What was the most-asked question around new music tech announcements earlier this month, coinciding with the industry’s NAMM trade show? Was it, “What’s the best accessory for my iPad?” Was it, “what was the game changer for music workstations?”

Nope – not among CDM readers, anyway. It was, “can I do one-shot samples with the new loopers?

A one-shot sample – for those of you thinking of True Grit – is just a sample that plays once and then stops, instead of immediately looping. It shouldn’t be rocket science, but makers of loopers are often convinced you want everything looping e. The nice thing about one-shot samples is that they provide more opportunities to be musically expressive and virtuosic than you would if you were knee-deep in never-ending loops.

VOX (Korg) and BOSS (Roland) each had dueling looper introductions – and each, in turn, earned some attention from readers. Those readers wanted to know if one shots were practical on the hardware. The answer: yes.

The BOSS LoopStations offer extensive sample time and memory storage; you can even use them as mobile recorders:
New Boss Loop Stations Add Features, Up to Three Hours of Recording; the Loopers to Beat

The VOX looper lacks that recording flexibility with small sample times, but many readers liked its live performance-oriented features and effects:
VOX Gets in Looping Game with Dynamic Looper – 90 Seconds, But with Live Features

So, about those 1-shots… First, Amanda Whiting confirms the new RC LoopStations each offer one-shot looping. Add that together with other usability enhancements, and I’d say the LoopStations really are looking a lot better.

Second, I asked Korg’s Leslie Buttonow if the VOX Dynamic Looper will do one shots:

Yes, it does because the Looper allows you versatile ways of ending your loops. Ex.—-“Stop at end of a loop; playback; fade out; delay out (like a fade while repeating last note).”

So, using the “stop at end of loop” mode would in essence give people a “one-shot” loop trigger of sorts.

Actually, I’d say that’s not just a one-shot “of sorts” – that there, pardner, is a gosh-honest, one hundred percent-authentic one-shot. Put that in your … sampler … and … smoke it. Erm. Yeah.

There you have it, folks. Each looper looks like it holds some serious potential. Oddly, talking to Roger Linn about his new drum machine with Dave Smith, the Tempest, our conversation turned to looping as an ideal way to translate the act of recording into performance. So, there’s great interest in this stuff. If you put together some fantastic looping performance, whether you’re sampling your singing or your ukelele or your crumhorn, do send it our way!

You might not see it on a magazine cover or tattooed to someone’s arm, but the lowly looper is one of those things many musicians find invaluable. And in hardware loopers, the BOSS Loop Station reigns supreme – I’ve even seen a San Francisco-based musical act who call themselves LOOP ! STATION.

Believe it or not, the (actual) Loop Station hardware from BOSS has just turned ten. In one of the more overlooked hardware announcements this week, BOSS has rolled out some significant and promising-looking upgrades to these well-loved, affordable tools. There’s a new RC-3 stereo stompbox-style model, as well as an updated “dual track” model, the RC-30. (That lets you run two stereo tracks at once. No question, the RC-30 would be the one I’d get; it’s still reasonably portable, and having two tracks means geometrically more musical options in my opinion. But I can see the appeal of the RC-3 being small and stompbox-like.)

One weird thing about hardware is that it’s tended not to keep pace with storage capacity in computers and mobile devices. That’s not the case here – both models, even including that little stompbox, can record up to three hours in stereo. I’m not quite sure what people will use that storage capacity for – stompbox version of Erik Satie’s Vexations, perhaps?* But it’s nice to know it’s there.

How do these models compare to the previous models, and to competitors?

• More processing power (a six-fold improvement)
• Aforementioned three hours of stereo recording. (Seriously, you’d probably use that for more loops – up to 99 phrases – not one really long loop.)
• True stereo recording.
• Auto-quantize, which Roland’s Amanda Whiting describes as “forgiving looping.”
• Tempo-synced effects on the RC-30.
• USB 2.0 for import/export of audio, making this a foot-operated mobile workstation of sorts. (Try that with an iPhone or iPad. Actually, really, don’t – just had visions of broken glass and bloody feet.)
• Battery-powered for extra mobility.

If stompbox is what you want, Roland tells us the RC-3 is substantially easier to use. (Any RC-2 users who can tell us what they might mean?)

