obviously somebody who would buy a K2000 wouldnt even sniff in the direction of a Qsynth.
Hmmmm...K2000, what was Nick saying about expensive Jokes?
Regards
David
John Vulich
>: I know that in film/TV audio post the ADAT *IS* considered a joke and the
>: DA-88 seems to be the "industry" standard.
>
I work on a TV series called Babylon 5 and the folks at EFX who do all the
audio post on that and many other TV shows/movies and their attitude towards
the ADAT was not very positive.
JV
Joe Kearney
: DA-88 seems to be the "industry" standard.
Pure, unsubstantiated crap.
Have a nice day,
Joe
Bill Gates
: ....but it's become pretty
: clear over the years that Alesis are pretty full of bullshit and
: are incapable of manufacturing anything reliable other than their
: budget effects processors (some of which are quite respectable).
I disagree.
: The ADAT is an expensive joke.
I fully disagree with you here.
: The QuadraSynth looked debatable even on spec, years before
: release, and the interviews with Marcus Ryle confirmed that
: to me before it ever hit the shops. And the huge price-drops
: were more clear evidence that dealers were trying to get rid
: of thr things.
Several posts on this board seem to contradict this opinion. I don't
own a QS, but I've read postings from many satisfied owners.
: I'd like to be able to give some consolation, but all I can say
: is: watch and listen ot the market, closely, and all the time.
Every company has its goofs. You've missed some very good stuff
Nick Rothwell
> Sounds like we have a pissed owner...
Nothing wrong with getting pissed, so long as the hangover isn't
too bad.
> If you are so damn unhappy, vote with your wallet and don't buy anymore
> Alesis gear!
The only Alesis gear I've ever bought is the MIDIverb II and the
QuadraVerb. I still have both of them and patch them in from time
to time. I'm not a "pissed" owner of a 1622 or an ADAT or a
QuadraSynth because I saw them coming. That's what I was saying in
my original message; I thought that was clear.
Darryl Fillier
However I am glad you mentioned it as I am looking at an ADAT, and was
wondering about support in CA -- in NF there doesn't seem to be a dealer!
Later
Darryl
g.r. dorter (gdo...@julian.uwo.ca) wrote:
: I don't know what the product support is like in the US, but in Canada,
: if you ever need any repairs to an Alesis product, good luck. I sent in
: my Quadraverb for some simple repairs (total cost, parts amd labout, was
: $75 Canadian). I sent it in in October. I called a couple of times and
: was assured my unit was on the top of the pile. Finally in February I
: told them just to send it back without repairing it, because I needed it
: three months ago for a project I was working on. Only then did it get
: repaired, 4 months after I sent it in. So, at least in Canada, don't buy
: Alesis unless you don't mind waiting 4 or 5 months for simple repairs.
: --
Dom
>From: Nick Rothwell <ni...@cassiel.com>
>Subject: Re: WARNING ALEISIS QUADRASYNTH S4
>Date: Thu, 9 Mar 1995 13:04:38 GMT
>ha...@ix.netcom.com (Harry Hache) wrote:
>> Sounds like we have a pissed owner...
>Nothing wrong with getting pissed, so long as the hangover isn't
>too bad.
English American
======= ========
pissed drunk
pissed off pissed
crisp chip
chip fry
etc.
Is there a bilingual dictionary on the net to deal with this?
What does 'pissed off' mean, if anything, in American?
--
/~~~~~~~~ Dom does delayed sax for Angstrom - altogether excellent ~~~~~~~~\
| Mar 9th - The Railway, Ipswich Mar 27th - George Robey, London |
\~~~~~GWENDAVOXMARKGUITARALEXBASSMARTYNDRUMSTINASAMPLERMOLLOMOOGDOMSAX~~~~~/
Olafur Gunnlaugsson
>> The ADAT is an expensive joke.
>But this is why I post -- I've never heard this before. In
>fact, most agree that the ADAT is an industry standard for
>8-track MDMs. And with the recent price reduction (assumably
>to compete with affordable DAWs), it's even a decent buy.
>The RD-8 and DA-88 have competing feature sets and *some*
>say that the DA-88 is quieter (in the room, not on tape),
>but then it cost more (always did).
>No?
