Synth Site: Roland: MC-303: User reviews Add review
Average rating: 3.7 out of 5
page 38 of 66:   <<<  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21 
                          22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  48  49  50  51  52  53  54  55  56  57  58  59  60  61  62  63  64  65  66  >>>
XXX a part-time user from Austaila writes:
I used the MC-303 for about a year and as Microflip said i hit a brick wall. It is buy far the most limited allround box around. If you talk to any professional about it the first thing they say is "Sell It and get something good". Second hand Rm1x's are cheap and completly kik the MC. I bet that anyone giving it 5/5 has never used any other equipment extensively. even a computer with friuty loops will sound heeps better.

I have never seen or heard of a professional using one of these. I sold mine and ever since my musics been a 1000 times better. If you are serious about your music sell it today save get a good sequencer (rm1x, mpc) and a sampler (asrx, su700, mpc) and i promise you will feel the same and never look back (and if you do you'll laugh).

PS Stop putting down Microflip he's just try'n to tell you the real deal. (Keep telling them how it is Microflip your a brave man XXX)

Rating: 1 out of 5 posted Tuesday-Mar-28-2000 at 02:05
Peter Hasek a professional user from Canada writes:
WHy did Roland improve on it with the 505 and the 307? Well, really these pieces arent really big improvements. I've used the 505 extensively, though not the 307 and the differences are not great enough for me to prefer it over an RM1X. But thats a whole other can of worms.

Ta Ta

Rating: 5 out of 5 posted Monday-Mar-27-2000 at 18:17
shankara a professional user from USA writes:
Thanks Casparproject!! You are a wise man!! This is the kind of intelligent review I like to see. I aggree on every single point you made. I am so glad to see you handle this issue of informing people in a responsible way. The MC-303 does kick ass and it is a fairly deep machine. Many people have simply not taken the time to learn its cool structure enough to tap its powers. Its is worth learning this machine. The manual is very helpful and the video manual is excellent too. I am still learning new things about the MC-303 even tho I have had it now for 7 months. I will never sell mine even tho I have other machines that are better. Its a unique piece of gear. Kudos to Casparproject for a KILLER review. One of the best I've seen yet. Perhaps that will help the losers to keep their mouths shut, but probably not

Rating: 5 out of 5 posted Monday-Mar-27-2000 at 16:29
microflip a part-time user from chicago writes:
WOW!!!! i'm amazed that someone responded to my review without making it personal. I'd have to say that Peter has set the perfect example. I'd also like to say thanks to Peter cause he actually provided me with insight. I'd have to say that the MC303 was advertised, or Rolands' intentions were, for it to be a tool for the DJ. Well that didn't pan out as first thought. Or maybe I'm mistaken about the fact that it was marketed as a DJ tool. I owned it for a year and a half and I can honestly say that I hit the limit as a stand alone box. Peter, I hit that memory limit with step-programming the drums. That was the main reason for buying it. Maybe I tried to set too many complicated parameters for each pattern. Eventually because of this "memory freeze" problem, I would have to delete older patterns to start programming new ones. Sure, these problems can be alleviated by purchasing other equipment. With the money I spent on the MC303, I could've bought a Technic 1200 and an ortofon cartridge. Which is what I should've done!! I agree with you on the fact that it is an ideal tool for beginners and that's why I think that it will go down in history as a learning tool and not a classic like the tb303 and tr808,909. Hey, if it didn't have any faults, then why did Roland improve on it with the 505 and 307? To deny the fact that it has it's limits is illogical.

Peace, DJ MICROflip

Rating: 2 out of 5 posted Monday-Mar-27-2000 at 16:26
Peter Hasek a professional user from Toronto, Canada writes:
Ok Microflip, here's your explanation on why the MC-303 kicks ass. Lets start off by stating that this unit is probably something I would reccommend to someone who has fooled around with computer music sequencing and soft-synths for a while, and needs a starter unit that will teach them most of the stuff they need to know about hardware sequncing, sound synthesis, drum grid programming and simple DSP effect processing. Let's start with the sequencer. Ok, so it's memory is limited, but you can get around that by not programming too many control or pitch bend changes, use the LFO for those things, or better yet, do it in real time. You can program your sequences in step or in real time, and you can program your patterns in 2/4 3/4 and 4/4. The sequencer is fairly solid in the newest version, and mine, though it was a v1 never crashed when I used it live. On to the drum section. Fairly standard roland kits. Good stuff for simple dance music type stuff, and maybe techstep (though prolly not), the drum sequncing is very good, and works in a drum grid while you play mode, which means you will hear the changes you make to the beat as you make them. This makes learning how to program beats a lot easier, it's also great if you get a simple phrase sampler and program sequences of sampled drums from the MC-303. The arpeggiator, without a doubt, is one of the best there is out there for this price range, and I know people who have hesitated to sell this unit for that reason alone. The synth section, though it is sample based is much more versatile than many people think. You have 1 LFO for each voice, unfortunately not midi syncable, which can be set to random, square, or sawtooth waveforms, and can be assigned to any one or any combination of amplitude amount, filter cutoff frequency, or pitch (this can be manipulated while a sequence is playing). You have one 24db low pass filter for each voice, which on some voices does self resonate a bit, not as much as real analog, but its a half decent emulation of such (this can also be manipulated in playback). You have an ADSR envelope for each voice and it too can be manipulated during playback. There are a few other things about this unit that I loved, and I knew the box inside out. I think most of you who speak of its limitations really didn't learn how to use it well, or were just expecting something different, because for what it is and what it's supposed to do, it's a great frickin box (easy to transport too).


Rating: 5 out of 5 posted Monday-Mar-27-2000 at 15:47
page 38 of 66:   <<<  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21 
                          22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  48  49  50  51  52  53  54  55  56  57  58  59  60  61  62  63  64  65  66  >>>