Check out the shot below of the back of the RC-30, too – it’s nice seeing a proper XLR jack on this kind of device and not just 1/4″; it’s even got phantom power. That makes this practical for acoustic instrumentalists and vocalists who might otherwise ignore this sort of gear.

There’s more to talk about – see additional specs below — but I was already sold on the Loop Station. Having a better Loop Station is just icing. Having talked to many, many musicians, it’s a perennial favorite among everyone from fairly large stars to obscure Game Boy artists. Roland’s Amanda Whiting is quick to tell CDM that competing loop pedals are limited to around half an hour of mono-only recording with no mic jack, but I’m guessing part of the reason I’ve never heard anyone using one of the competitors is that people found that out already.

The real rival: While it’s not a stompbox (no pedals) and therefore is a bit apples-to-oranges, the one competitor I think worth mentioning (and thanks to readers for chiming in) is Electro-Harmonix 2880. It’s the one box that can take on BOSS, provided your hands are free: it’s stereo like a BOSS, it’s got loads of storage like a BOSS (1GB card now), and it has USB connections like the BOSS. While I think it’s not as friendly or accessible as the BOSS may be, it has some advantages in other respects: there’s four-channel recording instead of two for some really advanced looping, and it has the one key feature missing on the Loop Station – MIDI sync. It’s a shame BOSS missed the opportunity to add a MIDI IN, at least on the RC-30. EH is actually here in NYC, and they assemble their gear right here, too, which almost no one does. (In the five boroughs, no less. It’s one of the only things Queens manufactures that’s not a doughnut or other pastry item.) So expect to see more of that EH, ideally close to the source.

RC-3 Loop Station

• 99 phrase memory
• Records to 44.1 kHz WAV, stereo.
• USB Mass Storage class compliant for file transfer. (Actually, here’s a twist: that means you can transfer files from this to an iPad, using the Camera Connection Kit. Or a computer, if you prefer.)
• Tap tempo, and/or play a “guide” rhythm with built-in percussion sounds.
• 1/4″ in (stereo pair), 1/4″ out (stereo pair), plus an aux stereo minijack. (Can’t be used simultaneously, but handy.)
• 9V power; use an alkaline or buy an adapter separately if you want a wall wart. 3 hour expected battery life.

RC-30 Dual Track Looper

The RC-30 has what the RC-3 does, but with some extra goodies:

• 2 track stereo recording.
• Effects: “BEND DOWN, STEP PHASER, SWEEP
  FILTER, TEMPO DELAY, LO-FI.” It also boasts indicators so you can see what those effects are doing. (Sorry, Daleks. No Ring Mod, apparently.)
• XLR mic input with a dedicated level knob.
• 48V phantom power.
• 7.5 hour expected alkaline battery life. (Longer than the RC-3, because you can add more batteries. Did I mention that I would recommend the RC-30?)

The RC-30 even has that handy aux jack for an 1/8″ stereo – another use for your iPad, or your Game Boy, or your Teenage Engineering OP-1.

I’ll try to get an RC-30 in for review, but I’d be curious how you’d review it. Let us know.

*Vexations, by astonishing coincidence, neatly sums up how I felt browsing hotel rooms in Anaheim a few weeks ago. I can stick my head under a fluorescent light, play my BBC sound effects CD cue for crowd noise, and hoarsely shout a press release. It’s just like being there. Oh, and yes, I’m a classical music nerd, too. Bring it.

The BOSS Pedal Sketch application, a free download today for iPhone and iPod touch, probably isn’t what you think it is – but it is a novel concept in mobile apps, and a sign of some of the new ideas to be explored.

If your first thought was that this is a handheld set of virtual stompboxes, as we’ve seen recently from the likes of IK Multimedia, you’d be wrong. (That’s okay, that’s what I thought at first glance, too.) Of course, as I’ve observed before, while these apps are cool for practice sessions, they’re no replacement for hardware – not until we have phones you can stomp on comfortably.

What BOSS Pedal Sketch actually is is a handheld, digital notebook for remembering your stomp setups. Find a routing and settings you like, and then record them on your mobile, down to where the knobs were. Use a mic (built-in on iPhone, or external on iPhone/iPod) to record audio and remember later what a rig sounds like. Take photos with the camera.