The adat is a neat machine, however it has 2 major faults
1) It keeps breaking down, a machine sold as pro or semi-pro device
should me relatievly reliable, if it's used much, you may expect it to
malfunction quite a few times a year, ( say 2 - 10 times), this is a major
bummer if you cannot afford a spare adat.
2) the sound quality is way below "CD standard". i.e. what you whould expect
an medium/low price CD player to sound like.
Kent Sandvik
assuming that I would need to upgrade the ROMs and that Alesis would think
of their customers and provide a cheap way to do this. 1.0 ROMs are 1.0
ROMs.
It took me about a month to finally get through to their phone support line.
The ROM upgrade has been postponed again.
The free ROM upgrade is no longer free.
They are bundling a grand piano module and charging $300 + shipping (I
don't need the module, just an upgrade to more stable ROMs).
Supposedly it should be ready in April (was going to be January, was going
to be November 1994).
The tech support person on the other side was very hesitant to talk with
me. I'm a support person inside Apple, and this felt a little bit weird.
It's important to take care of the first generation of customers, as we
are the evangelists for the product. Just now I feel that I'm not taken
care of. In other words those who purchased Quadra Synths in the first
round, beware.
On the other side, the synthesizer is pretty good, but their customer
support handling is very primitive, and I'm afraid they will loose
customers with an improper handling of customer cases. It's not the first
time that good hardware will not make a product successful.
I wish they got a good support manager in place to handle support issues.
And would think of their existing customers a little bit more. My next
synth is not an Alesis, neither any equipment I will purchase for my
studio.
Cheers, Kent
--
Kent Sandvik san...@apple.com Working with Multimedia stuff...
Apple Developer Technical Support. Private activities on Internet.
Dan Blumenfeld
>Well, I ordered one of the first QuadraSynths here in the Bay Area,
>assuming that I would need to upgrade the ROMs and that Alesis would think
>of their customers and provide a cheap way to do this. 1.0 ROMs are 1.0
>ROMs.
>
>It took me about a month to finally get through to their phone support line.
Best bet is to send them e-mail. I've gotten responses back quickly using
this method.
>The ROM upgrade has been postponed again.
Like Alesis is the only company that ever postponed the release of an upgrade...
>
>The free ROM upgrade is no longer free.
>
>They are bundling a grand piano module and charging $300 + shipping (I
>don't need the module, just an upgrade to more stable ROMs).
>
>Supposedly it should be ready in April (was going to be January, was going
>to be November 1994).
Actually, the upgrade is much more than just a ROM swap... my understanding
in talking with folks at Alesis is that the upgrade involves a hardware
swap, hence the cost. As far as I know, the 1.0.7 ROM upgrade is still
offered gratis.
For the price, the QS is a great synth. I've had mine for about a month
now, and I am very satisfied with it. At least Alesis offers upgrades...
With Japanese gear, you're stuck with what you've bought; their concept of
"upgrading" is called "buying a new synth".
- Dan
Robert Parkans
>Well shucks...
>
>I have a M-EQ230 and a 3630 compressor that have never given me a day of
>trouble and do a great job for the price...
I agree. I have/had several Alesis products over the years and they never
gave me a lick of trouble. The units that I've sold give their owners no
problems either.
I will buy a S4+ when Uncle Sam sends me my refund. I will also continue
to purchase their products as they are economical and give good performance.
My $.02
Bob
Chris Gray
In article <dom.325....@i-cubed.demon.co.uk>, d...@i-cubed.demon.co.uk (Dom) writes:
In article <D56CB...@demon.co.uk> Nick Rothwell <ni...@cassiel.com> writes:
>
>English American
>======= ========
>pissed drunk
>pissed off pissed
[etc]
Wasn't it Nick who once said of a flight case that one "shouldn't let a
roadie stub out his fag on one"?
However I'm pretty sure it was Raiph Vaughan Williams who said
"a composer's best friend is his rubber".
__________________________________________________________________________
Chris Gray cg...@btma74.se.bel.alcatel.be Compuserve: 100065,2102
__________________________________________________________________________
Roger Allen
experience. I wrote to them a few weeks ago asking about what the latest
version of the ROM was. I said I had 1.0.6 in the email. They wrote
back a day later to say that they were sending a new EPROM to me. I was very
impressed... I didn't even have to actually ask for the EPROM.
I've written a few emails to them and received prompt replys. I called
them once when I first got the synth to ask for the SysEx
document. I have to say that I have not had any trouble at all.
