boss launch the micro br80 to replace the micro br

[Kenneth]

Everything looks great about this, love the updates, and I bet all the cosm effects are wonderfully up to date. I have yet to read through all of this thread.
Dont know if I missed but are they (models, effects) based on the GT10?

The fader issue is the real biggie for me, but if you can use the wheel to gradually fade in or out , it could be very workable.
In fact, I wondering if this is so up to the times that I can use it exclusively and unload all my other Br's....

[64Guitars]

Dont know if I missed but are they (models, effects) based on the GT10?

I haven't seen anything that says they're based on the GT-10.

All I've seen so far is:

• powered by a newly developed custom DSP chip
• over 40 types of COSM amp models
• dedicated vocal effects, comparable with BOSS's popular VE-20, include doubling, harmony effects, pitch correction, and more

"Over 40 types of COSM amp models" sounds impressive. The original Micro BR has 11 (13 if you count the three variations of Marshall). The BR-800 has 12 amp models with 3 or 4 variations on each. If you count all of the variations as separate amp types, the BR-800 has 39. I assume that's what they mean when they say that the BR-80 has "over 40" amp models. It probably has one extra amp model (compared to the BR-800's 12) with 3 or 4 variations, putting the total amp type settings at "over 40".

Here's how all of the BRs compare on number of amp models:

	Amp Models	Total Types
Original Micro BR	11	13
BR-80	13?	40+
BR-532	13	15
BR-600	13	15
BR-800	12	39
BR-864	13	15
BR-900 v2	12	48
BR-1180	13	15
BR-1200	13	15
BR-1600 v2	13	15

[Migs]

I've added 39 screenshots of the BR-80's display to my website.

https://songcrafters.org/64guitars/BR/BR80Screenshots.html

Ya know,  its largely an aesthetic rather than a technical complaint but it would have been nice for them to have thrown in a hi-res screen.  A NES emulator has higher res than the new BR-80 which just makes it look dated to me.

[64Guitars]

Ya know,  its largely an aesthetic rather than a technical complaint but it would have been nice for them to have thrown in a hi-res screen.  A NES emulator has higher res than the new BR-80 which just makes it look dated to me.

The crude graphics remind me of my old Commodore VIC-20.

But the display is a big improvement over the original Micro BR, and it's the same resolution as the BR-800's display (128 x 64 pixels). I think it will be great to be able to see several effects parameters on the screen at once, or several items in a menu while you scroll through them, rather than just one at a time as on the original Micro BR. And the screen is big enough to show the current status of all 64 v-tracks at once, just like the BR-800 does:

I agree that higher resolution would have been much nicer. But, although the BR-80's display is far from state-of-the-art, it's certainly a big improvement over the original Micro BR.

[Migs]

I agree that higher resolution would have been much nicer. But, although the BR-80's display is far from state-of-the-art, it's certainly a big improvement over the original Micro BR.

It is just one of those simple things that Roland *could* have done to make it a really impressive piece of kit.  Technology has advanced too much and is too cheap to be putting last decade's technology into anything.

[Migs]

what it *should* look like...



...complete with colour touch screen.

[64Guitars]

That would be cool!

I just had a quick look around at what the other recorder manufacturers are offering and I can't find anything with a higher resolution display. The Zoom R24 and the new R8 have 128 x 64 displays, the same as the BR-80 and BR-800. Maybe Roland didn't have any incentive to put a higher resolution display in the BR-80.

Also, I wonder if part of the reason is power consumption. I would imagine that a high-resolution colour display would draw more current than the monochrome 128 x 64 display that Boss chose. In a battery-operated device like the BR-80, you want to keep power consumption at a minimum.

[Geir]

wow ..... this willl be high up on my GAS-list

It does look very interesting.....

     Can you record using just one mic? No good having those extra tracks if they all get eaten up with having to record stereo lead and backing vocals...maybe a BR-800 owner can answer this...

i think you could record using both mics to a mono track

agree on the faders issue-still is a tempting little devil

The BR800 can record both mics to one mono-track. I do hope that an upgrade will make it possible to record from only one mic to a mono-track, but I doubt it will happen, and I suspect that the BR-80 will be the same. What I do on the 800 is to turn the input sensitivity all the way down on one of the mics and sing into the other one. Why? To avoid any phase-cancellation effect.

I told you, but no, no one believed me! 

I know DSS, I'm sorry !!!!! but it was the 1st of April when you posted the good news !!

[FuzzFace]

I assume that the jog wheel is used to adjust levels and other parameters. Not as good as proper faders but I guess it's an improvement over the dinky +/- buttons.

What is the problem with the +/- buttons?

I have only ever used the MBR, so I don't know any better.

Although I have used the level adjusters in Audacity, but I prefer the +/- buttons on the MBR because I can pick the exact level I want without having to rely on the touchiness of the controls.

[64Guitars]

What is the problem with the +/- buttons?

Too tiny for my liking. Faders make it easy to do proper fades. And they provide immediate visual feedback of their current setting. You can just glance at the recorder and see that track 3 is set higher than track 2, for example, without pressing any buttons. And, they're more intuitive to use than buttons. If a track's level is too high or too low, you just nudge that track's fader in the appropriate direction. If you want to instantly drop a track's level to minimum, a quick flick of the fader is all that's needed.

Plus, tiny switches tend to break easily. Just ask Gnasty.