Re: [mc505] samplah shtuff
- Hey drK
so a power user from wayback eh?
any other hints and tips? hmmmm...
seems like there is no escape from the 250 meg limit? and on the subject of
zip/jazz what is the actual difference between the media? (size and shape
already noted ;)
i dont know how these things work, is it part of the OS that controls the
partition size or would it be an onbard rom that handles that kinda info?
seems like the a6 would sit nicely beside an 808 at anyrate without the loss
of the A6 OS...what the real question is, how can edirol pass out the a6 so
much cheaper than roland can the sp808...does the dbeam really cost that
much? maybe seethru plastic and pink colouring cost a fortune...
Join the world�s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
>Probably, if I can remember them! I really stopped using the SP808 except
> Hey drK
> so a power user from wayback eh?
> any other hints and tips? hmmmm...
as a funky mixer when I got the VS1680 almost 2 years ago. But I really
used to use it for everything, from composition, to editing raw "live"
performances, even did the mastering for two CDs on it. There is a definite
zen to it and if you are of the frame of mind to milk it fro everything it
has it really is very capable. The only reason I even moved to the VS1680
was to gain more simultaneous record inputs.
>well that needs to be verified, but yes, it is a limitation that there is no
> seems like there is no escape from the 250 meg limit?
work around, short of actually hacking the OS - good luck ;-)
>and on the subject ofTwo different technologies. The ZIPs are really over-sized floppies. The
> zip/jazz what is the actual difference between the media? (size and shape
> already noted ;)
media is flexible and floats the head above the surface because of the
aerodynamics (Bernoulli effect - in fact the great granddaddy of the ZIPs
were the Bernoulli drives made by Iomega way back when).
Jazz is related to hard disk technology. the recording surface is rigid.
This allows higher densities and faster rotational rates 9and hence data
transfers) but creates two reliability issues. First is that the drives can
'crash' - head into the surface - due to vibration, which will cause disk to
fail. The ZIPs also suffer from this, but less so because the flexible
media is more forgiving. the second issue is that the Jazz cartridge must
open up to outside air to allow the head mechanism to enter. Hard drives
are normally made in extremely high clean rooms because dust is fatal to a
hard drive (a spec between the head and surface will score the surface of
both). Jazz drives are prone to this same issue. In some regards it is
amazing that drives like Jazz work at all.
hard media removable drives are inherently unreliable and should not be used
for any type of data backup. This includes not only Jazz, but also the now
deceased syquest brand, and the newer Castle orb drives. A quick scan of
the news archives at Google.com will reveal lots of reliability issues.
syquest went out of business because their low cost 1GB drive was such a
ZIPs are a tad better, but from experience they still should not be used for
more than short-term storage, working storage, data transport.
Personally the 250MB ZIP was nearly idea on the SP808 in that I could do
over an hour of recording in stereo on one cartridge. This made it possible
to record an entire CD's worth of tracks in a final mixed form. And it is
more than adequate for any type of single song composition. actual, the
"old" 100MB ZIPs handled this. So the benefit of the larger HDD is
questionable in my mind, though I can see the appeal for convenience.
> i dont know how these things work, is it part of the OS that controls theIts the code in the OS. You will find that most musical instrument OS's
> partition size or would it be an onbard rom that handles that kinda info?
reflect older DOS-like designs in their limitations. Time was that 500MB
HDDs were the biggest DOS could handle 9and we used to have before that a
32MB limit, so a large HDD of 250MB would end up partitioned 8 ways). More
recent instruments have overcome the limitations somewhat, though a 2GB
partition limit is still pretty common. I would hazard a guess that a lot
of the file management and disk code in a current Roland or Korg or Yamaha
product is over five years old.
File lengths are another "hidden" limitation in most hardware devices.
Again, up until very recently Windows had a 2GB file length limitation.
Normally this isn't an issue in audio (3+ hours) but the limit is there.
The other thing is that on something like this the complexity of handling
the bigger drives is never broached if there is no need. Since Roland
conceived the SP808 as a ZIP based device it never even looked at what it
The a6 is really more closely related to the VS840 than the SP808 OS-wise.
They basically took a VS840 and shoved it into a SP808 package.
> seems like the a6 would sit nicely beside an 808 at anyrate without the lossNot sure that having the a6 and the Sp808 is a good or bad combination.
> of the A6 OS...what the real question is, how can edirol pass out the a6 so
> much cheaper than roland can the sp808...does the dbeam really cost that
> much? maybe seethru plastic and pink colouring cost a fortune...
Depends on what's the goal. For perspective, if the recording features of
the A6 look attractive for the price, I would encourage researching what the
going rate for used VS880 products are. I know that the VS1680 can be had
for well under $1,000 so I suspect that its substantially less featured
little brother is well below that, probably under $500 (or more).
Why the cost difference? Well the D-beam hardware adds a bit, but not much.
the D-beam royalty also adds something but hard to know what exactly that
would be. So there is a bit of cost difference, but not enough to account
for this difference. Most of it is the positioning of the product and its
intended market. Roland tried to extend the SP808's life by introducing the
well over priced SP808EX at the same price point of the original SP808. But
the market changed a lot in the time since '98 when the SP808 first came
out. My own approach 9had they asked me ;-) ) would have been to make the
SP808EX a sub $800 SRP product. Today it really should be close to $600
BTW, Edirol and Roland are the same company, Edirol is a division focused on
non-musical markets, primarily educational originally - hence the name.