The result is – uh, how shall we say, this charitably – a bit specific. I can’t imagine a guitar player who exclusively owns BOSS pedals. Whoever you are – you, with BOSS sales posters you stole at NAMM pasted above your bed so you can stare at them – you’re welcome. Go enjoy. But I thought it was worth posting as a separate story because it is a unique idea. (I’m also assuming that’s why this wasn’t emphasized by Roland US in today’s announcements.)

That said, of course, I’d probably just make some quick notes in a mobile app like (my own personal favorite) Evernote. Many of those work on alternative platforms, too, in case you don’t have an iPhone. (Memo to mobile app developers: native is cool, but looking at the features here, this could also be a Web app.)

And it does raise some interesting questions, too, like the best way to provide handheld access to settings via MIDI or (ideally, for more futuristic devices) even wirelessly with Bluetooth. So, at least it’s free, and someone will use it, I’m sure, but I’m going to mostly take it as an indication of more useful things to come.

http://www.bosscorp.co.jp/en/sketch/
Via iTunes

Roland dropped a slew of news announcements today, from new keyboards to software. There’s a new JUNO-Gi, which takes Roland’s economical synth workstation and adds multitrack recording and BOSS effects. The virtual piano lineup has all been remade in the image of the V-Piano, with more realistic sampling tech. And there’s a set of offerings as broad as what we’re accustomed to seeing at trade shows, including one nice-looking harmonic stompbox.

Here are the highlights, focusing on what you need to know.

The JUNO that Records

A keyboard workstation, multitrack recording, and BOSS effects, mobile at just over a grand

The JUNO-Gi is the biggest headline here. Built on the JUNO-G, already a slimmed-down rendition of the Fantom in a much cheaper, more compact package, the Gi is a mobile, multi-function workstation at the recession-friendly price of US$1199. It’s a pretty complete all-in-one offering that manages to be cheap and mobile while still cramming in a lot of functionality:

• Battery-powered option.
• Built-in 8-track digital recorder (64 virtual tracks.
• Dedicated mix faders, rhythm machine track, and recording onto a standard SD card (up to 32 GB cards.
• Built-in USB audio and MIDI interface when you’re connected to a computer; SONAR LE bundled.
• Rear-panel XLR mic (thank you, Roland!), guitar, and line inputs.
• Built-in BOSS-GT guitar effects, vocal processing.

To me, the JUNO-Gi looks like a big winner for those who want an all-in-one keyboard workstation rather than a computer when they’re on the go, especially with the addition of real ports, faders, and guitar and vocal effects. And there’s definitely something to be said for that kind of distraction-free workflow.

For background, you can read my 2007 review of the JUNO-Gi’s “-G” predecessor for Keyboard Magazine; I lamented the fact that the “JUNO” name doesn’t really apply in terms of the sound generation, but otherwise found an affordable, balanced keyboard with a friendly front panel. In fact, I really prefer these designs to some of the bigger flagships; to me, it’s like driving a sporty hatchback instead of a lumbering SUV.
Roland Juno-G [Keyboard]

I said at the time – really doubly true now with the addition of BOSS effects and multitrack interface and recording capability:

Despite its price and retro styling, the Juno-G really is a “Fantom-Xpress.” It’s got the processor and sound engine from the pricier Fantom-X line, minus some of the extra bells and whistles. You still get Fantom-class sounds, a multisampled grand piano, compatibility with Roland’s SRX expansion boards, onboard audio and MIDI recording and editing, lots of effects, and a powerful arpeggiator. That makes the Juno-G an unusually feature-packed workstation relative to other budget keyboards.

See also our CDM Q&A on the 2.0 update to the JUNO-G

Digital Pianos Go SuperNATURAL

The other story Roland is pushing is the switch of its digital pianos to a new set of sampling technologies it calls SuperNATURAL. It appears to be a big leap forward for Roland’s pianos, and given the success of the V-Piano, for digital pianos in general.