I have to say that I am very happy with the synth. And with the forthcoming
sampler features, I expect to be even happier.
Regards,
Roger
--
Roger L. Allen #include<std_disclaimer.h> r...@sgi.com
Silicon Graphics, Inc, M/S 553, 2011 N. Shoreline Blvd., Mt. View, CA 94039
Chris Sherwood
> Well shucks...
Yeah...
> ...the Roland gear continues to sound like well,
> Roland gear (D-50 syndrome)...
I'm not sure what you mean by that--if you *really* knew todays JV
synth architectures, then you would know that it's very little like
a D-50.
> with the exception of the JD-800, and the
> now current unit that is an 800 in a rack and then some, all Roland gear
> sounds the same
Now current==JV1080. This is a beefed up JV synth with some D-50 like
tone-structures and (finally) enhanced effects. This should sound more
like the "D-50 Syndrome" machine by your reckoning, but you hail it as
the rare Roland that sounds different... and:
> (like Yamaha and how no matter what they tried to produce,
> ended up sounding like a DX-7)...
This proves you haven't listened to a Yamaha in years -- I think that
the only thing that sounds like a DX-7 these days is a Korg X3 ;^),
but we digress:
> I contend that for the money, the QS offers the most distinct sounds
> available, not perfect mind you, just distinct and useable. For my $700
> bucks I can get a S-4 that will eat anything else I've seen on the market
> at the same price point.
That's the first time I've ever heard anyone use the word distinct
applied to the QS. Mind you, I agree that the QS is a 'good buy'--
I've never argued against that--I'm simply saying that it is not
'distinct' by any stretch of the imagination, especially against
something with resonant filters (like, ahem, the JV-880 for $595).
Why do I say that? Easy: The QS is 1) a PCM sample-player through
the use of 2) subtractive synthesis using 3) non-resonant filters,
Changing just that last item goes a long ways toways opening up
the possibilities of what those PCM samples are going to sound like.
> Thank God for companies like Alesis that continue to strive to give us
> more for less...
Agreed.
> I see all this about how bad Alesis is...
Well, when design flaws surface and the (synth buying) public majority
won't buy it (not like having a decent piano or can't control pan
externally), then they should be pointed out (and Alesis agrees, as
we see they're fixing these things).
But the QS is not the only synth and at that price, there is
strong competition -- 'quad' has yet to answer to my JV-880
claim (com'on now, all in good spirit -- tell us why, and
give us specific points, why the QA is *better* than the
JV-880. We already know the price is *lower*).
Eh?
What Net Magazine
Poly? If so, does the word 'Playback' (1988) mean anything to you?
Ta!
Martin.
Nick Rothwell
> English American
> ======= ========
> pissed drunk
> pissed off pissed
>
> crisp chip
> chip fry
English American
"" ":-)"
Chester Jankowski
> 2) the sound quality is way below "CD standard". i.e. what you whould expect
> an medium/low price CD player to sound like.
In what way exactly?
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Chester Jankowski jank...@blues.epas.utoronto.ca
Music Graduate Students' Association University of Toronto
An idea whose time has come: Karaoke Busking
Kristofer D. Dale
system this spring, if you beef to your dealer about multi-channel
sequencing problems, perhaps you can get an upgrade inexpensively. For
what you pay, the Quad rack unit sounds pretty good even compared to the
new K2000 board, which feels decidedly cheesy compared to my K1000SE...
--
barefoot
Chris Manuel
> The adat is a neat machine, however it has 2 major faults
>
> 1) It keeps breaking down, a machine sold as pro or semi-pro device
> should me relatievly reliable, if it's used much, you may expect it to
> malfunction quite a few times a year, ( say 2 - 10 times), this is a major
> bummer if you cannot afford a spare adat.
>
>
> 2) the sound quality is way below "CD standard". i.e. what you whould expect
> an medium/low price CD player to sound like.
It's cognitive dissonance time; I find myself defending my choice of the ADAT
once again.
I've heard a lot of talk about failures and high maintenance on the ADAT.
I guess I'm one of the few lucky ADAT owners:I've never had even an
audible drop out with my ADAT in nine months, let alone _any_ downtime. In
contrast, my six month old (pro-audio) Tascam DA-30 suffers drop outs
almost daily.
