Sent Wed, Nov 9th 2005, 19:17
I own both, a small System-100m and a complete System-100. You may have read some of my comments in the archives. Yes, the System-100m is more flexible. It has better control sources such as envelope generators and LFOs. But the System-100 does sound better. The System-100 is warmer and fuller. I like the sound of those oscillators and filters. Both systems have the basic modules, not much that is really esoteric. The System-100 sequencer is great, not a monster analog sequencer, but enough for my needs. System-100 suffers from too few envelope generators. I have spare envelope generators in my System-100m, so with both combined as one bigger system I'm very happy. System-100 is not a failure as sound goes. It wasn't tremendously successful in the marketplace at the time, but nothing from Roland was in the mid 70s, especially in the USA. Roland didn't achieve full market recognition until the Jupiter-8. It is only in hind sight that 70s era Rolands have gained recognition and respect on a wider scale. Regards, Mike. ___________________________________ | email@example.com | | homepage.mac.com/mikekent | |___________________________________| |UU|UUU|UU|UUU|UU|UUU|UU|UUU|UU|UUU|| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| > Would anyone like to talk about the sound differences between the Roland > system 100 and 100m. > > I've read the archives a lot and understand that the 100m is more powerful > (and the more desireable in general). > > However I cannot tell from the archives if the 100m sounds better than the 100 > or just sounds different. I realize sound quality is very subjective. I think > my main concern is that after reading the archives I get the impression that > the 100 was a failure or did not sound good.