Roland boils down the technology to three techniques:

1. It’s 88 keys of stereo multi-sampling – no zones.
2. Via tech borrowed from Roland’s V-Piano, it promises smoother transitions between dynamic levels.
3. The decaying tone isn’t looped.

You can watch a video explaining the techniques. (Does anyone else find Roland’s promo videos seem like they fell through a time warp from the 80s? No matter – it’s how the piano plays that counts.)

Now, some of the comparisons Roland makes relative to software piano instruments aren’t quite as fair – a couple of instruments, through clever sampling and/or modeling, do get this right in software. But it is more unique in hardware.

There are four new digital piano products with SuperNATURAL sounds in them. Two of them you probably don’t care about; they’re geared for the home/education market and have notation views built into the music stand:
HPi-6F
HPi-7F

– I’m guessing CDM readers would rather get a keyboard they like and then prop an iPad on the music stand. (Or use this magical technology called paper.)

There’s also the FP series, with built-in speakers:
FP-7f couples the new sound tech with a redesigned keybed. It also adds looping and mic input and harmony effects as new features. US$2190, unless you want it in white, in which case it’s US$2299. Don’t ask.

The keyboard with the new tech most likely to appeal to readers of this site is this:
RD-700NX, the upgrade to Roland’s previous flagship stage piano. As with the FP, this model adds a looper, a vocal mic input with harmony effects, and a new “PHA III Ivory Feel-S Keyboard with Escapement” keybed. There’s also a new, larger LCD screen. US$2999.

The RD-700NX works nicely as a MIDI control keyboard as well as a standalone stage keyboard, so it could be one to watch. I’ll be honest: the Roland action on these keyboards, while solid, was never my favorite. I’m curious to see how the new action feels. And you really have to play simulated pianos to know if they’ve gotten the sampling tech right.

GAIA Editing Software

Part of the whole appeal of the GAIA SH-01 synth is that you work on the front panel and not in software. But I like what Roland is doing with the GAIA Synth Sound Designer – if, for no other reason, because it has an oscilloscope view so you can see the waveform. You can record and play back sound creations in Action Lists, a clever new way of working. And you can use it as an editor/librarian app for backing, organization, and storage – a category that made hardware synths more useful and has been sorely lacking.

d news: instead of providing the app for free, the software, released in October, will list for US$99 (in-store street should be lower). Given the GAIA’s mission of reaching out to new synth lovers, I’d rather see this bundled in box. (Note that this is hardly unprecedented — Moog charges US$79 for their Minimoog Voyager Editor, and a Minimoog owner has shelled out a heck of a lot more cash than a GAIA customer.)

I’m finishing off an SH-01 review, complete with sound design tips, soon, so if you have any last-minute questions, fire away.

A new, multi-effect BOSS pitch stompbox

The BOSS PS-6 “Harmonist” pedal looks delicious. Effects include three-voice harmony, plus four pitch shift modes:

• Harmony
• Pitch Shifter
• Detune
• “Super Bend,” a brand-new mode with “shift,” “rise time,” and “fall time” (so, in other words, it’s a time-based pitch shifter)

US$241.50 in September.

More New Products

In other Roland news:
The AX-Synth is available in black, though at US$1449 list, you’d have to consider the more affordable Lucina AX-09 if you really need a shoulder keyboard. I’m finishing a review of the latter now.

The C-380 is a luxurious-looking, 2-manual modeled pipe organ. I want one, and an underground lair to go with it. (Yeah, sure, it’s the cliche, but I’ve always appreciated the lifestyle choice.)

Roland also has new CUBE-XL guitar amps, though I’ll try to examine those next to a similar announcement from Vox – it’s a good time to be in the market for inexpensive, busk-ready amps.

The Octa-Capture is a new high-res, USB 2.0 10-in, 10-out computer audio interface. Roland is going toward calling these “Roland” interfaces, instead of “Edirol,” and appears to be pushing the quality of these devices. US$699. Unfortunately, this illustrates that we need an updated USB class spec to support interfaces like this without drivers, at least from what I know; you do need the drivers to run this box, so no driver-free operation and no Linux support initially.

The BOSS ST-2 “Power Stack” is a compact pedal that simulates stack-style tube amps. US$162.

