Note the placement of the names Dave Smith and RogerLinn in the top two renderings for the LinnDrum II Analog. The third shot is the LinnDrum II Digital (minus the analog engine from Dave Smith). The top image is the official from the
DSI website. The bottom two are from
this post.
Update: In case it wasn't clear, what is interesting about this is that the names Roger Linn and Dave Smith are swapped in the two images of the Analog version. Same version of the synth with the the names in different order. The top has Roger Linn's name first and the second has Dave Smith's name first. My guess is they decided to go with Roger Linn's name first as that is what is on the DSI site.
Note the placement of the names Dave Smith and RogerLinn in the top two renderings for the LinnDrum II Analog. The third shot is the LinnDrum II Digital (minus the analog engine from Dave Smith). The top image is the official from the DSI website. The bottom two are from this post.
Update: In case it wasn't clear, what is interesting about this is that the names Roger Linn and Dave Smith are swapped in the two images of the Analog version. Same version of the synth with the the names in different order. The top has Roger Linn's name first and the second has Dave Smith's name first. My guess is they decided to go with Roger Linn's name first as that is what is on the DSI site.
the digital one is made by Linn, the analog one by Smith (I think its on the DSI announcement) - that would make sense
ReplyDeleteOk..Now that I've looked at them a bit. There's a lot of real estate on the top part of the machine.
ReplyDeleteWhy can't it be released as the standard "base" unit which is the Linndrum 2 by Roger Linn with just the sampling. Then you could have a stand alone module along the size of the Evolver that could sit on the top and add your analog voices and control knobs. You could have a serial connection, or some easy way to interface them.
It would mean that people could get the one unit and then upgrade it and you'd have a standard size between the two. Easier to travel with also and not take up as much desk space in the studio.
Just a thought.
I'd like for it to say Dave Linn & Roger Smith on all six sides. Looking less like an MPC, so better IMHO. BoomChic name gone tho, it was fun saying it.
ReplyDeletei really liked the name 'boom chik'
ReplyDeletevery porno like.
i would immediately sample a waka-waka and modulate it with a 'yo baby'.
Pac, the top image of the Analog version has Roger Linn's name first. The second image of the Analog version has Dave Smith's first. That's what was interesting - the fact that the names are swapped between the two images of the same Analog version of the synth. I'll update the post to make it more clear.
ReplyDeleteshould be called smithDrum by roger linn or linnDrum(II) by dave smith. more confusing == more better.
ReplyDelete.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Or is the naming totally irrelevant and entirely narcissistic?
ah I see :-))
ReplyDeletebut I don't think there's a fight who's name is "first" on that one...
I just hope the analog part does the job. The pricetag is another key issue.
I predict that within 100 years drum machines will be twice as powerful, 10000 times larger, and so expensive that only the five richest kings of Europe will own them.
ReplyDeletedf-
ReplyDelete100 years is post-singularity according to Kurzweil. Drum machines will double in power once every clock cycle, but their physical size won't exceed planck's constant in each dimension.
But don't worry, this is all well because we will be able to hold billions of 2107 drum machines in our brains at that point.
Ah cool, so we will have a DrumLinn BoomSmiths in our heads by then. Coolness!
ReplyDelete