I totally agree with Craig regarding the curious business strategy that Neo seems to be using with their products. The Vent II is an excellent product, but it needs to be priced competitively. But I am not privy to their sales data.  I assume they are doing alright as they are not lowering their prices. 

But after gigging with my Vent II I must admit I do like the simple interface. Neo was smart not to buy the most coming adjustment into a submenu, so I was able to use the relevant dials all night. To me, I only need the rotor distance, balance, and overdrive available to me during performance.  

Do I wish that the Vent had MIDI?  Absolutely. But it's not a deal killer for the way I play. 

Sent from my iPad

On Oct 25, 2014, at 5:17 AM, Craig MacDonald ccmacdon@rogers.com [CloneWheel] <CloneWheel@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

 

There is nothing wrong with being a loyal vent fan (I have been for years), and saying.. "hey guys, you're falling behind the competition!" or "hey guys we need additional functionality".  Owners of the original Ventilator have been asking for midi switching since the first day the it was released (and I clearly recall HammondDave's criticism of it for that very reason right here on this forum from years back).

I understand the simplicity of the Ventilator, and there is no question the original Vent was a thing of beauty with it's 5 recessed knobs to adjust all of the key parameters. It was an absolutely elegant design!  However, once the vent II introduces it's sub menus, it no longer has quite the same elegance as it once had. Now setting up the effect you want is a bit more tedious.  For a guy like me with dramatic leslie sim changes from one song to another, and often just seconds to do it between songs, digging into sub menus is too tedious for me to do in a live setting. 

I completely understand your point that you don't want the added feature/function/complexity of the Burn, but I'm going to play "Devils Advocate" with you and tell you why you might just appreciate this functionality!!!  Let's use HammondDave's Harmonic Beating issue as an example. HammondDave noticed this several years ago, and it was reported and discussed at length on various forums AND fed back to Neo Instruments who eventually fixed it in the Ventilator II (and this has obviously made HD very happy). However, the reality is that it took Neo Instruments 2-3 years AND the release of an entirely new product to fix the problem!!  With the Burn, this problem would have been reported to them and fixed in a matter of days, or weeks, with a simple OS update via midi sysex message. Not only can the Burn switch speeds via midi, it can store presets that correspond to changes on your clone (including switching the true stereo bypass on/off automatically with no foot switch required), but having the ability to download a new OS means that the the Burn can be not only fixed but completely "reborn" at any time with new effects algorithms, features and functionality. 

Again, I want to be clear that I am a fan of Neo Instruments and their Ventilator product line.. I still have my original Ventilator and don't plan on selling it!  I am NOT trying to convince anyone to purchase a Burn, I am simply trying to make sure that the clonewheel forum members are making informed decisions.  You can choose to spend $500 on a Vent II simply because you like how it sounds, or you can do so because you don't want the added complexity of presets and midi and all that.. I completely understand!  You can buy a Vent II simply because of the great support you get from Joan and Bruce (and as far as I'm concerned their kind of support is priceless, and I have the utmost respect for them both). 

I just think (and just my opinion) that Neo Instruments needs to pick up the pace.. They can't keep recycling, what is effectively the same old 122 leslie algorithm, in too many more different coloured boxes. Furthermore, continuing to charge premium prices while falling behind the competition in feature/functionality is a going out of business strategy!! 

Again, just my humble opinion and YMMV.

Craig MacDonald 

Sent from my iPad

On Oct 25, 2014, at 6:46 AM, cheshire1uk@googlemail.com [CloneWheel] <CloneWheel@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

 

>>>>>I think the Vent captures more of the ambient sound that gives it a sweeter tone and that tonal bend on ramp up and down<<<<<and that's what makes the Vent 11 the winner for me. 

Craig I can't agree that the Vent should play catch up to the Burn, why should it, it does what a real Leslie does, no more no less, and should we really be comparing them with each other, the Burn, in my opinion, is probably best suited to synth players who want the flexibility of the extra functions it has to offer like Midi etc etc, whereas the Vent is just a dedicated Leslie simulator, easy to set up with no bloat or need for programming etc, and therefore is more likely to appeal to the more traditional Hammond Organ player who just likes to sit at the Organ and play the instrument, not with the sim.

The Vents simplicity, rugged design, and reputation is probably the reason why The Rolling Stone chose it, I put my Vent 1 for sale on eBay at a price I really didn't think I'd achieve, but to my amazement I sold it within a day at the full asking price! bet I wouldn't have done this had it been a Burn.

As you may have gathered I'm a loyal Vent user, of course they are both excellent sims but each may appeal to different players for different reasons and needs.