Yamaha M50/M80 compared to Roland Sound Canvas ?
Richard Lundberg
compared to the old Sound Canvas modules from Roland?
The price on the synth modules from Yamaha is lower but
what about the sounds and the effects ?
/ Richard Lundberg Richard....@um.erisoft.se
Cameron Newham
>Does the new synth modules from Yamaha (MU50 and MU80) have a chans
>compared to the old Sound Canvas modules from Roland?
out of an MU80 and an SC88 I bought the Yamaha. I'm glad I did.
10/10 for features, sound and price.
c.
--
Cameron Newham |_ We're flying high. We're watching the world pass us by.
c...@iinet.com.au |__ Never want to come down. Never want to put my feet
c...@adied.oz.au |_______ back down on the ground.
http://www.iinet.com.au/~cam/ | -- M. L. Gore
The Dog
>
>>Does the new synth modules from Yamaha (MU50 and MU80) have a chans
>>compared to the old Sound Canvas modules from Roland?
>
>out of an MU80 and an SC88 I bought the Yamaha. I'm glad I did.
>10/10 for features, sound and price.
>
Hi from Down Under. I did a review of the MU80 vs SC88 a while ago.
I ended up buying the SC88 as sound quality (of the samples) was
my no. 1 priority...but I loved the MU80! Unfortunately I couldn't
afford both...
Yamaha MU80 versus Roland SC88
by Doug Stenhouse
Copyright 1995 Don’t Panic Ltd. Palmerston North.
You’ve already decided that you want a GM compatible,
64-voice polyphonic, 32-part multi-timbral sound module
but can’t decide between these two?
Maybe this will help -- a brief comparative discussion of
what I feel are the main considerations when buying (or selling)
either of these modules. It is not intended to be a full review
of either of the modules, but covers four important topics
(with the exception of price, of course).
**** User Interface
The MU80 gets full marks for its Midiot-proof interface - the
buttons are clearly labeled, the information on the large back-lit
LCD is sensibly arranged, access to/within menus is consistent,
and it even comes with cute icons showing the type of instrument
selected for each part. Wonderful! Unfortunately the manual is a
bit sparse. Can’t have everything it seems...
The SC88 has sacrificed a little user-friendliness to allow for a
greater accessibility and immediacy of editing the Parts and
Sounds by including individual front-panel buttons for Part
parameters: Pan, Reverb level, MIDI channel, etc.; and Sound
parameters: Attack, Decay, Vibrato rate, Resonance, etc. Access
to system parameters is not immediately clear - combinations of
button presses are required - so keep the user manual handy.
MU80: 9.5 / 10 SC88: 8 / 10
**** Performance features
The biggest and best feature of the MU80 is it’s A/D input(s).
This stereo input allows two different (mic or guitar) or two
matched (left and right synth outputs, CD, etc.) mono inputs
to be processed internally in the digital domain (a dual-mono
to stereo cable is used for two inputs). This means that these
two inputs are treated as if they were a MIDI part i.e. the four
independent effects processors can be used separately or in
combination on these two inputs; each input is given its own
MIDI channel and thus, volume/pan/FX/etc. can be controlled
using MIDI controller messages. Fantastic, and about time, too!
The SC88 does not have A/D inputs but it does have stereo line
inputs with adjustable gain. The input signal is simply routed
directly to the stereo outputs - handy for adding a drum machine
or additional module for those with limited mixer inputs.
Also, the MU80’s Performance mode which has 128 preset and 128
user patches - 256 total - is a real plus for gigging muso’s.
It gives you access to a maximum of 4 parts on a single MIDI
channel so you can create your own layers/splits etc. Note that
Drum parts are not available in this mode and if the A/D inputs
are to be used, only 2 parts are available for layering, etc.
Regardless, this is a great feature.
The SC88 does not have a performance mode per se - layers/splits
etc. can be made, however, by setting the various parameters for
individual parts e.g. setting 2 parts to the same MIDI Channel
creates a layer; altering their Key Ranges creates a Split.
And MIDI implementation on both modules is very good!
MU80: 9.5 / 10 SC88: 7.5 / 10
**** Sounds
The MU80 has basically the same set of sounds as the SC88 covering
all the GM sounds with several variations - over 700 sounds in all.
Without going into too much detail, I will highlight some general
observations of the two modules, both technically and subjectively:
Technically, I found the raw samples of the MU80 to be inferior to
those of the SC88:
Multi-samples (across the keyboard) were more noticeable on the
MU80 - the SC88 multi-samples were more consistent.
The MU80’s samples were generally shorter in length with looping
being more apparent.
Some of the samples on the MU80 suffered from aliasing noise and
the BreathyTenor (Sax) had a very nasty sound introduced in it’s
sample around the range A2 to F4.