If any of this stuff strikes your fancy, let us know, and we can get questions answered for you.

http://www.rolandconnect.com/

In pointing out Behringer’s clone of Apple’s homepage, I may have left some things unclear. I was honestly surprised to find a number of people rushing to Behringer’s defense. I wasn’t trying to score cheap and easy points against the brand, but while venting frustration, I may have underestimated the response of people who own Behringer gear. If you do, and it’s working for you, as always – that’s a good thing.

The conversation got me excited, and I stepped into the comment fray. I shouldn’t have in this case, and unless asked to, I’ll stay out of this conversation. I enjoy being involved in those threads, but there are times when I should keep my writing to this space and let you have at it in the space below – the one labeled “comments.”

I think the reason Behringer inflames some people boils down to two things. Those people may have been burned by gear that proved not to be a bargain, or offended by a history of gear designs copied from recognizable models, or both. The former, of course, can happen with any vendor, but it does illustrate that saving money doesn’t always save time or money. Caveat Emptor is therefore true with any vendor. The latter is really the sticking point. Here’s a loose timeline of the cases in question:

Behringer and Mackie: In 1997, Mackie sued not only Behringer but distributor Samson and retailer Sam Ash. Mackie claimed that Behringer mixers were intended as exact copies of Mackie mixers – not only of external look and feel, but circuit design and individual components. In 1999, Behringer and Samson claimed a decision by the US Copyright Office “vindicated” the company. That supposed vindication is fairly empty, however. The US Copyright Office didn’t say that Behringer’s circuit designs were original. Instead, they said that the circuit board designs weren’t covered by the US Copyright Office. That has more to do with peculiarities of US intellectual property law than it does a vindication of Behringer.

Behringer and Roland/BOSS: In 2005, Roland sued Behringer for duplicating the look and feel of its guitar pedals. The blog Music Thing had a nice visual of just what this looked like. In this case, there was no claim about underlying circuit design, but the look and feel or “trade dress” is covered legally. Again, Behringer was not exactly vindicated. The two companies reached a settlement. The terms remained confidential, but Behringer did modify the look of its pedals.

Behringer and Line 6: What’s more disturbing to me is that, after reaching a legal settlement with Roland, Behringer simply moved on to a different vendor. In 2007, Behringer introduced a new line of pedals copying Line 6 instead of BOSS. Again, Music Thing’s Tom Whitwell did a visual comparison. Less extreme, but demonstrating Behringer continues to try to steal Line 6 market share by looking like Line 6, even the prize for the web design competition (the V-AMP) is intended to clone Line 6′s POD.

These are not the only cases of Behringer products that are designed to look like someone else’s products. As noted in comments, even the screenshot of the Behringer website is of monitors intended to look like those from KRK. Part of why I’m taking up the Behringer stories is that Music Thing isn’t around to do it any more, but here are some of Tom’s best hits:

In 2006, Behringer again copied Mackie, answering Mackie’s ONYX with mixers-plus-digital-I/O called the XENYX. (They copied the look and feel of older Mackie mixers rather than newer ones, but this was also clearly intended to look like Mackie’s product.)

Some amount of cloning, of course, should be forgiven – it’s expected practice for software emulations to mimic the look and feel of classic analog gear, so I can’t really fault Behringer for that. (That said, of course, I still think there’s far too much of that, and far too little original thinking about how to lay out controls and design interfaces.) The difference between cloning a classic product and a currently-shipping product is that making something look like something else that you can buy new suggests you want to create confusion. There are laws around that – “trade dress” – but more importantly to me is the question of whether it’s ethical.

Please, if, in comments, you want to fill out this timeline or offer more details of each case, on either side, I’m happy to hear it.

Apple and Behringer: In the case of the Apple site, while I wish websites in general would stop cloning Apple’s design – good as it may be – Behringer crossed a line by copying product pages, the color weight, gradient values, pixel weights, and radius of the Apple site. My small images in the story didn’t do that justice. This is not about the “cult of Apple.” Let me make myself plain: please, stop making sites look like the Apple site. Behringer’s case I think was worse than most, but I’d be happy if other sites flirted less with some of the particulars of Apple’s designs. Apple’s solution is not always the “best” design solution. There are others.

