|
|
|||||||||||||
|
Tips
& Tricks
|
RM1x
and ASR-X April
19, 2003 ~ Another frequently asked question: RM1x
and ASR-X combo. Check out Christian's
write-up: >>
Will sequencing the ASR-X with a Yamaha RM1x take
care of the sequencer timing problems in the X, and
if so would it be as tight as if I sequenced with
an MPC. Those who have used those machines tell me
your experiences (those with RM1x/ASR-X setups)
Peace T-Diddy
<< To
which Christian replies: "the
ASR-X and RM1x are a great combo. This is what I
use live... Timing
is not a problem for the RM1x. Not at all.
Sequencing is great. Editing is great. Samples
triggered in the ASR-X from the RM1x play perfectly
in time as far as I can tell... PPQN is high and
tempo stability is rock solid. We use 2 different
Yamaha sequencers on stage (RM1x and RS7000) and
all you have to do is set the 2 to the same tempo
and start them at exactly the same time and they
pretty much lock up, without any midi sync, and
stay that way for quite a while. We left a sequence
running like this in the studio once for at least
half an hour and these 2 independent sequencers,
not synched in any way, were still in time. This is
a testament to their tempo stability and
accuracy. It
seems that in some circles, sequencer 'tightness'
is an almost mythological beast. Here are my
criteria, these are things you can actually
measure: 1.
high PPQN. RM1x PPQN is 480 if I remember
correctly. This is the 'resolution' of time in your
sequencer, the number of parts each quarter note
can be divided into. 480 PPQN is like being able to
play 640th note triplets. The Alesis MMT-8 has a
PPQN of like 24 or something... just for
comparison. This is very important to the 'feel' of
the sequencer. 2.
tempo accuracy. When you tell it to play at 120.0
BPM, it plays at 120.0 BPM... not 120 2/7ths or
something weird like that. Roland gear (at least
the stuff I have) tends to be a little slower than
others. Don't know why. This is not really that
important unless you plan on doing silly stuff like
manually synching 2 sequencers live on stage
without midi... 3.
tempo stability. it stays at 120.0 BPM. Not
wavering around. Regular listeners can't really
hear this in isolation, and most wouldn't care
anyway. Most modern hardware sequencers have this
area pretty much down... computer based sequencers
running on older platforms are a different story.
OS overhead could cause these systems to loose some
important clock cycles here and there and make the
timing a little wobbly and inaccurate... They've
pretty much found ways around this now
though... The
problem with the ASR-X sequencer is that it has a
nice high PPQN, 384 IIRC, but it can't play more
than a few tracks of notes at once before it starts
to bog down. It just can't handle all the data. And
when you start messing with front panel controls
while its playing it gets really bad because the
processor has to handle that stuff, update the
display, and all that too... pretty much the same
problem as old computer sequencers. However,
when you play the ASR-X from an external sequencer,
these problems go away. It doesn't have to lookup a
midi note every 1/3072th of a second (at 120 BPM)
or send (potentially) 16 or more of these notes
over to the synth engine. It just sends the notes
from the midi-in to the synth engine and plays them
back. The
processor has time for cool stuff now like updating
midi cc data and keeping track of what the screen
is supposed to be showing... A
caveat: Some older sequencers found in drum
machines like the 808, 909 and others are rumored
to have slight timing irregularities which are
desirable to some people. I'm not sure if this is
the case with the MPC. Important
things to consider in a modern sequencer
are: 1.
How do I arrange my tracks when I'm playing them?
Do I want to lay a song out beforehand in its
finished state? Do I want to arrange on the fly by
muting/unmuting, switching to other parts for B and
C section, bridge, etc.? Maybe some of both? For my
live purposes, the second is absolutely essential.
For multitrack studio purposes, the first is
important too... The RM1x allows you to work either
way, or both. 2.
How many patterns can it hold? How many do I need?
What are my options for backup, transfer, and
translation to other systems? The RM1x stores 50
user patterns, has a built in floppy drive for
storage, and writes standard midi files. 3.
Will the PPQN be high enough for what I want to do?
Fine control over note timing is a subtle thing,
but can add a lot to the feel of certain types of
music. Lots of old school techno was done on
sequencers with PPQN of 4 (yes four). Its supposed
to sound stiff and robotic. Do you need to be able
to approximate the feel of a human rhythm section?
The higher your PPQN, the smaller your timing
resolution, and the more flexibility you have.
(assuming that the sequencer can keep up with the
data, the RM1x certainly can) The quantizing
functions available have a role to play here too.
These go a long way to getting the feel of a track
right without a lot of work... how flexible are
these features? With
the added features of both the Ensoniq and the
Yamaha, I'm sure you'll find that you can do a lot
more with this combo than with an Akai. Both the
RM1x and the ASR-X have stock sounds available on
power up. you don't have to load everything from
tons of floppies every time you turn the machine
on. If you do load custom samples, the available
internal zip drive for the ASR-X makes it pretty
convenient. With the two machines you have a
polyphony of 48 notes. (64 midi notes if you're
concerned about driving even more gear from the
RM1x) The ASR-X sampling engine kills the Akai's
(except for the 4000, they're catching up) with 2
filters (modulatable with realtime CCs from the
RM1x knobs, by the way) 4 envelopes, LFOs, etc...
plus an insert effect which comes in handy and is
of high quality. The
RM1x has some cool sequencer tricks too... midi
delay, beat stretching and offsetting, groove
templates. Plus its stock sounds+effects are really
useful for a lot of different types of music. Not
every sound HAS to be a sample... In
short, my opinion is this: RM1x + ASR-X vs. MPC.
ASR-X sampling capabilities beats MPC, RM1x
sequencing capacities beats MPC. Together, you have
more flexibility, more polyphony, more options,
more sounds, and more durability. It probably costs
less too... Christian
Oncken Yamaha
RM1x & RS7000 User Groups |
||||||||||||
 |