BigRedX

I have been looking at this as an alternative to the Roland. I think the only way to know for sure which is the best for you is to try them.

My drum machine history goes like this: 1. 1981-1982 Boss DR55 Doctor Rhythm. Used live. Had just about enough patterns (one per song) for a 10 song set with careful use of the A/B switch and some external triggered percussion sounds to add variation to duplicated patterns. Didn't sound anything like "real" drums but the band had a percussionist to add the rhythmic interest. 2. 1983-1985 Roland TR808. Recorded to cassette for live use. Just one song memory so recording to tape was the only way we could get a whole set out of it. I did see a band use one live instead of a drummer, but it could only be done with a lot of lateral thinking and live pattern/fill-in changing. Still didn't sound much live "real" drums, but we were an all-synth band so it didn't really matter. As we were recording all the drum parts we took full opportunity of external percussion sounds and studio processing to get the rhythm track sound we wanted. 3. 1985-1987 Yamaha RX11. Recorded to cassette for live use. Had up to 99 pattern and 99 song memories, but in practice the rhythm parts for 2 songs would use up all the available pattern memory. Typical 80s sampled drum sounds. Kick, Snare and Closed HiHat were pretty good, the rest were generally replaced or augmented with extra samples or synthesised percussion. 4. 1988-1991 Alesis HR16. Used live in conjunction with a drummer playing an acoustic kit. Now that finally had a drum machine that sounded (at the time) like a real drummer, I spent most of my time trying to manipulate the built-in sounds so they wouldn't conflict with what our drummer was doing. Use to add some extra percussion sounds (and something for the drummer to keep in time to) for about half the set where we also had sequenced synth parts. That pretty much used up all the available memory. 5. 1992-1996 Ensoniq EPS16+ Sampler with build-in sequencer. The sampler part was great, but the sequencer wasn't a particularly user-friendly way of programming drum parts. Most of the time I would bash away at the keyboard until the quantisation gave me the rhythm I wanted. If the beats were out, it was generally easier to have another go than try and edit them into the correct place. Used live. With the expanded memory there was just enough room to get all the sample we needed for a complete set loaded up simultaneously. The sequences for each song had to be loaded as required from floppy disk, but it was fast enough not to ruin the flow of the set. From 1995 onwards I got a Mac and Logic V2 (IIRC) sequencer, and all the rhythm parts were programmed on that which was a lot easier. For live use they were saved on floppy disks as Standard MIDI files and play back from a MIDI file player, which was probably the most unreliable piece of high-tech equipment I have ever had the misfortune to own. It would go wrong (usually in a quite spectacular way) almost ever other gig. Was finally replaced by... 6.1997-2002 Akai S2000. Pretty much as before but all the drum parts were created in Logic and loaded into the Akai as MIDI files. The Akai was expanded to the max with Flash RAM which allowed 16MB of samples to be permanently loaded and retained even after the power was turned off. The MIDI files still had be loaded from floppy disks, but went into RAM rather than being read in real time from the drive, so it was rock solid. We liked the drum sounds we had sampled so much than when we came to record our album all the live drums were replaced by them except for the HiHats. 7. 2002-present. EXS24 sampler plugin in Logic. The original version would read Akai formatted floppy disks and sample CDs so I simply loaded all my Akai programs into it and this is what I have been using ever since. For live use the drum and percussion tracks are saved as a stereo audio file since reading that from an SSD is more reliable than running the plugin.

Unfortunately just because several manufactures make their 8-string basses with a single saddle for each course doesn't mean that they are right. It just means that they are saving money. Both 8-string basses I have owned had individual saddles for each string and they needed it, and 8-string basses are especially suited for bass lines that reach further up the neck than usual. It used to be that the go-to bridge for an 8-string bass was a special version of the Schaller 3D bridge, but that is now out of production, and any left in the retail chain have seriously high price tags attached to them because of their scarcity. The only other 8-string bridges with individual saddle that I know of are the two-piece bridge/tailpiece used on the Dean, Schecter and similar asian-made basses and those fitted to Tune basses. I have no idea how you would go about buying one separately.