(Side note: the basics of Apple’s current website design really have been tremendously influential – so much so that it’s easy to overlook how much of this is derived from Apple. The earliest version of the current look dates from around 1997. But you can be influenced by a design and make it your own, rather than copying every detail or copying every detail poorly. To pretend otherwise would be to say design doesn’t matter, and I can’t do that.)

Let’s consider the larger issues:

Cheap can be great. One thing I won’t do is discriminate against musicians because what they’re using is cheap. “Ghetto fabulous” I believe is the proper term. Far from that, I hope on CDM we can find every opportunity to champion finding ways of doing cool stuff with cheap things. However…

Cheaper doesn’t always save you money. Because value is important, because you’re on a budget, you don’t want to throw your money away. Assume for a moment the allegations that Behringer cloned Mackie’s mixers down to individual circuits and components were true. That still doesn’t cover issues like manufacturing quality assurance or support. Larger than any one vendor – Behringer or otherwise – we urgently need to consider value. We can’t afford disposable gear. Our musical electronics are made out of toxic materials, and they impact the environment as they’re made, shipped, and disposed. And we need them to last for our music, too. I’m certainly guilty of having made this mistake, but it’s something that – as a community – we can all do better. Again, perhaps you have a good relationship with Behringer gear, which is great.

Copying is good; plagiarism, not so much. There’s a huge benefit to making copies and improving on them. A certain amount of copying is part of design. There is a difference, however, if the copy is intended to create confusion, to substitute for something else dishonestly. It’s the difference between Kia competing with the Honda Accord, as mentioned in comments, and someone making a car that looks exactly like an Accord called the Monda Schmaccord, and steals the design of its drivetrain. Likewise, in music, sampling can be a beautiful thing. Taking someone else’s work and trying to pass it off as your own is something different.

I believe it’s essential to draw these lines. It’s only going to get tougher from here. If you think these isolated Behringer cases were bad, brace yourselves: an army of music technology cloning companies is waiting in the wings.

My plea to Behringer: kick your copying habit, if you can. I could forgive you if you didn’t keep doing it over and over again. That suggests to me, and many others, that it’s malicious, that you hope consumers won’t notice and will buy your cheaper version because, cosmetically, it looks the same as something else. If it really is different, and if it really is better, then that only makes this more of a tragedy.

I’m going to leave the Behringer discussion at this point, having provided some of the historical background. But I certainly won’t let go of these other issues. And the uprising of Behringer support says to me that CDM and I do need to spend more time talking about affordable gear, affordable software, and — not necessarily because it’s “cheap” or “free” — free and open source hardware and software. I welcome your suggestions.

Stompboxes are back! Yes, software is great, but the gigging musician still loves something you can plug in and step on. The Messe show saw some traditionally rack-mounted gear reborn in stomp form.

Sure to be a huge hit, Roland’s BOSS RE-20 takes the beloved RE-201 Roland Space Echo and recreates it as a stompbox. It emulates all the major features of the RE-201, down to placement presets and tape flutter and magnetic head sound saturation, and adds a longer delay time — plus the ability to tap in delays with your foot. No pricing or availability yet that I’ve seen.

BOSS RE-20 Space Echo Product Page
Music thing weighs in with some thoughts.

At the other end of the spectrum, vocal processor maker TC-Helicon is best known for making big, do-everything racks. They’ve now taken the most popular features there, and repackaged as stomp boxes called VOICE|TONE. The idea is to perform all of the sweetening you’d normally apply in the studio onstage.

VoiceTone Create is a multi-effects processor in stomp form, with reverb, delay, thickening/microtuning, distortion and telephone/megaphone effects.

VoiceTone Correct performs pitch correction with tone (EQ, mainly) and dynamic shaping, and de-essing. On top of that, it has some sort of “dynamic sensing” algorithm that adjusts this for you. I’m not entirely sure what that means or how it works, but it sounds interesting.

TC’s vocal effects sound really terrific. You could easily abuse them, of course, but for some subtle processing, they could also make you sound a lot better — if you can just use a little restraint. I’m not entirely sure that splitting multi-effects from dynamics/EQ/de-essing makes sense, but on the other hand, even if you get both of these, they’re quite compact. And TC is one of the only companies I’ve seen that does high-quality vocal processing with some thought into how you’d actually use it onstage, in terms of easy controls, A/B switching, and so on.

