Dano wrote:In the Sound on Sound review of the Proteus 2000 I think they concluded by mentioning that the Proteus and JVs would compliment each other well if you were in a position to have both.
KLAXON wrote:I think the quote about them complimenting each other well is right on. However, if I had to choose just one I would go with the JV because of the amount of expansion cards and the fact that the JV expansion cards seem to be a lot less expensive that e-mu ones. The JV also sounds better to my ear, YMMV.
aeon wrote:As it concerns base sound quality, I think the JV-1080 sounds better. That said, I think post-processing is the norm with most synthetic productions, so base sound quality may not be that strong of a determinant. I find the modern Proteus-engine machines to work very well with pedals and rack processors in that they provide a sound quality that lets post-fx shine. So it depends if you want the warmer and thicker tone of the Roland or the thinner, more precise sound of the E-mu.
JUGEL wrote:I was thinking about this the other day.. Now that my D-50 is gone .. I still want something for digital ensembles.. strings, simple pads, ooooo's and ahhhhh's. Maybe a piano or two.
was looking at the E-MU and JV's.. but I'm thinking maybe Kurzweil K2000RS.
just thought I'd share. Might wanna take a look at those.
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], monolith and 16 guests