Roland DEP-5 ???

[Daniel]

Hi,

Can anyone please lend me your opinion on the Roland DEP-5 and if it is
strictly a reverb box or does it also have delay ?

Thank you,

Daniel

PS: My provider deleted my previous post/question re the dbx266 so if any of
you replied I thank you.

[Don Cooper]

Daniel wrote:

> Can anyone please lend me your opinion on the Roland DEP-5 and if it is
> strictly a reverb box or does it also have delay ?


There is pre-delay on the reverb. There is also EQ. It's primarily a
reverb, though. I want to sell mine. Not sure how much yet.


Don

[Don Cooper]

Daniel wrote:

> Can anyone please lend me your opinion on the Roland DEP-5 and if it is
> strictly a reverb box or does it also have delay ?


There is pre-delay on the reverb. There is also EQ. It's primarily a
reverb, though. I want to sell mine. Not sure how much yet.


Don

[Bryson]

I remember it having a fairly full featured delay (2 secs?). I always used the
delay and the built in analog Boss chorus more than it's barely passable reverb.
One cool thing it had was a ping pong delay algorithm where the repeats
alternate left and right.
The srv-2000 was their dedicated reverb of the time, but it could also become a
regular delay whith certain buttons held in at power up.


Don Cooper wrote:
>
> Daniel wrote:
>
>
>>Can anyone please lend me your opinion on the Roland DEP-5 and if it is
>>strictly a reverb box or does it also have delay ?
>
>
>
> There is pre-delay on the reverb. There is also EQ. It's primarily a
> reverb, though. I want to sell mine. Not sure how much yet.
>
>
> Don

[Bryson]

I remember it having a fairly full featured delay (2 secs?). I always used the
delay and the built in analog Boss chorus more than it's barely passable reverb.
One cool thing it had was a ping pong delay algorithm where the repeats
alternate left and right.
The srv-2000 was their dedicated reverb of the time, but it could also become a
regular delay whith certain buttons held in at power up.


Don Cooper wrote:
>
> Daniel wrote:
>
>
>>Can anyone please lend me your opinion on the Roland DEP-5 and if it is
>>strictly a reverb box or does it also have delay ?
>
>
>
> There is pre-delay on the reverb. There is also EQ. It's primarily a
> reverb, though. I want to sell mine. Not sure how much yet.
>
>
> Don

[Daniel]

"Bryson" > wrote in message
link.net...
> I remember it having a fairly full featured delay (2 secs?). I always used
the
> delay and the built in analog Boss chorus more than it's barely passable
reverb.
> One cool thing it had was a ping pong delay algorithm where the repeats
> alternate left and right.
> The srv-2000 was their dedicated reverb of the time, but it could also
become a
> regular delay whith certain buttons held in at power up.
>

So you'd say the SRV-2000 was better sounding than the DEP-5 for reverbs ?

Thanks,

Daniel


> Don Cooper wrote:
> >
> > Daniel wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Can anyone please lend me your opinion on the Roland DEP-5 and if it is
> >>strictly a reverb box or does it also have delay ?
> >
> >
> >
> > There is pre-delay on the reverb. There is also EQ. It's primarily a
> > reverb, though. I want to sell mine. Not sure how much yet.
> >
> >
> > Don
>

[Daniel]

"Bryson" > wrote in message
link.net...
> I remember it having a fairly full featured delay (2 secs?). I always used
the
> delay and the built in analog Boss chorus more than it's barely passable
reverb.
> One cool thing it had was a ping pong delay algorithm where the repeats
> alternate left and right.
> The srv-2000 was their dedicated reverb of the time, but it could also
become a
> regular delay whith certain buttons held in at power up.
>

So you'd say the SRV-2000 was better sounding than the DEP-5 for reverbs ?

Thanks,

Daniel


> Don Cooper wrote:
> >
> > Daniel wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Can anyone please lend me your opinion on the Roland DEP-5 and if it is
> >>strictly a reverb box or does it also have delay ?
> >
> >
> >
> > There is pre-delay on the reverb. There is also EQ. It's primarily a
> > reverb, though. I want to sell mine. Not sure how much yet.
> >
> >
> > Don
>

[nmm]

On Sun, Oct 5, 2003 1:25 PM, Mondoslug1 > wrote:
>Thought so too. It's the first piece of rack gear I bought when I moved
>to town
>& wasted my life on bulding a guitar rack. Reverb with chorus patch
>was cool &
>I was constantly swimming way too much. I see them for like $150.00,
>thought of
>picking one up for nostalgia.

