Confirmation from Roland uk- No Multi-Sampling

Too-Shay! <SSSSSSS]=o

Audacity,

yes, you are right and I got it wrong. I begin to understand the technical dilemma with two MFXs not being able to act in the same way as the two insert PFX rows (my original thought was: first MFX decaying the first effect while the second MFX switches to the new effect/effect setting just like the PFXs).

So yes, I have to accept the technical problem, while still being unhappy with the situation resulting in Live Mode.

In this case the only solution would be some new combination effect types programmed by Roland in future updates. Things like former reverb/delay combinations or nowadays things like a rotary allowing a slight distortion setting at the same time. DSP power of the new engine should propbably allow that...

I mentioned in an earlier post about the powerful new Kurzweil. I forgot to mention that my local Kurzweil dealer will be selling this beast at about $2200 US! (MSRP is $3695 US)

The X stays with me, and I am buying the PC3X - the best of both worlds!

I will get a G once it comes down in price of course as I love Roland equally as much as I love Kurzweil. But the sheer synthesis power of Kurzweils coupled with the truly mammoth capabilities as a workstation built into the PC3X is too hard to pass up.

Besides, I get a warm feeling knowing that Kurzweil is going to kick Yamaha and Korg's asses on this one!!

Hmmm, As I was writing this, I noticed that spell check does not like the words Kurzweil and Korg. I wonder if the Secret Roland Agent knows anything about this?

Best to all - X AND G owners,
Vlad

Spel Chekr? I knoe nuthing about a spel chekr! Itz all lyz I tell u! 'L' 'Y' 'Z' . . . Lyz!!!!!

Jimknopf:

In this case the only solution would be some new combination effect types programmed by Roland in future updates. Things like former reverb/delay combinations or nowadays things like a rotary allowing a slight distortion setting at the same time. DSP power of the new engine should propbably allow that...

Maybe. In another thread we were discussing the possibility of creating a system preference that would enable the MFX processors in Live Mode, and a scripted warning would pop up, saying something to the effect of "Warning! Enabling MFX for Live Mode means seamless switching is impossible!"

At that point, the user would be aware of the situation. Even if the MFX wouldn't be seamless, the other parts/PFX would.

Of course, this is assuming that the technology allowing for seamless transitions isn't eating into the MFX processing power. It may simply be that we can't access them at all in Live Mode. EDIT: Never mind, they're available for the audio tracks in Live Mode.

The real trick is convincing Roland, as their Japanese engineers are most likely very proud of Live Mode and wouldn't want to undermine it in any way...

audaciously tenacious,

HAH! now you are talking about convincing roland engineers. i brought this same topic and other necessary topics up and you smirked at me and spat at me.

YOU DESERVE IT!

i brought this same topic and other necessary topics up

This specific topic? No you didn't. And your other topics were non-issues that reflected a deep misunderstanding of workstation technology.

sigh, here we go again about sampling rates, compression, bits, and how the workstation is made...right from the microprocessor level all the way into VLSI.

can your highness please enlighten me on the process that you went through making your brand workstation named 'tenaciously audacious'.