I will be making a decision soon (hopefully - if everything else on my priority list doesn't bankrupt me first), between a PRP700 and a CME VX8 with GEM half-rack solution. Or are there simply a lot of pianos and e-pianos on board, atop the basic stock 128-program GM set, but with less programmability than in the RP-X module (which isn't set up specifically for 16-track sequencing as is the GM-X module).Īlso, what about the triple-pedals? The specs I saw do not seem to indicate that EITHER module would fully support all three output jacks of a typical triple-pedal set (such as from GEM or from CME - the latter of which also supports unacorda/sostenuto/sustain via MIDI CC assignment and a MIDI cable).
I'll try to search down audio demos for the GM-X soon (at my home computer,m which supports audio), as that may be telling.īut as there aren't that many core sounds that are typically physically modeled, the high number of 50 programs that use physical modeling has my interest piqued.įor instance, does this cover marimba and vibraphone both of which benefit from modeling? What about winds and brass, or even srings? a larger number that appear to be arranged almost in the enhanced XG manner.
And I also initially assumed it had 128 programs, vs. I previously thought the GM-X module was strictly sample playback. I am aware that they are different-purposed and have different core features, but what intrigues me is that the GM-X also has a DRAKE chip and says 50(?) of its internal voices are modeled vs. I don't think this specific topic was covered yet, as the details of the GM-X module had not yet emerged, but I'm wondering what the SOUND differences are between the GM-X and RP-X modules from GEM.