For $150 a DEP-5 is worth i . I use mine mostly as a delay .. for tht ping
pong effect.. It;s being replaced by the Lexicon MPX-1 lot in my set up,
but still gets used a bit.

Like others have said IT is noisey.. Flange chorus and delays.
You also can't use the delay and reverb at the same time.
and there are some "Non-linear reverbs"

[nmm]

On Sun, Oct 5, 2003 1:25 PM, Mondoslug1 > wrote:
>Thought so too. It's the first piece of rack gear I bought when I moved
>to town
>& wasted my life on bulding a guitar rack. Reverb with chorus patch
>was cool &
>I was constantly swimming way too much. I see them for like $150.00,
>thought of
>picking one up for nostalgia.

For $150 a DEP-5 is worth i . I use mine mostly as a delay .. for tht ping
pong effect.. It;s being replaced by the Lexicon MPX-1 lot in my set up,
but still gets used a bit.

Like others have said IT is noisey.. Flange chorus and delays.
You also can't use the delay and reverb at the same time.
and there are some "Non-linear reverbs"

[Bryson]

Daniel wrote:
> "Bryson" > wrote in message
> link.net...
>
>>I remember it having a fairly full featured delay (2 secs?). I always used
>>the delay and the built in analog Boss chorus more than it's barely passable reverb.
>
>> One cool thing it had was a ping pong delay algorithm where the repeats
>>alternate left and right. The srv-2000 was their dedicated reverb of the time, but it could also become a
>>regular delay whith certain buttons held in at power up.
>>
>
>
> So you'd say the SRV-2000 was better sounding than the DEP-5 for reverbs ?


I would, but that's not saying a whole lot. It's still a ringy, grainy sounding
reverb (to my ears).

[Bryson]

Daniel wrote:
> "Bryson" > wrote in message
> link.net...
>
>>I remember it having a fairly full featured delay (2 secs?). I always used
>>the delay and the built in analog Boss chorus more than it's barely passable reverb.
>
>> One cool thing it had was a ping pong delay algorithm where the repeats
>>alternate left and right. The srv-2000 was their dedicated reverb of the time, but it could also become a
>>regular delay whith certain buttons held in at power up.
>>
>
>
> So you'd say the SRV-2000 was better sounding than the DEP-5 for reverbs ?


I would, but that's not saying a whole lot. It's still a ringy, grainy sounding
reverb (to my ears).

[David Morley]

In article .net>,
Bryson > wrote:

> Daniel wrote:
> > "Bryson" > wrote in message
> > link.net...
> >
> >>I remember it having a fairly full featured delay (2 secs?). I always used
> >>the delay and the built in analog Boss chorus more than it's barely
> >>passable reverb.
> >
> >> One cool thing it had was a ping pong delay algorithm where the repeats
> >>alternate left and right. The srv-2000 was their dedicated reverb of the
> >>time, but it could also become a
> >>regular delay whith certain buttons held in at power up.
> >>
> >
> >
> > So you'd say the SRV-2000 was better sounding than the DEP-5 for reverbs ?
>
>
> I would, but that's not saying a whole lot. It's still a ringy, grainy
> sounding
> reverb (to my ears).
>
>
>

I loved one algorithm on the DEP5. The reverb with chorus was great.
Haven?t been able to get that anywhere else. The gated verb was nice too
They can be a bit hissy especially when warm. Keep it with free space
above it in the rack.
I think they are excellent personally. Much nicer than a Quadraverb or
equivalent.

