VOGONS

Search

Common searches

Roland modules - which one should one have/get ?

Topic actions

First post, by bestemor

Posted on 
User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Ok, so this may be better posted on queststudios, but...

I'm considering which modules to buy.
The following are among the contenders:
MT-32
SC-55
SC-55 mkII
CM300
CM500
SC-88 (various versions?)

So far, I've settled for 1 MT-32 and a SC-55 mkII(+ mkI?).
And maybe another CM-64 if I can get it cheap enough (spare).

I assume all these would be relatively easily obtained in Tokyo, hopefully at half or less prices than those on ebay ?

So, any good reasons to replace the SC-55's with a SC-88(or not?), and if so, which version of the SC-88 ?

I guess CM300 is relatively pointless, and perhaps the CM500 as well ?
And even the MT-32 can be substituted by the CM-64, I suppose ?
But assuming I'll get it for $30 or less, why not...

I do have the SCC-1(and SCD15+MPU401AT), so the newer module(s) are mainly due to the lack of ISA slots. (for when my mobos eventually crap out)
And hopefully less noisy sound(better shielding).

Note, I normally don't do very old games, mostly 1993/4 and up, with the odd 1991-92 one and a few adventure ones from the late 80's.

Come to think of it, given my game selection I may be better off not buying ANY of those modules, heh 😜

Anyway, if someone owning several or any of the mentioned modules, let me know why you chose that particular one, and which one(s) you think would be best suited.

Reply 1 of 2, by Dominus

Posted on 
User metadata
Rank DOSBox Moderator
Rank
DOSBox Moderator

I have a MT-32 and a CM-64.
The MT-32 for obvious reasons, classic games with MT-32 support (AND Exult supports it, too, also with nice sysex messages).
I later got a CM-64 because Ultima Underworld has some effects (or one, the water) that aren't supported on the MT-32, but on the CM-32 (or 64).
Now I have them chained up so the sysex messages are shown on the MT-32 and the CM-64 gives the sound 😀
(and if Exult on OS X would support CoreMIDI I would be able to enjoy both again... 🙁

Windows 3.1x guide for DOSBox
60 seconds guide to DOSBox
DOSBox SVN snapshot for macOS (10.4-11.x ppc/intel 32/64bit) notarized for gatekeeper

Reply 2 of 2, by HunterZ

Posted on 
User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

Bought an MT-32 and SC-88 from eBay a couple years ago to use with DOSBox. They work quite well.

The MT-32 is sufficient for most DOS games that support that family of synths, and some games even put messages on its screen (as Dominus mentioned). Only a couple games take special advantage of the CM-32/64, and those synths don't have a display screen. I have heard that the CM-32/64 may be less noisy and have slightly better polyphony than the MT-32, though.

The SC-88 is 100% compatible with the SC-55MkII and can also emulate the default instrument set of the CM-64 (but of course it's not an LA synth so it won't work as an MT-32 family substitute for the many games that reprogram the MT-32/CM-32/CM-64/LAPC-I via SysEx). The SC-88 sounds great with any DOS game that supports Sound Canvas / SC-55 / SCC-1 / MPU-401 / General MIDI as a MIDI device option. The SC-88 and SC-55MkII modes do sound slightly different with some instruments (mostly horns are a little crisper in SC-88 mode I think?) but everything sounds pretty good in either mode so it's all subjective.

If you want ultimate authenticity for DOS games, I'd get an MT-32, CM-64 and SC-55MkII. I don't have any buyer's remorse whatsoever with my MT-32 and SC-88, though, and don't plan to buy any other synths unless I come across a nice deal on a CM-64.

Go to top of page Go to top of page
Back to General Old Hardware
Close window
Close window