View other reviews for this product:
nitroLFO
Published on 12/18/08 at 01:20
The big highlight of this machine: the number of controllers and the ease of allocation (LFO speed, LFO amp, cut-off ...)
Full connectivity with optional optical out and digital
Double midi handy for controlling other instruments.
UTILIZATION
General configuration simple, but it is true that the instructions are pretty basic. However, we must not forget that handle this type of machine to acoustic modeling, this concept leads to a minimum on the layers, filters, LFOs. So for newbies, it takes a while to learn.
Editing the sounds in SOUND mode is well done. Each module is clearly marked and very graphic. I am including an example application of LFOs that by "wiring" between the blocks.
SOUNDS
Once you understand the philosophy of publishing, we can very quickly realize PRESETS very complete and very original. I think that we should not see the WSA as comparable to others, but to explore very different sounds.
The main drawback comes from the granularity of samples of the ROM. However, with a bit of time adjusting the equalizer and the equalizer output is reached to produce sounds very nice.
The aftertouch is very reactive and the key mapping is also very simple.
Finally, the internal effects are a bit poor for the reverb. It is however often the problem on the synths of that era. It is sometimes easier to release a raw sound and apply effects to externally with more efficient algorithms. This has a major drawback is that multi track, only audio track 1 is good, others inherit selected effects on track 1, which can be very problematic when a superb organ is positioned on channel 1 and a bass or a guitar effects are the same .
OVERALL OPINION
I use this machine since 1998, mainly for composing music for films (advertising jingle, movie trailers, ...) Soon I was afraid I was mistaken purchase using only the sounds of the ROM but once the edit mode included, and many hours of work, I built a database of sounds suitable.
Like all machines, each has its strengths. Technics wanted to focus on modeling. Ie a "cello" is also becoming clear that a basic VST completely sampled with a variable attack by striking or aftertouch, but it takes hard work, just like on the K2K which sounds ROM but are devastating when they are published, they become totally different.
One can only Technics criticized for not putting this machine in the hands of enthusiasts who could build a strong very good sound banks and the overall image of the machine would have been much better.
For me this machine is ideal for those wishing to really explore the sounds that exist nowhere with very good ease of publishing through the GUI and the big screen.
At the time, I wanted to take rather a K2000, but the aspect of "price" was too big. Once the sound of a WSA as an insert past in a rack effect, the result is good to very good.
Full connectivity with optional optical out and digital
Double midi handy for controlling other instruments.
UTILIZATION
General configuration simple, but it is true that the instructions are pretty basic. However, we must not forget that handle this type of machine to acoustic modeling, this concept leads to a minimum on the layers, filters, LFOs. So for newbies, it takes a while to learn.
Editing the sounds in SOUND mode is well done. Each module is clearly marked and very graphic. I am including an example application of LFOs that by "wiring" between the blocks.
SOUNDS
Once you understand the philosophy of publishing, we can very quickly realize PRESETS very complete and very original. I think that we should not see the WSA as comparable to others, but to explore very different sounds.
The main drawback comes from the granularity of samples of the ROM. However, with a bit of time adjusting the equalizer and the equalizer output is reached to produce sounds very nice.
The aftertouch is very reactive and the key mapping is also very simple.
Finally, the internal effects are a bit poor for the reverb. It is however often the problem on the synths of that era. It is sometimes easier to release a raw sound and apply effects to externally with more efficient algorithms. This has a major drawback is that multi track, only audio track 1 is good, others inherit selected effects on track 1, which can be very problematic when a superb organ is positioned on channel 1 and a bass or a guitar effects are the same .
OVERALL OPINION
I use this machine since 1998, mainly for composing music for films (advertising jingle, movie trailers, ...) Soon I was afraid I was mistaken purchase using only the sounds of the ROM but once the edit mode included, and many hours of work, I built a database of sounds suitable.
Like all machines, each has its strengths. Technics wanted to focus on modeling. Ie a "cello" is also becoming clear that a basic VST completely sampled with a variable attack by striking or aftertouch, but it takes hard work, just like on the K2K which sounds ROM but are devastating when they are published, they become totally different.
One can only Technics criticized for not putting this machine in the hands of enthusiasts who could build a strong very good sound banks and the overall image of the machine would have been much better.
For me this machine is ideal for those wishing to really explore the sounds that exist nowhere with very good ease of publishing through the GUI and the big screen.
At the time, I wanted to take rather a K2000, but the aspect of "price" was too big. Once the sound of a WSA as an insert past in a rack effect, the result is good to very good.