Roland SP-404 vs SP-555

[r05c03]

Not super with the lingo associated with samplers. Can someone with such knowledge break down the basic difference differences between the Roland SP-404 and SP-555 to help me see the compromise between price and performance? Thanks.

[Meatball Fulton]

555 has three very important improvements:

 

--USB port (usable as audio and MIDI interface)

 

--comes with software to convert WAVs into 555 samples on your computer (much faster than doing it on the unit itself)

 

-- MIDI out!!!!

 

and these which I feel are less important:

 

--live loop capture (i.e. make new loops while the unit is playing other samples)

 

-- D-Beam and V-Link controllers

[r05c03]

 

555 has three very important improvements: --USB port (usable as audio and MIDI interface) --comes with software to convert WAVs into 555 samples on your computer (much faster than doing it on the unit itself) -- MIDI out!!!! and these which I feel are less important: --live loop capture (i.e. make new loops while the unit is playing other samples) -- D-Beam and V-Link controllers

 

 

Having the MIDI out means it can be used as a controller, and sequencer, or just sync other gear to its clock?

[Meatball Fulton]

 

Having the MIDI out means it can be used as a controller, and sequencer, or just sync other gear to its clock?

 

 

I don't think it can be used as a sequencer, just clock sync and start/stop.

 

As a controller it's limited (a few knobs and the pads can trigger MIDI notes over 2 channels) but it works.

[r05c03]

Cool thanks!

[Diametro]

Not sure about the 505, but the 404's sequencer is not a stand-out feature ...

[xmlguy]

Since others have noted the 555 improvements, I'll point out some of its drawbacks. It is much more expensive than the 404 and doesn't really add much functionality for the price, and there's a lot more 404s available on the used market under $300. The looping feature is unusable for live looping for the most part because saving any loop to a pad stops the music. Other loopers keep the music going, such as the KP3. The 606 had a lot of nice features that were stripped out on the 555, such as the LCD display that lets you edit samples by visually seeing the waveform and a lot of the sampling functions disappeared too. However, the 606 was limited to 512K MB CF cards, the 404 is 1GB, while the 555 is 2GB. I don't really find the increase CF capacity much of an improvement because 512MB is still a lot of sample time. The ESX sampler can only use up to 128M flash, for example. The 555 also isn't battery powered, while the 404 runs a long time on AA batteries. So depending on what you want to do, the 404 or 606 might be better than the 555, at a lower price. The 606 also had step sequencing, and the 555 doesn't: the 555 only has real-time sequencing (patterns).

 

The 404 doesn't have velocity sensitive pads, while the 606 and 555 do, so that could be important for getting a better drum pattern. The 606 has 8 poly, the 404 and 555 have 12 poly.

[toomanyKORGs]

i just got a 555 off of ebay for 525 brand new everything sealed i think from 'gear gear gear'.

 

im really impressed, it is well built and worth every bit of 525, but not 700 in my op.

 

the usb capability is really nice, as is the huge sample time. id say check ebay to get a really good price.

[tjwett]

555 has hi-z input for guitar too, if that's your thing. the concept of the thing has always intrigued me but every time i try one in the store i'm left scratching my head. for $700 it should have an LCD. and i don't get the d-beam. i mean, really? are people actually using it in public?

[Meatball Fulton]

The 606 was a superior machine in most respects but apparently Roland found the better feature set didn't really sell. Having owned one, I would go nuts if I had to use a 555 with just those LEDs.

[xmlguy]

 

The 606 was a superior machine in most respects but apparently Roland found the better feature set didn't really sell. Having owned one, I would go nuts if I had to use a 555 with just those LEDs.

 

 

Sample editing by ear sucks, particularly if you want to get clean audio loops without a click at the loop point, which is nearly impossible. The KP3 also doesn't have an LCD display of the sample wave for editing, however the external editor software is very nice for that. For live visual editing without a PC, I'd stick with the 606 or bump up to the MPC1000 with JJOS.