Slagging the sound quality is really strange - I thought everyone agreed
they sounded pretty good, just that they fall apart all the time :-) I'd
like to understand this criticism better, are we referring to SNR or
frequency bandwidth shortfalls? Personally, once I got used to running the
metres in the yellow all the time, I find the audio quality completely
transparent.
Thoughts?
--
Chris Manuel "Opinions expressed above are mine!"
cpma...@bcsc02.gov.bc.ca
BAFriend
support and questions they both E-mailed me and called me on the phone the
very next day. So far I am very happy with them. What can I say? Also I
love the product especially for the money. The new Piano Card is awesome
for those of you who do not have one yet. Sorry to hear about your
problems with them. Try contacting Albr...@alesis1.org or at least I
think that is the address. He was most helpful.
Stephen Hammer
the first ones and sold it three months later out of frustration
Granted, they give a lot of bang for the buck. They also are committed to
giving you a working unit, and making sure you can operate it.
But there, in my experience, the responsiveness stops. I had some very
specific needs from a module, and was unable, after some hours on the phone
and a couple of dozen emails with Alesis, to get a straight answer about
whether future development would ever meet my needs. They also played fast
and loose, IMO, with the bonus card promotion in the early winter.
Bottom line - products that do some nifty stuff, a lot of hype, and decent
front line support. But a professional musician is going to want more than
that from the people that make his tools. In my experience (and, it seems, a
number of other people's) Alesis doesn't provide that.
I traded up to a K2000 and found myself in the company of people who actually
_like_ discussing what their instruments can do, a community of customers,
Kurzweil techies, and support people. I have confidence that any issue raised
will be answered thoughtfully and as completely as possible. Maybe those are
luxuries that can only come with a more expensive product, but is that
necessarily true? What say ye, Alesis?
Chris Bradley
: : I know that in film/TV audio post the ADAT *IS* considered a joke and the
: : DA-88 seems to be the "industry" standard.
: Pure, unsubstantiated crap.
Absolutely true. ADATs have outsold DA-88's 3 to 1. End of story.
-->Chris
Quadrasyn
> strong competition -- 'quad' has yet to answer to my JV-880
> claim (com'on now, all in good spirit -- tell us why, and
> give us specific points, why the QA is *better* than the
> JV-880. We already know the price is *lower*).
Well, looks like you really mean it, let's compare:
The JV-880 comes with 4MB, QS = 16MB
JV-880 8 part multitimbral, QS = 16 part
JV-880 28 voice polyphony QS = 64 voice
And the Quadra sounds great, I know, I'm listening to it right now.
As for the Roland, I don't have it any more... traded it in when bought
my
second QS.
Conclusion: If you like the Roland-sound, and have lots of money to spend
on
expansion cards, go for the JV 1080, but the JV-880 just no match for the
QS.
Nice try...
dek...@delphi.com
The Quadra Synth I had was a joke. The Best thing about Alesis
product are the pretty pictures in the ads. Just wait untill your
Alesis products break down on you. (you wont't have wait long)
DeKype
John Vulich
>The JV-880 comes with 4MB, QS = 16MB
> JV-880 8 part multitimbral, QS = 16 part
> JV-880 28 voice polyphony QS = 64 voice
> And the Quadra sounds great, I know, I'm listening to it right now.
> As for the Roland, I don't have it any more... traded it in when bought
>my
>second QS.
to be virtually useless for my style. It's really hard to get a good synth
bass sound (yeah, yeah I'm sure there are synth bass samples in the Quadra
but sorry I like to program my own) and impossible to get a filter sweep type
sound. Not to mention the lack of any other synth features like ring mod,
hard sync and others that the Quad is missing. I'm sure that the Quad is a
great value but as far as I'm concerned it's just another in the long line
of "me too" sample playback machines and IMO barely qualifies to even be
called a synth.
JV
Christian Fowler
: English American
: "" ":-)"
English American
ass fanny
fanny a fine time with wine and ...
