Mobile Sound Canvas versus Sonic Cell?

Well, I think that Sound Canvas has "Sound Canvas GS quality" sound module - compared to "fantom sound module" for Sonic Cell (that might also explain the lack of SRX compatibility). Well, the GS quality may have been improved to GM2 but no further than that. At least the price is correct. Is any Roland / Cakewalk / Edirol product able to alter up/down the pitch of an MP3 file?

P.S. To be fair, there are also 3 solo sounds - violin, trombone and shakuhachi. They sound pretty realistic but - alas - only three of them??? C'mon...

That's the impression I had formed too. More of a 'GM-plus' kind of unit but with MP3/WAV/AIFF playback as well.

I'm looking to find a way of using the songs I've programmed on a Fantom-G workstation in a more portable live setting.

The Fantom-G isn't really very practical for playing three or four tracks at an open mic night, for example.

I'd like something to hook up with a small keyboard - probably my Alesis Micron - and get a decent sound.

I have or used to have different Roland models such as The Fantom XR, Sonic Cell, XV-5080 and several models of the "sound canvas" line, such as the SC-55, the SC-880 or the SD-20, among others. Now I'm planning to get a SD-50 to take o look at it.

Maybe I'm wrong (I'll know when I'll test the SD-50), but my guess is that the main differences between the canvas and de sonic cell are in their approach and philosophy, rather than in the sound quality department.

The SD-50 follows the "Sound Canvas" approach of the SC and SD line, so it's mainly a "box of presets" rather than a "true" synthesizer. You cannot edit sounds from scratch (from the waveform level), there is nor user ram, and the editable parameters are virtually limited to the filter and evelope settings. Also, as we all know, it's not expandable at all.

On the other hand, and having listened to the demos from the cakewalk official site, it seems that many of the wafeforms and patches are borrowed from the Fantom and Sonic Cell. This would be no surprise, as it also happened in the past, when many of the SC sounds were taken from the JV series. Soundwise, it seems that the SD sounds very good.

In sum, it seems to me that the SD-50 is focused for musicians looking for portability and who maily use presets and don't care much about synthesis and expandability. In that case, IMO the value for money of this module is astounding.

Here I disagree. With the dedicated exception of the 3 solo sounds, all others sound identically to the GM2 soundset in the fantom X / G. The GM2 sound level might very well be quite high, but I would not put them on par with Fantom sounds (and in no way with SRX sounds). I'd say the main purpose of this module is to play back SMF's and occasionally play a "solo sound" along. If you don't care about synthesis and expandability you might want to get a GW-8 instead, at least that piece of gear does contain some SRX sounds. And a lot more than 3....

Yesterday I put an order to acquire a SD-50, and probably it will arrive next monday. When I'll test it I'll be able to compare the sound quality with my Fantom XR (I also used to have a Sonic Cell).

Certainly, I take for granted that the "normal" preset sounds (not the solo ones) will be inferior to SRX cards, but I'm not that sure regarding the Fantom's preset ones. Some of the demo patches from the Cakewalk site sound to me identical to some Sonic/Fantom presets, and in any case, I suspect that there will be no such a big difference, considering that the amount of memory (128Mb) and number of presets are very simmilar (also the Fantom X and the Sonic Cell have got 128Mb rom samples).

But maybe I'm wrong; in any case I'll know in a few days

Has shadowfax or anyone else yet been able to compare the sounds of these two units?

Psst! Shsssssssh! There's a curse... you know, there's a curse on fantomized forums... each time a user says "I'll go check upstairs... down the basement... into the woods... past the grand hall... to the church, on the right after the main street... the nearest guitar center..." etcetera, etcetera and so on and so forth, he or she activates the CURSE... And that's why each and every time someone says "I'll go and see" he / she never returns... like in B (or R?) -rated horror movies.

Thanks for the laugh, Parsifal, so well put and so true! It's not just here, I've noticed the Curse at other music forums as well. "I'm gigging with it this weekend, I'll report back and let you know what I think." Gone. My money is on alien abduction.

Well, to be honest I - too - promised to deliver some patches and performances for Fantom X using the SRX-03 and failed to do it so far - so I'm guilty as charged At least I didn't say anything about the deadline... Nobody seemed too excited about it so I kinda lacked motivation.

I would not recommend the SD-50 for live use as a midifile player.

The main reason: there is no midi information coming out of the MIDI-OUT port !!!
So you can only use the internal soundcard and NOT drive any outboard midi periferals.

Other SD-50 flaws:
- maximum of only 99 midifiles possible in the root directory on the USB memory stick.
- midifiles are not alphabetically sorted.
- not enough characters in the too small display to show full name of the midifile.
- wasted character-positions by useless digits in front of the filename set by the SD-50.

I'm sorry...returned mine to the store..... :-(

Roelf Backus
Netherlands

SD50...Man what a RIP -OFF....I wanted to use a drum machine , along with the SD50..CANT DO IT..!!!

...I AGREE WITH R-BACKUS...
The main reason: there is no midi information coming out of the MIDI-OUT port !!!
So you can only use the internal soundcard and NOT drive any outboard midi periferals.

WHY IS THERE A MIDI OUT PORT...BUT NO MIDI OUT SIGNAL...?????

Roland-CE says: MIDI-OUT is for backup purposes only. :-(

Digital photography on canvas art question? I recently went to an amateur art festival. This one exhibit had huge panoramic canvas pictures of landscape photos (taken with a digital camera). Up close the pictures looked like oil paintings, but they were actually digital photos printed on this canvas as art. The pieces were expensive (around $800). The girl said she took the photos on her digital camera herself, had the pictures professionally developed, and then printed them on the canvas herself - in house. These pictures were huge. There were panoramic style and were about 30" x 48" (2.5 ft x 4 ft). The canvas was attached to a wooden stretcher frame for direct hanging on a wall w/o need for a frame. I was wondering if anyone knew any more on this subject. Is there a special name for this process of digital photography onto canvas art? What kind of printer is used? Where do you get the pictures developed? What else is needed for this process? Starting costs? Where can I go for additional information on this subject?

I guess Jeannila is lost in the wrong forum :-(
This forum is about midi music !