Also from TC at Messe: control via guitar, harmony for Pro Tools, a new flagship vocal processor, and new editors with enhanced features and Vista/Universal Mac readiness. The editors will be out in May, and since I have a VoiceLive, Intel Mac, and Vista PC, you’ll be sure to hear more about them.

Roland has published a compatibility list for all its current relevant hardware, under the BOSS, Roland, and Edirol brands.

Windows Vista Compatibility Release

The table setup is a bit unusual. “Yes” means “will be compatible” in the future tense, but that apparently translates to “it works now”; links are included to 32-bit and 64-bit drivers. A dash means compatibility is unconfirmed one way or another, as you’re on your own with current drivers. A “No” means “We are sorry but we have no plan to realese the compatible software with Windows Vista.”

In other words, Roland/Edirol/BOSS have basically finished drivers for most of the devices they plan to support, and a lot of what isn’t supported now won’t be supported, ever.

Winners: USB, USB2 audio and MIDI hardware.
Losers: Older gear, bundled software, and editing apps.
Undetermined: FireWire (as of 1/31; I expect we’ll either learn it works or see an update).

The good news is, there’s a lot on the list: nearly all USB and USB2 audio and MIDI devices are supported, with only a handful of “legacy” devices excluded. The bad news is, FireWire devices are currently unconfirmed, and a surprising number of synths are on the “No” list. The original V-Synth (though not the newer XT) and Fantom-Xa and S (though not the X6, X7, and X8), and the SH-201, introduced less than a year ago, is being “evaluated” for compatibility with the internal editor, one of the major selling points of that synth. I’m assuming “incompatible” means the editor software is unsupported, though I’m unclear on why.

Overall, I’d say the Roland/Edirol compatibility picture is pretty good, and with dozens of devices on here, it’s certainly not fair to say “there are no drivers yet for Vista.” This is far more compatibility than the Mac had when the first Intel Macs appeared. But, that said, watch closely for what isn’t compatible before you get stung — there are some popular devices on the incompatible or unconfirmed list.

I’ll try to get more information, but otherwise, you should consult the Roland page for the latest information rather than CDM; only major announcements will appear here since Roland has it covered.

BOSS Micro-BR

For those of you who like old-school multitracking to sketch out ideas but want to go digital, this could be a decent option. It reminds me a whole lot of the old Zoom portable recorders. It records to SD cards (I’ve been seeing 1GB cards on sale for US$30), plays and records MP3 files (and presumably uncompressed WAV like Roland’s other portable player/recorders), and measures a svelte 5-3/8″ x 3-3/16″ x 7/8″. It’s not quite iPod nano small, but it will fit into your pocket. There’s an internal mic, and a line in/mic minijack, plus a phones/line out jack. Onboard multi-effects, which you might not need or want except for one important feature: you can slow down audio without changing pitch for compressed and uncompressed audio. That could make it a handy practice tool, if you want basic 4-track recording, too. Extras include drum patterns, a tuner, and a dedicated guitar in jack, making onboard guitar effects handy.

This looks like something a lot of people will have fun with in their gig bag, but I’m surprised that we still don’t have a simple, ultra-portable, affordable recorder with XLR inputs. There are plenty of more expensive options, but, come on, adding a Neutrik jack to a recorder with a basic mic pre can’t possibly be that expensive. I’d love to see a recorder that dispenses with the other extras and just does that, for simple, high-quality recording. No, it wouldn’t fit easily in my pocket, but anyone doing serious work can happily carry a laptop bag or at least a “man purse” (or woman purse!) with a good mic. And I don’t think it’s just the broadcast market and hard-core field recording markets who want good-quality recordings on the go, sans laptop and audio interface. The Trinity recorder prototype we’ve seen this week is along the right lines, but only for those willing to invest extra in a full-blown editor. Surely someone can build a bare-bones recorder for under US$400 with an XLR in. (See a close alternative, minus phantom power, in comments — the existing BOSS BR-600, which could be worth the extra size for some additional features. Thanks, Richard!)