Organizing multiple sound modules.

[RABid]

I know a few people here have multiple sound modules. Im wondering what your philosophy is for using dedicated hardware for specific sound types. Here is a hypothetical setup which is not my setup. Pretend that you have a Roland XV-5080 and two Roland XV-5050s. For those units you have the two SRX Orchestra ROMs (SRX-03 and SRX-05 I think) and the Roland Orchestral sample CDs. You have the Drum ROM, World ROM, Vintage ROM and Dance ROM. There are two ways to break up the ROMs and organize your modules.

 

1. Turn the XV-5080 into your orchestra module. Install the two orchestra ROMs plus use the sample CDs to fill in the gaps. Use one XV-5050 for drums and percussion. Install the Drum ROM and the World ROM into that machine. For the third XV-5050 install the Vintage and Dance ROM.

 

2. Spread like sounds across the units. Install the Drum and Vintage ROM in the XV-5080 along with the orchestral sample sets. Install an orchestral ROM and the world ROM into one XV-5050. Install the other orchestra ROM and the dance ROM into the second XV-5050. If you are doing major orchestration you can use all three units for increased polyphony. The same with major drum breaks, or dance music.

 

So, would you/do you specialize and focus or do you spread like sounds around as long as all units give you the same quality within those sounds?

 

Robert

[billjv]

Hey Robert,

 

I'm not exactly familiar with all the Roland gear, but the concept is clear behind what you're doing. I would personally group the sounds separately on the various machines, simply because it would be easier for me to remember (in a 3:00am music stupor) where the groups live!

 

So, there ya have it, my philosophy on organization - make it easy to remember.

 

bv

[Rod S]

Originally posted by Rabid:

So, would you/do you specialize and focus or do you spread like sounds around as long as all units give you the same quality within those sounds?

The way it ends up working in my head is I know the type of sounds I wouldn`t use one of the modules for, and then I look elsewhere. A lot of times if I eliminate enough options I'll end up on a module alone. It works almost subconciously, I`ve never really thought about a `formal` division.

 

Case in point: The Alesis QSR is horrible for anything resembling orch strings and guitar - I certainly won`t bother looking there. Ditto for analog resonance effects.

 

Not a module, but I don`t like the organ sounds in my cs6x - usable for a gig, but as long as I have other options I'll stay away from them.

[Carlito]

I agree with bv.I would go with option one.But I also think, with the Roland modules, there will be so much wasted ROM since they all have the same stock samples.

 

With the E-mu's it would be different.You could buy four of the 32meg Flash Roms for each module, and customize them to your taste.You'd need to borrow a E-IV sampler plus library from your friends to transfer the sounds.Three loaded Customized modules would cost about $4000.00 . But that's 384MEG of your best selected sounds .

[Tusker]

I'd spread the cards out amongst the synths to prevent polyphony issues from bottlenecking the process.

 

I too would prefer to bring some timbral variety into the picture ... adding a K2600 rack or Motif rack to fill out the picture. A number of people have done very good work using only on manufacturer. Still I think it's more work to provide a sonic depth of field with only one class of instrument... even if it's a stellar machine like the XV's are.

 

Best,

 

Jerry

[Albert]

I have a very similar setup to the one you describe. I have a 5080 and one 5050, plus a few SRX cards (not the ones you mention), plus the Roland Orchestral CD library.

 

In general, I would say your scenario number one is the best of the two. The reason is that you will probably need more polyphony for the orchestral sounds than for the others. You would also be able to dedicate the one box to orchestral, since the 5080 has the sample RAM.

 

However, there is another scenario you haven't mentioned.

 

Consider this: use two 5080's instead of a 5080 and two 5050's. The price difference between two 5050's and one 5080 is not really all that great. The polyphony would be the same, the number of outputs the same, but you would actually have more expansion options with two 5080's. You'd also have more possibilities regarding loading samples: 256 meg of sample RAM instead of 128. That would allow you more space to load drum loops, etc.

 

Further, there are advantages to having all those expansion slots in two machines rather than spread out over more hardware. Programming possibilities are greater, as you can mix and match sounds from any expansion card within a patch. Also, the programming interface on the 5080 is easier to work with than the smaller LCD on the 5050.

 

I use my 5050 as a gigging box, which it is great due to the fact that it is light and single rack space. The only problem is that I end up swapping expansion boards out between the 5080 and 5050 more often than I'd like. Really better to have more slots in one machine.

 

Hope some of this helps.