From djacques@csulb.edu Tue Sep 14 12:08:29 2004
Subject:RE: Motion Sound KBR-M

I totally agree as I had the same exact experience with my Pro3T. When I
bought my CX3 the Leslie sim in stereo was MUCH better than the Pro3T. The
Pro3T has a strange "honkiness" to it. I also went through THREE
diaphragms.. and at $50 a piece that is NO fun. I wonder how the Leslie
2101 compares..





-----Original Message-----
From: theb3freak [mailto:dougsloan@neo.rr.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2004 11:09 AM
To: CloneWheel@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [CWSG] Motion Sound KBR-M



just to throw in my $0.02 observation:

I once considered a Pro3 setup, and compared, at a store, a CX3 v 1.0
with its sim through a EON 15, to the straight signal through a Pro3 +
EON 15. The KBR-M may well have a different (improved) rotor sim than
the Pro3. But to my astonishment, I literally preferred the Korg's
internal sim to the Pro3 setup, overall. The Pro3 horn was better
than the Korg sim, but as you moved away, the difference diminished
substantially. The Korg's rotor, to me, was far and away better than
the Pro3's. Thus, in the end, I gave a slight nod to the CX3's
internal sim, disregarding cost. Considering the extra cost and
hassle of the Pro3, it was a no brainer. Furthermore, this was a mono
setup, and the sim in stereo through a PAIR of EON 15s is better
still. Even more still, the CX3 v2.0 has a noticebly better Leslie
sim than the V1.0 used in the comparison.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]