They are "weird and wacky" US band who were briefly interesting about 20 years ago.

The parcel I have been having problems sending to Belgium has finally gone. When I was able to complete the booking I needed to print and sign 3 copies of the customs invoice, something I have only previously had to do for expensive items going to South American countries. Also Interparcel couldn't automatically generate the shipping label and I had to contact them and they had to send it in a separate email. I don't know if this was a one-off glitch or it it was a delay due to them checking the EORI information and/or Tarif Codes. That added an extra 30 minutes onto the process. Now I just need to see if the parcel reaches it's destination without any further problems.

But nowhere near as expensive in real terms as it was back in the early 80s when programmable drum machines first appeared. The TR808 my band had, cost about £800 back in 1982 IIRC, and the better alternatives - LinnDrum, Oberheim DMX, and Movement MCS were all significantly over £1k.

Which is why you don't use a set neck design with a bolt-on neck.

Just imagine having to disinfect all of those before the next "gig".

But the Behringer is essentially a TR808 which isn't much cop for creating realistic sounding and feeling drum parts. I know because for the best part of the 80s my band had an actual Roland TR808. With a studio's worth of additional sound generating and manipulating equipment you can get closer, but it's not exactly easy. However the Roland TR-8S will leave it standing in terms of sounds and user-friendliness.

Some people want dedicated hardware. I use a laptop for the backing of one of my bands, but we also have a drummer, and what it supplies is very much secondary to the live instruments. However in my other band, when we get back to rehearsing and gigging, we are most likely going to be without a drummer, so I am looking at a serious drum machine that can both replace a conventional drummer as well as produce unusual percussion sounds. For this I'd much rather use a hardware drum machine rather than having the cart round the laptop and all the associated interfaces etc.

From what I have seen of both the significant number of extra controls on the 8S make it a lot easier to use. Also the 6S only supports 6 channels simultaneously so some things like multiple tom patterns are going to be more difficult to program since AFAICS it has to be done either by sacrificing the availabilty of other sounds or by programming in pitch changes on a single tom sound. Having looked at both there are too many compromises to the 6S

There are just so many variables even in the construction of mass produced factory instruments, that is no wonder that two supposedly "identical" basses can sound very different. This is why I always maintain that worrying about the wood a solid electric instrument is made of is a waste of time for anything other than aesthetic reasons. Once you switch to man-made materials the consistency will increase, but even carbon fibre sheets can be laid up in the mould in a different way with potentially differing sonic outcomes. Having said that my two Gus 5-string basses apart from the fingerboard woods (cocobolo vs ebony) and the electronics (single coils with pre-amp vs humbuckers with passive controls) are the same. Switch off the pre-amp on one and activate the coil tap on the other, and they are inter-changeable from a sonic PoV.

Does that mean each course is tuned in unison rather than octaves? IME 8-string basses with octave courses are noticeably out of tune in the course above the 7th fret if both strings in the course share the same saddle.

I would have thought the Roland TR-8S ought to fulfil that need. It might not be cheap compared to the competition, but it appears to be the best all-round for sounds and pattern/song memory.

The original version of Metal Box isn't worth that much, last time I looked you could get a decent quality copy for under £100 on Discogs (which is a far more accurate indicator of an album's worth than eBay). Most of my rare stuff is rare because it wasn't very popular, not very copies were sold and consequently it's not worth much. However I did have a look at the values of the DIY cassettes I have from the early 80s, some of which are now supposedly worth several hundred pounds. Not bad for an investment of a blank C60 cassette and a stamped addressed envelope!

And I didn't take it as such. Just pointing out that what hope does the average small business have when the organisations in charge don't appear to know the information. I'm sure I'm not the only person who has had to get help from HMRC trying to sort this out. I thought I was on top of this having already spent an hour or so working out the tariff code I would need earlier this week when I placed the order with the printer knowing that I would be forwarding on the printed labels to Belgium. Little did I know that it was only the tip of the new Bureaucratic iceberg! Hopefully anyone else who needs this information is now aware. If you think you are going to need and EORI number this year apply for it now!

