Do I have this right? Anyone deep dive into Roland's digital snare vs 2 box.

[photobeat]

I have the TD-27 and drumit 5 version 1.  The 2 box I hardly adjust and I am really appreciating the multi sample files. Having multiple samples randomly working at various velocities seems to be excellent and pretty much equaling the roland capability but without the positional sensing.  Do we really need PS when we get a different velocity sample randomly changing anyway?   There are a lot of paramter controls of the Roland however I never know how involved a 2box sample is unless I load it into a program to see how complex the file is. I beleive rimshot 2 in the system when you play really lightly repsonds nicely with varying tones but not quite lound enough. Editing sampled and creating the .dsnd I know is possible but the time to do it is crazy for me. It seems like the 2 box should be a bigger product or a bigger contender to Roland than anything else but it's just not and I wonder why?  I am trying to have the Roland Cymbals and create files to put into the Roland. I can get a total of two one hit samples in the center snare and two in the rim and control the velocity. The center almost does not make sense as the Roland stock stuff is not bad and has so many dynamics. The rim I can layer on top of the Roland sound in two samples and get great stuff. The easier way is 2box for all drums and Roland for cymbals but that means a mixer.

[Karbonfaiba]

You've outlined the two camps basically.

The truth is Roland needs more of 2box's sampling power and 2box needs more of Roland's processing and design prowess.

You also understand how much better 2box is at using what I like to term "brute-force" approach to drum modules, because content is king.

The good news is that next 2box module (whatever form that takes) really only needs to expand on the settings and processing to take the crown away from basically every drum module because the foundation is so strong. Yes, the underlying velocity layers (even in SD3) really is the the key to a great sounding module. It's Roland that developed to be what they are today because of the memory constraints.

[photobeat]

You've outlined the two camps basically.

The truth is Roland needs more of 2box's sampling power and 2box needs more of Roland's processing and design prowess.

You also understand how much better 2box is at using what I like to term "brute-force" approach to drum modules, because content is king.

The good news is that next 2box module (whatever form that takes) really only needs to expand on the settings and processing to take the crown away from basically every drum module because the foundation is so strong. Yes, the underlying velocity layers (even in SD3) really is the the key to a great sounding module. It's Roland that developed to be what they are today because of the memory constraints.

So what do you think of the mimic? seems like it could be besting both Roland and 2box no?

[Karbonfaiba]

Oh the Mimic is the best module easily, but it's also over double the price of the 2box. It competes better with the TD-50X because you will also have no expandability there either. You must make a choice for what is most important to you.

If you want a complete product out of the box with the multilayer VST sample library built in - Mimic Pro is the answer.

2box is for people also buying SDSE and also own many VSTs. It requires hours at your computer but it's forever expandable. That Fields of Rock SDX is but one huge reason why having a 2box is so cool, the module always feels new when you fill it with new sounds and have all the velocities layers from the VST in your arsenal.