Micro to BR600

[pjd1]

Hi chaps just a quickie from a newbie , i have been using the micro Br most of the year to record and listen to MP3,s , i am really impressed with the quality and guitar patches and MP3 options  avaliable to me , here is my question does the BR 600 have the same or better guitar patches and can it use MP3s in the same manner as the Micro , I am thinking off upgrading but i cant see on rolands website about the MP3 usability on th BR 600 , I dont really want to spend a couple off hundred quid and have less MP3 capabiltys open to me .
Cheers fellow pluckers !!
PJD1

[The Reverend 48]

I love my MBR to bits so I bought a '600 and am not impressed
I don't think the effects patches are anywhere near as good as the MBR
It works on WAV not mp3 but that's not really a problem
It's great having more channels to play with
but all in all  I'd buy yourself another toy and stick with your MBR
or if your in the UK I'll do you a deal on a nearly new '600

[launched]

I think Mike's right - I went to the music store to try out a 600 and I like it, but it seems like the same thing, only more tracks to play with. If it did instant bouncing instead of realtime, I would definitely consider it, though - Actually, I would not stray from the MBR if it had that feature. Waiting 3-4 minutes per bounce absolutely sucks. I can't believe that feature is not available...

But as far as a 600 goes, you should definitely ask Vanncad or BobIles for advice on whether it is a good purchase. Those guys can totally rock the 600.

Peace,

Mark

[64Guitars]

it seems like the same thing, only more tracks to play with.

You didn't look close enough Mark. The BR-600 offers a lot more than the Micro BR.

• 64 record tracks versus the Micro BR's 32.
• 8 mixer channels (playback tracks) versus the Micro BR's 4.
• 8 real fader controls versus the Micro BR's dinky little buttons.
• dual built-in condenser mics (stereo) versus the Micro BR's single mic (mono). Granted, a few people have had noise problems with these mics. But for most people, they seem to work just fine.
• 26 insert effects versus the Micro BR's 11. They include acoustic guitar and bass simulators, acoustic guitar processor, octave, pitch shifter, wah, and more. See this document.
• 4 loop effects (reverb, chorus, delay, and doubling) versus the Micro BR's 1 (reverb).
• 9 mastering tool kit effects versus the Micro BR's 5.
• Vocal pitch correction.
• A much more versatile drum machine that includes the following features, none of which are available on the Micro BR:  
  • 12 velocity-sensitive drum pads.
  • Ability to program your own drum patterns.
  • Ability to import MIDI files. This is great for doing covers, as there are thousands of midi files available on the internet which you can download and import into the BR-600 for an instant drum track!
  • Tone Load feature allows you to import WAV samples to create your own unique drum/cymbal/percussion sounds.
  • Works directly with the BR Rhythm Editor. Just connect the BR-600 to your computer via USB, open the BR Rhythm Editor software, and edit the BR-600's patterns, arrangements, and drum kits on your computer's screen.
  • Tap Tempo button allows you to tap out the tempo rather than entering the BPM (although you can do that too).
• Track EQ. Each of the eight playback tracks have their own separate 2-band equalizer with adjustable low and high frequencies.
• Mute button to instantly mute any playback track.
• Footswitch/expression pedal input. A footswitch allows you to start and stop the BR-600 transport, punch in and out, or toggle the insert effects on and off. An expression pedal allows you to control the volume (great for guitar volume swells), wah effect, or pitch shifter effect (similar to Digitech Whammy pedal popularized by Joe Satriani and others).
• A pair of standard RCA jacks for Line Out, reducing the need for adapter cables.
• Separate Line In connector.
• Separate 1/4" stereo headphone jack.
• Ability to record from guitar input and mic input simultaneously, with each input recorded to a separate track.
• Locator button allows you to mark a position in your song and return to it instantly at the push of a button.
• Scrub function allows for more precise editing.

... and probably one or two other features that I'm forgetting.

I love my MBR to bits so I bought a '600 and am not impressed

I don't think you've given it a fair chance Mike. You need to study the BR-600 manual some more and learn how to utilise all it has to offer. When you're more familiar with its features, I'm sure you'll be more impressed.

I think we all have a tendency to stick with what we know rather than invest time in learning something new. So it's easy to get discouraged with learning a new recorder such as the BR-600 when you've got the old, familiar Micro BR to fall back on. But the reward is well worth it.

I don't think the effects patches are anywhere near as good as the MBR

Patches are unimportant. They're just stored effects settings. It's the effects themselves that are important - not the patches. If you've got the effects, you can dial up any settings you like and save them to a patch. The BR-600 has all of the effects that the Micro BR has, plus a lot more. So you should be able to recreate any Micro BR patch on the BR-600. Just enter the settings in this document and save the patch. I've entered all of them into my BR-864 and they sound just fine. I don't have access to a Micro BR for comparison but I believe they would sound the same.

[64Guitars]

does the BR 600 have the same or better guitar patches

See my other message above. It's the effects that are important - not the patches. The BR-600 has all of the same effects as the Micro BR plus a lot more.

can it use MP3s in the same manner as the Micro

No. The Micro BR is the only model in the BR line (so far) that includes MP3 import/export. However, it's still easy to import and export MP3s on the other BRs. You can simply convert between MP3 and WAV format on your computer using a program such as Switch or Audacity, and import or export WAV files to/from the BR.