--
+-+
+-+|+-+ Christian Fowler | shape
+-+|+-+ ma...@acm.vt.edu | FACTOR moMeNt
+-+
Don Stegall
of "me too" sample playback machines and IMO barely qualifies
to even be called a synth. <<<
Get this ... you can't even manipulate the samples in the
S4 or S5 ... On the Proteus, you could delay sample start time,
chop the start of the sample, etc ... On some sample players
you can adjust the loop ... Not on the QuadraSynth.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------
Don Stegall - Playroom Software - 76702.1603 @ compuserve.com
Creators of Makeover for Windows, OSFrame, and MidiKeys
-------------------------------------------------------------
Kent Sandvik
<johnv...@delphi.com> wrote:
> I play industrial music and find any synth that doesn't have resonant filters
> to be virtually useless for my style. It's really hard to get a good synth
> bass sound (yeah, yeah I'm sure there are synth bass samples in the Quadra
> but sorry I like to program my own) and impossible to get a filter sweep type
> sound. Not to mention the lack of any other synth features like ring mod,
> hard sync and others that the Quad is missing. I'm sure that the Quad is a
> great value but as far as I'm concerned it's just another in the long line
> of "me too" sample playback machines and IMO barely qualifies to even be
> called a synth.
It'st true that various music domains have their prefererred sound
settings. Nowadays I enjoy those who go against the typical techno sounds
and create unique music. I'm sure someone like Orbital would make magic
with a, eh, Kawai.
--Kent
Bruce Satinover
76702...@CompuServe.COM says...
>per John Vulich:
>>>> as far as I'm concerned it's just another in the long line
>of "me too" sample playback machines and IMO barely qualifies
>to even be called a synth. <<<
Strong words. I take it the only music you're involved with is industrial?
I agree with you that the S4 would be better with resonant filters. I
don't think the JV-880 is all that better or different than the S4.
Since you program on the JV you've got to admit it's a pain in the ass
(unless you're using some kind of editor program). The samples out of the
box are OK but don't you think it sounds better with some of the sample
boards available for it?
Also, don't you think that 28 note polyphony is a little thin for
arrangements? We're talking industrial music, not anything else. Most of
the factory patches I've liked used a minimum of two samples. Most of the
ones I programmed used three or four.
By your statement you imply that anything without a resonant filter isn't
very much of a synthesizer. I wonder how many Korg 01/W or Wavestation
users feel about that. I know lots of them that wouldn't agree. Some of
them are doing industrial and IMO their music sounds fine.
I own an S4 and agree there are faults with it. I can tell you it is very
progamable and versitile. I don't do industrial music but I do a lot of
different styles, some for my band, some for "serious" music. At the price
point I can't think of a synth that is a better value.
Please look beyond *your* needs. I have no problem with your preferences,
I like the JV-880 too but having used both I see many similarities. But
before you can see them you have to work with the unit. If you have worked
with an S4 and still feel it's a "me too" synth not worthy of serious
consideration then I'd be interested in hearing about it.
BTW would you actually prefer a Yamaha SY55 or Kawai K4 to the
QuadraSynth? Both have resonant filters. I like the Kawai but the Yamaha
is severely limited. Neither are as useful to me as the S4. Bottom line,
it dosen't matter what I like any more than what you like. It's a matter
of taste. There are a few synths that I do not find useful but they are in
the vast minority. Everybody has their own esthetics. Lets leave it at
that.
>per Don Stegall:
>Get this ... you can't even manipulate the samples in the
>S4 or S5 ... On the Proteus, you could delay sample start time,
>chop the start of the sample, etc ... On some sample players
>you can adjust the loop ... Not on the QuadraSynth.
I don't think you have your facts straight. Of course you can delay the
start of samples on the S4/S5. There are envelopes for the ADSR, Filter,
and LFO. The Proteus' don't do that. They were very impressive in their
day, there wasn't anything similar to them.
You can't adjust the loop on the QS, nor the JV-880, or any of the Korg
synths out right now. Are they bad too?
You posted incorrect information about the synth. I'm not sending this
post out to start some kind of battle. Whatever equipment you prefer
probably does the job for you. Why attack equipment that works for others?
Jaime Lares Rebelo Pinto
: In article <3klm7f$qn9$1...@mhade.production.compuserve.com>,
[...]
: By your statement you imply that anything without a resonant filter isn't
: very much of a synthesizer. I wonder how many Korg 01/W or Wavestation
: users feel about that. I know lots of them that wouldn't agree. Some of
: them are doing industrial and IMO their music sounds fine.
Not to say that the S4 isn't useful, but it doesn't seem fair to me
to compare it to the Korg 01/W, that has Wave Shaping, or to the
Wavestation, that has Wave Sequencing.
