Decisions decisions. Roland TR 606 or 707?

[velocity boy]

I'm looking to buy a Roland TR drum machine, and really want a TR 808 (or 909) but they're way too expensive. So I'm thinking about getting a 606 or 707. Cosmetically, I think the 606 is much more handsome (and would match a TB 303 if I ever ended up with one), but I'm not sure the limited sounds will do it for me. What's your opinion on either of these? Also, I'm torn between buying a SH09 or an Sh101 as well.

[xoxos]

hmm :/ you're not doing your research, or you're jest posting for fun

the 707 is digital, and you may as well just download the samples. the + is that it sends midi and can be used as a controller. if you're living in the pleistocene

the 606 is analog. it's widely documented for being modified, which is pretty easy (probably better if you learn to solder someplace else first tho). i'd guess the main thing you'll notice is the hihats are a continuous stream of noise instead of a repeating sample.

the kicks are pretty weedy on pre- 808 machines.

i have a heavily modded boss dr110 (boss = roland). it's also analog, and iirc the clap is more or less the same as the 808, but the 606 hats are closer to the 808 than the 110.

tbh, i would say to forget about it if you don't intend to use them live frequently and you're not wealthy. for recording, stick with devices that render signal below nyquist eg. my vst are going to give you waaay more timbral flexibility.

the bit of bandwidth above nyquist is appreciable when you hear it plugged directly into your amp, but when you record it it's still nyquist and lower and doesn't make a whit of difference (except for the background noise).

[xoxos]

if you pm me your email addy i'll send you a link to download all of my vst (a $25 value!)

-$25 for me, but for you... loads of money not spent on learning the amount of progress made in the past twenty odd years...

[velocity boy]

I didn't know the 707 was digital. Thanks for the heads up.

[jjmini]

i really do love reading your posts xoxos

[david]

I picked up a 707 a while back. In large part, I was won over by its crude little matrix display which showed all the programming for each instrument at once. But in time, I got rid of it because of a couple flaws. Like xoxos said, it's just digital samples, so the primary value of a unit like that is in its sequencing capabilities. And sadly, that's where I found it lacking. I had planned to use MIDI to keep the 707 in sync with my computer. Strangely, if you've got the 707 synced to an outside MIDI clock, you can't edit the rhythm in real time. Or at least, I could never figure out how.

I've heard of a mod that makes the 606 sound much more like an 808. No idea about the details. But if that's true, a $400 606 is a way better deal than a $1600 808.

Check out the Korg ES-1. I thought it was awful the first time I looked at it. It's kind of dumb, but they're pretty cheap and they're actually not a bad drum machine if you just want to play around a while and figure out exactly what you want.

[velocity boy]

k thanks. i'm trying as hard as I can to stick to analog unless it becomes unbearable, so i think i'm going to go with the 606 (i'm also trying to stick with roland products, because they're my favorite).

[xoxos]

just a suggestion that i've waged several times on this board to no avail....


..but first, some "science"


the "sampling theorem" dictates that the highest frequency that can be recorded is the "nyquist frequency," or half the sampling rate. you can probably find some pictures aroudn the web but i like t use another example..

..if you were periodically taking pictures of someone waving their hand back and forth, if you took say 7 or 8 pictures during each wave and looked at them in series, you'd see a "movie" in the pictures of the hand going back and forth...

if you took less pictures per wave, or waved faster say... eventually you'd get down to two pics per wave, and in those pics you'd see the hand at one extreme, then the other... you'd still see that the hand was waving....

..but if you took less than two pictures per wave, the hand would start to look like it was just zipping erratically around, you wouldn't see the accurate cycling motion.. get it?

..that's the sampling theorem.. you need at least two samples to capture a frequency (all frequencies are sinusoidal.. but that's more complex theory..)


..so believe me, when you're making recordings, the primary advantage of analog is lost. (and if you'll forgive me for saying so, none of the impressionable people on ronnie's board want to listen, because ronnie uses analogue..)

i have owned many synthesizers.. and i am not saying that there aren't other factors to analog synths...


what i am advising is that given that digital synths are free, less than a dime a thousand, and there are hundreds of free synths with extremely quality algorithms... what you have to gain by using softsynths at first is experience...

...you'll know what kinds of sounds you can get from a combination of oscillators and filters, because you're not paying $1000 per oscillator... and when you can afford to set up an analog studio, you'll be much more informed and have tons more experience.

i am not satan trying to fool you into using computers. honest.

forget that they're not legit for now and set up a daw and a few dozen virtual analogs.. as a long standing joy electric listener, ronnie's work has actually infuenced by development (true..) eg. standard and swish2...

...here's some test audio using my 'standard' vst... as you'll note, they are more or less copies of ronnie's recordings, so you can A/B them and decide if my synths really sound more crap than analog synths once they're recorded....

compare to 'magic of christmas' -
http://www.xoxos.net/temp/winterwonderland.mp3
http://www.xoxos.net/temp/gloria.mp3

these are yours for free... and many other softsynths are equally or moreso capable without using mine....

but, now, come on... you can hear a difference.....?????????????????????????????????????

[xoxos]

maybe i should first lie and say they were recorded with analog synths....

[david]

Xoxos, upon analysis of your songs on my oscilloscope I found a significant deficit in the bits. You average .871 bits instead of the theoretical 1. Generally speaking, I believe this explains why soft synths don't sound quite as "full" as analog synths. Perhaps you could overclock your bits slightly to accomodate for this natural digital flaw?

[Nikmis]

I have seen lots of convincing arguments on both sides of the analog vs digital synthesizers debate. But it usually boils down to one person saying that there is no discernable difference in the waveforms, and then another person saying that digital is just too 'cold', 'thin' and not nearly 'fat' or 'warm' enough. Its important to use words that are extremely vague and unrelated to sound. All I know is that you want your synthesizer to sound like santa claus or an obese person in summer. There are people out there with absolutely amazing analog synthesizers, vintage and/or modular, making stuff like dubstep and raindrop atmospheric ambient, or just badly written pop songs with poor singing. Or people who drop $30,000 on a buchla modular and make horrible hissing sounds. And there are people out there making wondrously beautiful music with a laptop and ableton loaded up with free vsts. And there is everyone between the extremes, of course. Its usually the people who worry about songwriting and performance rather than what gear they need who make beautiful music. if you are unable to make appealing music with a computer having the warmth and fatness of vintage analogue isn't going to help you. and conversely, Ronnie Martin makes and made his synthesizers sound good, not the other way around

but I am a complete hypocrite since I just spent the last few months assembling a diy modular synthesizer, much of it based on circuit clones from old roland, korg, and moog designs. I just like having knobs to turn

this has not much to do with drum machines since I have never actually touched one

[changeofeyes]

I enjoy my 707 very much. I originally wanted 909 but could not bring myself to pay approx $2k on it. So I got the poor mans 909. It's doing the job.