It should be noted that MP3 format uses lossy compression which results in considerably poorer quality sound than WAV format. So you should only use MP3 format when file size is a concern, such as when posting to this forum or emailing. If you just want to save a stereo mix of your song on your computer for your own listening or burning to an audio CD, you should use WAV format instead to preserve the sound quality.

Conversion programs on the computer (like Switch or Audacity) allow for more control over MP3 settings that affect quality. The Micro BR only allows bitrates of 64, 128, and 192 kbps, and a sampling rate of 44.1kHz. Although these are adequate in most cases, computer software offers several more choices. So, for example, if your MP3 is too big to attach to a message in this forum at 192kbps, you could drop the bitrate to 160kbps using software instead of the Micro BR's 128kbps. That way, you might be able to make the file small enough to attach without affecting the quality quite as much as 128kbps would.

[fenderbender]

reading the above with interest -when I found the site here-it seemed that I should have gone for the MBR-
I had the BR600 and I love it -My limitations and lack of imagination are the only problem with the BR600 as far as Im concerned -
I love this machine and if it sat down on me tomorrow Id have no hesitation on trying to buy another
like everything else new-its a learning process -and Im still finding something new on the BR600 every  so often
so long live the Br600 -thats my penny(cent)sworth
tommy

[launched]

it seems like the same thing, only more tracks to play with.

You didn't look close enough Mark. The BR-600 offers a lot more than the Micro BR.

Ok, you got me, 64!    I did come close to buying the damn thing. I'm not a wizardry/gadget kind of guy, but the expression pedal, stereo mics and EQ/editing features did strike my fancy. I'll probably own one before long so I can get back to BR purity again. I work on servers/computers all day - Recording music with one is such a bummer.

The biggest reason I have not upgraded is because there is no instantaneous bounce feature. At least superfastforwardrecord or something... The novelty of patiently waiting 3-5 minutes per bounce wears very thin after a while. Technologically it might be a lot to ask, I don't know.


Oh, and Tommy, the reason I bought the MBR was because it is pocket sized. I had no idea that it could do so much, so I'm not complaining. It does so much that it really exceeded it's purpose - Record music sitting on a couch with the MBR balancing on the armrest!  With a 600, I would just have to migrate to the coffee table...

Anyway, I digress. Definitely not slamming the 600 in any way!

[pjd1]

Wow !! I think that maybe one for the BR600 !! seems like there maybe a lot more under the covers than what first meets the eye , the mp3 thing was a big one for me with the MBR because i have got loads of backing tracks , but i have downloaded the convertor from 64guitars web site so that is not a concern now , also i did check out that there is drum machine software for the 600 , which is definatley a plus on the 600 which 64 has mentioned , and all the other stuff which he has put fwd on this post is just fantastic information which cannot be overlooked , what a great forum!!! but what makes it the swtiched on people giving on the ball replies !! how much is that br in the window !!

PJD1 

[Ferryman_1957]

I'm still of the opinion that the lack of mp3 is an issue on the other BR machines. The MBR is a beautiful piece of kit that lets you do everything, from recording to producing a finished mp3. As soon as you have to put anything on a PC to finish the job, my argument is why not use a DAW? There are plenty of cheap, even free, DAWs that offer a lot more than any of the other BR machines. Portability is a big issue for me as well. You can use the MBR as a microphone (ie hold it in your hand and sing into it) and it works superbly at this. You can't do that with the other BR machines.

There is no limit to the number of V tracks on any BR machine - just create a new song, copy what you have done so far and overwrite intermediate V tracks (usually intermediate bounces) or back tracks up to a PC. Several of my songs have over 40 tracks on the MBR. Similarly, lack of mastering effects isn't an issue - you can create your own and few of us know enough about compression, limiting and mastering to push any BR machine to its limits. My own view is that if the mastering effects on the MBR aren't enough, you need a full DAW anyway.

I think the big issue with the MBR is the lack of a drum machine and mute buttons. Faders would be nice but I'm used to the little buttons now. The drum machine doesn't bother me - I have other things I use. I think the immediacy and portability of the MBR trumps anything else out there for me. I previously had a Zoom 14-track recorder and there was just too much stuff to fiddle with to get right to get anything close to the quality of stuff I have produced from the MBR.

Of course, your mileage may vary!

Cheers,

Nigel

[pjd1]

Ok i,m reading all this and i,m making some decisions about where i should or should not go with my had earned cash ,there is a lot of pros and cons which i will way up , but one thing i have to tell you about , i have a zoom mrs1608 which is sitting vacant in my study !! which i have used for a couple of years on and off , i bought the micro for some projects i wanted to do on holiday and it blew me away with the portability and cosm patches which were far better than the zoom, also i picked up almost at once and got to grips with how to use the micro , but the zoom to me anyway was a nightmare !! I   agree with Nigel whole heartedly about the Boss micro , super bit of kit just wanted to know if the next one up is worth the extra cash, and from what people say it is !!

PJD1