I own a Korg 01/W. With Wave Shaping it's possible, among other things,
to imitate some filter sweeps.
For me, programmability is not the only thing to consider in a synth,
but it is an important factor. However, resonant filters are not the only
interesting and useful synthesis tool. This is my opinion.
: I own an S4 and agree there are faults with it. I can tell you it is very
: progamable and versitile. I don't do industrial music but I do a lot of
[...]
The S4 is probably very useful to many, but what tools does it have
to make it comparable to the 01/W and Wavestation, when it comes to
programmability?
Cheers,
Jaime.
John Vulich
>It'st true that various music domains have their prefererred sound
>settings. Nowadays I enjoy those who go against the typical techno sounds
>and create unique music. I'm sure someone like Orbital would make magic
>with a, eh, Kawai.
programming flexibility. I feel that I stand a better chance of getting more
original sounds out of these types of machines.
JV
Bruce Satinover
>
>Bruce Satinover (gmope) wrote:
>: In article <3klm7f$qn9$1...@mhade.production.compuserve.com>,
>
>[...]
>: By your statement you imply that anything without a resonant filter
isn't
>: very much of a synthesizer. I wonder how many Korg 01/W or Wavestation
>: users feel about that. I know lots of them that wouldn't agree. Some of
>: them are doing industrial and IMO their music sounds fine.
>
> Not to say that the S4 isn't useful, but it doesn't seem fair to me
>to compare it to the Korg 01/W, that has Wave Shaping, or to the
>Wavestation, that has Wave Sequencing.
>
> I own a Korg 01/W. With Wave Shaping it's possible, among other
things,
>to imitate some filter sweeps.
>
> For me, programmability is not the only thing to consider in a synth,
>but it is an important factor. However, resonant filters are not the only
>interesting and useful synthesis tool. This is my opinion.
>
available. Using the original statement it wouldn't be considered much of
a synth because it didn't have resonant filters, ditto with the 01/W. We
agree, these synths are very progammable. That's why I used them as an
example.
>
>: I own an S4 and agree there are faults with it. I can tell you it is
very
>: progamable and versitile. I don't do industrial music but I do a lot of
>[...]
>
> The S4 is probably very useful to many, but what tools does it have
>to make it comparable to the 01/W and Wavestation, when it comes to
>programmability?
>
samples that can be used in one patch. Four samples vs. two. The same can
be said for the JV-880. I know this is going to be hard to beleive but you
can get some very Wavestation-like pads and emulations of vectors. You
can't control them but they have a striking resemblence to the WS. In
terms of programability, no it's nowhere near as complex and tweakable as
the WS. Timbre-wise it comes close.
The most important thing to remember is I like all the synths that have
been discussed. I've worked with all of them. The only reason I posted was
because incorrect information was posted. It dosen't matter what other
people use, if they're happy with it then *none* of us have a right to say
they are wrong in how they feel about their equipment. It's one thing to
dislike something and explain why you feel this way. Alesis gave people
ample reason with the QuadraSynth. My concerns are when people are warned
about problems that have been corrected six months ago or told you can't
do many things from an editing standpoint.
Jaime, we agree on almost everything. Hope this clears up any
misunderstanding my previous post may have had.
Let's hope this is the end of this thead!
Any other comments would be welcome via e-mail.
Bruce
EWINGST
instrument he plays. Somewhere out there, is a virtuoso coconut player
and his sidekick nose picker that have more talent than the percentage of
folks in this forum that waste time bashing keyboards that may be
precisely the only solution for certain top musicians. I sick of hearing
the bashing that the Q4 is taking. If you are not talented enough to play
it and get good music out of it for your application, that's your problem.
If it is simply that it doesn't meet the needs for your application, go
get another keyboard. But I guarantee I would find problems with your
keyboard in applications where the Q4 could excel.
Bruce Satinover
>
>Bruce Satinover <gmope> writes:
>
>>Strong words. I take it the only music you're involved with is
industrial?
>>I agree with you that the S4 would be better with resonant filters. I
>>don't think the JV-880 is all that better or different than the S4.
>
sync
>and resonant filters, it is more usefull for my style of music.