Subjectively, the MU80 sounded more processed with an almost
metallic edge, whereas the SC88 sounded warmer and more natural.
All of the sounds on the MU80 were fine for GM songs - most of
them were as good as, some better, than the original Roland Sound
Canvas palette (with the exception of the acoustic pianos).
The SC88, however, had some truly inspiring sounds - the
SteelAcoustic2 guitar, in it’s lower octaves, was exemplary.
The Accordions were emotive, the Fingered and Acoustic Basses
round and full, the drums punchy, and to top it all off -
a beautiful selection of ethnic percussion! I could keep going...
MU80: 7 / 10 SC88: 9.5 / 10
**** Effects
The MU80’s effects system is a timely step (“...about time!”) in
a new direction for sound modules. It comprises the familiar
GM/Rolandesque separately programmable Chorus and Reverb effects
and adds a Variations effect, a Distortion effect, and an EQ
effect setting. It allows you to put independent, special effects
on one or two parts, as well as use overall effects for processing
all of the 32 parts plus the 2 A/D inputs. For example, You can
have all your sequence-driven, on-board sounds processed with the
reverb, chorus and variation (e.g. delay) and have your (A/D input)
electric guitar processed with all those 3 effects plus distortion,
and your (A/D input) vocals processed with reverb and variation.
The 5-band, shelving EQ effect is global, affecting the mix as a
whole. It has preset settings (e.g. Jazz, Classical) much like
hi-fi audio systems, but is also programmable - and via MIDI too!
This effects system allows the MU80 to be used as a separate
effects processor (without driving the internal sounds) - fabulous!
If only there were two sets of stereo outputs on the back...
The SC88 has separately programmable Chorus, Reverb and Variation
effects available to each part with the Variation comprising mainly
of delay settings. The global 2-band EQ, though not as comprehensive
as the MU80’s 5-band EQ, can be turned on or off for individual
parts. Realistically, this is a workable compromise to having a
global EQ setting for ALL parts - you can tailor say 1 or 2 of
the parts with EQ and leave the rest.
Subjectively, the MU80’s effects sound cleaner and warmer (reverbs)
than the SC88 with a greater choice of effects, and the routing
system on the MU80 works extremely well.
MU80: 9.5 / 10 SC88: 8 / 10
**** IN CONCLUSION *****
Simply put, for those of you who require clean, high-quality,
general purpose sounds, then the Roland SC88 has the goods -
this is undoubtedly it’s strength and I can highly recommend it.
The Yamaha MU80 will appeal to a larger group - guitarists will
love the distortion effects, duos will look no further - it’s a
competent GM module with delightful extras.
Both boxes are great - just make sure you get to listen to them
and decide for yourself. Personally, I find the Roland over-priced
at NZ$2250-00. Now, if only the Yamaha had the Roland sounds...!
**** END
--
----------------------------------------------------------
Doug Stenhouse B.Mus
email: do...@dontpanic.manawatu.planet.co.nz
Palmerston North, New Zealand +64 06 356-4601
----------------------------------------------------------
Deleos
>Hi from Down Under. I did a review of the MU80 vs SC88 a while ago.
>I ended up buying the SC88 as sound quality (of the samples) was
>my no. 1 priority...but I loved the MU80! Unfortunately I couldn't
>afford both...
>
>Yamaha MU80 versus Roland SC88
>by Doug Stenhouse
>Copyright 1995 Don’t Panic Ltd. Palmerston North.
<review snipped>
Thanks for that informative article. I hope no one minds if I ask a
question _slightly_ off the thread;but, what are your opinions on the
Korg X5DR module? I have been comparing it to the SC88 and wondered
if perhaps you had a review on it as well.
--deleos
del...@gate.net
---------------------------------------
Call the ThunderDOME BBS * 407-367-8426
a FREE on-line multi-player game system
The Dog
>
>>Hi from Down Under. I did a review of the MU80 vs SC88 a while ago.
>>I ended up buying the SC88 as sound quality (of the samples) was
>>my no. 1 priority...but I loved the MU80! Unfortunately I couldn't
>>afford both...
>>
>>Yamaha MU80 versus Roland SC88
>>by Doug Stenhouse
>>Copyright 1995 Don’t Panic Ltd. Palmerston North.
>
>
>Thanks for that informative article. I hope no one minds if I ask a
>question _slightly_ off the thread;but, what are your opinions on the
>Korg X5DR module? I have been comparing it to the SC88 and wondered
>if perhaps you had a review on it as well.
>
>
>--deleos
>
>del...@gate.net
Sorry. Never did get to review the Korg X5DR...
But how about letting us know what you thought of it compared to the
Roland SC88...
Cheers, Doug.