Can't you copy and paste?

Which is how it should be. Glad to hear you got it sorted.

My EORI number confirmation email has just come through about 2 hours after it was supposed to have done. And I have noticed that in the small print it says: "Your EORI number will be ready to use within 48 hours. It will appear on the EORI validation checker within 5 days." To me that could mean that my parcel could be held up in customs somewhere until it is active on the validation checker. No doubt I'll find out next week...

I suspect that one of two things will happen. Either no-one on either side of the channel will be the slightest bit bothered, or you'll end up in your underpants next to your completely unpacked and dismantled vehicle whilst the items you are trying to import/export end up seized and destroyed by customs.

Actually that's not always true. One of the three problems I have had with Interparcel was when I used their cheaper FedEX option to send two parcels of books to Japan. It turns out that while FedEx did the intercontinental shipping the collection and delivery end either end of the chain was done by local "representatives". Unfortunately in the UK this was handled by Hermes who managed to loose one of the parcels somewhere between picking it up from me and delivering it to the FedEx Hub. I had no idea that Hermes were going to be doing the collection until the booking had done through, by which time it was too late to do anything about it. Interparcel to their credit paid out the insurance in full and without any quibbles. I also notice that this particular option doesn't appear to be available anymore.

Although I very rarely need to send items outside of the UK for my work, back in November when the "New Rules" ads were on the telly, I decided to have a look to see if there was any useful information for me. Having worked my way through the various questions the web site I presented with a list of things that I "may" have consider after 31st December 2020, but because this was before any agreement had been finalised nothing was actual concrete information. I suspected that VAT would be a problem and maybe import duty depending on if there was actually an agreement and what was agreed, but nothing else seemed obvious from the list of articles the UK Government website thought would be relevant to my business. Prior to today (mostly from the various threads on here about importing and exporting items) I was aware that I would need a Tariff Code for anything I sent and that for some items it might be less than obvious to find. I didn't expect them to be as obscure as they were for something that IMO should be fairly straight forward, and I did want to make 100% sure that I was using the right code for what I was sending. It looks as though all the various printed items I might need to send in the future are covered by many different codes so I'll probably have to go through it all again when I need to send printed items that aren't labels. (I also haven't been able to find what I consider to be a 100% definite code for my GFs business making Wax Melts). However I can't recall any mention of requiring an EORI number (and consequently an SIC Code) in anything I had read up to this point, until I actually needed to send something. I suspect this will be the case for most small business owners, and I suspect that a lot won't have either the time or the energy required to find all the information and to make sure it is right, because you can rely on the fact that if something hasn't been done correctly it will result in your items being at best severely delayed while the correct paperwork is sorted out.

And finally I have a SIC Code and an EORI number! It has only taken 3 hours of persistent internet searches, web chats and telephone calls. I can see why a lot of small businesses have decided to stop sending goods between the EU and UK. It has taken me a whole morning on what should be a day off. I can't charge anyone for the time I have lost sorting this out, and most of the time has been spent trying to interpret obscurely worded information and getting clarification from those who should know the answers but as can be seen very obviously do not. And now the Interparcel web site needs an email address for the person receiving the parcel. I'm pretty certain this wasn't a requirement previously. I have their telephone number because Interparcel have always asked for that (even though they never appear to use it). So I'm waiting for my client (in London) to email it to me. Also the supposed email confirmation of my EORI number has still not come through, even though I was told I would get one. Just as well I saved the page that gave me the number as a PDF.

I've just received one of those emails too. However I have also been told by an HRMC representative on their web chat that this form is out of date and have been given a new link to follow, which asks similar questions but one just a few at a time on each page. However this version requires you to have a SIC Code too. HMRC are still trying to help me work out which one is right for my business. I am once again on hold as my representative asks his manager yet another question. They have been trying to fob me off with finding it for myself as the SIC codes come from Companies House and not HMRC, but as I have firmly pointed out it is an HMRC form that requires the correct SIC code so it is their duty to help find the right one for me.