Moroder escribió:Como curiosidad, acabo ahora de leer ahora mismito un mensaje de Stephen Kay(KARMA) en los foros Karma Lab http://www.karma-lab.com/forum/ que viene a decir practicamente lo mismo que yo, al hilo de Sir RoyRogers y dorremifasol, os comentaba ayer, sobre la calidad del OASYS y la del M3 frente a frente.
Aqui os lo dejo resumido, por si a alguno le interesa.
" Let me say this - I am now in the process of starting to port the above-mentioned Catalyst set from the OASYS to the M3. The difference is - I can't really find a word - staggering. When you are trying to make the OASYS and the M3, side by side, sound as close as possible (given the fact that the O has a bunch of additional synth engines, but even so), the overarching sound quality of the O is readily apparent. Also, the vastly more developed sound palette. It's not that the M3 sounds bad. No way - it sounds great. But the O sounds more better. It's like going to 11. The true word is "depth". The soundstage of the O is so much deeper. It's very hard to describe, but as I go back and forth between the two, readily apparent.
The O, as it stands now, even if they were to release nothing else for it, is worth having big-time, and worth having paid the money for, and everything else about it. I know some people will not be happy to hear me say that. But I just love to work on it, compared to the M3 and the M50 - both of which are not slouches, I will make them sound good on my KARMA Sound Sets as well, fear not - but they ain't the O. "
Recibido
... 