Well, I agree that the JD-990 is a hell of a good synth. It's also not at
the same price point as the S4. In your previous post you used the JV-880
as an example. The JV-880 sells for about $600 as does the S4. The
JD-990's are being "blown out" for about $1200. That's a big price
differential
>>Since you program on the JV you've got to admit it's a pain in the ass
>>(unless you're using some kind of editor program). The samples out of
the
>>box are OK but don't you think it sounds better with some of the sample
>>boards available for it?
>
>I find the 990 second, only to my Xpander, in ease of programming.
Again, I agree, the 990 is very easy to program once you learn it. It has
an excellent user interface. As I stated before, we were comparing $600
synths not $1200 synths.
>>very much of a synthesizer. I wonder how many Korg 01/W or Wavestation
>>users feel about that. I know lots of them that wouldn't agree. Some of
>>them are doing industrial and IMO their music sounds fine.
>
>Certainly the Wavestation has unique features that very much make up for
the
>fact that it is missing resonant filters. If the Quad had some similiar
and
>just as unique feature also I would be far less critical of this.
>
I have to ask you, how familiar are you with the S4? It isn't a
Wavestation and it dosen't have Waveshaping like the 01/W series. It does
offer considerable control over the sound. I know resonant filters would
make it a much more interesting synth for you but we keep comimg back to
the whole premise of what is good value.
>>Please look beyond *your* needs. I have no problem with your
preferences,
>>I like the JV-880 too but having used both I see many similarities. But
>>before you can see them you have to work with the unit. If you have
worked
>>with an S4 and still feel it's a "me too" synth not worthy of serious
>>consideration then I'd be interested in hearing about it.
>
>I realize, that for many musicians, the Quad is a viable and usefull
tool.
>I am however trying to voice the concerns from the point of view of a
genre
>where unique and sometimes dissonant sounds are the norm. The reason that
I
>even mention the genre that I work within was to to warn others, that
might b
>be into similiar styles, of my concern with what I see as limitations of
the
>Quad in relation to that genre.
Here we agree. You find the S4 limited for the genre you work in and I can
appreciate your good intentions. I'm not sure I agree with you as to
whether the S4 is not of much use for industrial music. But that dosen't
matter, people always have preferences. I wouldn't have felt compelled to
respond to the post if your original post didn't have such a negitve bias.
I don't know how you feel about this but aren't you tired of all the chest
thumping and so little talk of music up here?
Anyway, this is absolutely my last post about this subject. If you or
anyone else want to continue the discussion please e-mail me.
Bruce S.
EWINGST
of the price-point. Let's just compare a Ferrari with a Chevy Camaro.
I'm just arbitrarily going to say that the Ferrari is better because it is
faster, in spite of the fact that the two have distinct markets. When you
compare higher-priced keyboards with the Q4, aren't you doing the same
stupid thing? That is the beauty of the Q4, that there is nothing else in
its price-range that is comparable!
John Vulich
>I continue to be amazed that folks compare the Q4 to keyboards totally out
>of the price-point. Let's just compare a Ferrari with a Chevy Camaro.
the JV-1080 catapult the JV into "Ferrari" territory. I realize that there is
a cost difference between the 2 but IMO the JV is still in the very afford-
able range.
JV
Frank Krul
People are such sheep. If you took the Q4 and taped over the name people
would freak over it.
Considering it was designed by Marcus Ryle who designed the Oberheim OB-8,
Xpander, Matrix-12 and DSX sequencer, it's definetely in good company re it's
design. Oh and Marcus also desinged the Dynacrod ADS and ADSK 16 bit samplers
along with Digidesign's samplecell cards.
Funny how these instruments are considered awsome..but the Q4 is considered
crap because of it's name.
Also sound designer Athan Billias did the voices on the Q4. If you have a
Korg 01/W or one of the T/X/or I series synths you know his work well..he did
the sounds for all of those synths.
It's funny how people create misconceptions based of product names. The Q4 is
about as good as it gets for under a grand.
It's beauty is not just skin deep.
malachai
>
>E> the bashing that the Q4 is taking. If you are not talented enough to play
>
>People are such sheep. If you took the Q4 and taped over the name people
>would freak over it.
(good informative article cut)
Bravo, my man! Very well said.
It sounds great, looks alright, gives me an outlet to express myself, and most
importantly, is *affordable* for a struggling artist like myself.
Not everyone can *afford* to be a snob.
:)
-00
Proud owner of the Quadrasynth.