On Mon, 6 May 1996, Jon Drukman wrote:
Jon be dissin the CZ, so I'm duty bound to leap to it's defence. I run
the mailing list, after all.
quoted 2 lines the answer is "buy a k2000">
> the answer is "buy a k2000"
The K2000 is the best jon drukman equipment. Others quibble with weak
filter, overcomplicated programming interface, etc. If you spend a lot of
time with one and really learn the ins and out of the K2K you can get a lot
out of it. On the other hand, for what you pay for a K2000 with sampling RAM
and a hard disk, you can get an Akai S2000 with analog filters, lots of memory
and a hard disk, and still have money left over to buy an analog keyboard
as well.
quoted 6 lines the big win on the cz101 is that its cheap. otherwise it's not>
> the big win on the cz101 is that its cheap. otherwise it's not
> particularly impressive for any kind of music. (unless you want that
> genuine cheesy house organ sound). i use it as a backup "swirly noise"
> box.
>
I and a lot of other people actually like how a CZ-101 sounds. Other people
including many successful producers. CZ sound is all over popular
House and Detroit techno. It's not the be-all and end all but
I find myself starting tracks around CZ sounds, or finishing them by
using the CZ to add that last little touch.
quoted 4 lines it has no real-time control, and no velocity response. you can put it in> it has no real-time control, and no velocity response. you can put it in
> 4xMono mode in which it responds to 4 different programs (monophonically)
> on 4 consecutively numbered midi channels.
>
I have the CZ-1 which corrects all of these limitations and I think it rocks.
I always program velocity response to some (one or more) aspect of the
sound, and get a lot of motion in sounds. And maybe it's just me, I
love the sounds, find it easy to edit yadda yadda.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Kent Williams kent@inav.net
(319) 338 6053 (home)
(319) 626 6700 x 219 (work)
(319) 626 3489 (fax)