[David Morley]

In article .net>,
Bryson > wrote:

> Daniel wrote:
> > "Bryson" > wrote in message
> > link.net...
> >
> >>I remember it having a fairly full featured delay (2 secs?). I always used
> >>the delay and the built in analog Boss chorus more than it's barely
> >>passable reverb.
> >
> >> One cool thing it had was a ping pong delay algorithm where the repeats
> >>alternate left and right. The srv-2000 was their dedicated reverb of the
> >>time, but it could also become a
> >>regular delay whith certain buttons held in at power up.
> >>
> >
> >
> > So you'd say the SRV-2000 was better sounding than the DEP-5 for reverbs ?
>
>
> I would, but that's not saying a whole lot. It's still a ringy, grainy
> sounding
> reverb (to my ears).
>
>
>

I loved one algorithm on the DEP5. The reverb with chorus was great.
Haven?t been able to get that anywhere else. The gated verb was nice too
They can be a bit hissy especially when warm. Keep it with free space
above it in the rack.
I think they are excellent personally. Much nicer than a Quadraverb or
equivalent.

[Mondoslug1]

David Morley wrote:

>In article .net>,
> Bryson > wrote:
>
>> Daniel wrote:
>> > "Bryson" > wrote in message
>> > link.net...
>> >
>> >>I remember it having a fairly full featured delay (2 secs?). I always
>used
>> >>the delay and the built in analog Boss chorus more than it's barely
>> >>passable reverb.
>> >
>> >> One cool thing it had was a ping pong delay algorithm where the repeats
>> >>alternate left and right. The srv-2000 was their dedicated reverb of the
>> >>time, but it could also become a
>> >>regular delay whith certain buttons held in at power up.
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > So you'd say the SRV-2000 was better sounding than the DEP-5 for reverbs
>?
>>
>>
>> I would, but that's not saying a whole lot. It's still a ringy, grainy
>> sounding
>> reverb (to my ears).
>>
>>
>>
>
>I loved one algorithm on the DEP5. The reverb with chorus was great.


Thought so too. It's the first piece of rack gear I bought when I moved to town
& wasted my life on bulding a guitar rack. Reverb with chorus patch was cool &
I was constantly swimming way too much. I see them for like $150.00, thought of
picking one up for nostalgia.

>Haven?t been able to get that anywhere else. The gated verb was nice too
>They can be a bit hissy especially when warm. Keep it with free space
>above it in the rack.
>I think they are excellent personally. Much nicer than a Quadraverb or
>equivalent.
>
>
>
>
>
>

[Mondoslug1]

David Morley wrote:

>In article .net>,
> Bryson > wrote:
>
>> Daniel wrote:
>> > "Bryson" > wrote in message
>> > link.net...
>> >
>> >>I remember it having a fairly full featured delay (2 secs?). I always
>used
>> >>the delay and the built in analog Boss chorus more than it's barely
>> >>passable reverb.
>> >
>> >> One cool thing it had was a ping pong delay algorithm where the repeats
>> >>alternate left and right. The srv-2000 was their dedicated reverb of the
>> >>time, but it could also become a
>> >>regular delay whith certain buttons held in at power up.
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > So you'd say the SRV-2000 was better sounding than the DEP-5 for reverbs
>?
>>
>>
>> I would, but that's not saying a whole lot. It's still a ringy, grainy
>> sounding
>> reverb (to my ears).
>>
>>
>>
>
>I loved one algorithm on the DEP5. The reverb with chorus was great.


Thought so too. It's the first piece of rack gear I bought when I moved to town
& wasted my life on bulding a guitar rack. Reverb with chorus patch was cool &
I was constantly swimming way too much. I see them for like $150.00, thought of
picking one up for nostalgia.

>Haven?t been able to get that anywhere else. The gated verb was nice too
>They can be a bit hissy especially when warm. Keep it with free space
>above it in the rack.
>I think they are excellent personally. Much nicer than a Quadraverb or
>equivalent.
>
>
>
>
>
>

[Rob Adelman]

David Morley wrote:

> I think they are excellent personally. Much nicer than a Quadraverb or
> equivalent.

I agree. There was a time I had a whole bunch of them. Now I have 1
SRV2000 and a bunch of better stuff. I also like it better then a
previous LXP1 I had.

-Rob

[Rob Adelman]

David Morley wrote:

> I think they are excellent personally. Much nicer than a Quadraverb or
> equivalent.

I agree. There was a time I had a whole bunch of them. Now I have 1
SRV2000 and a bunch of better stuff. I also like it better then a
previous LXP1 I had.

-Rob

[ScotFraser]

<< > So you'd say the SRV-2000 was better sounding than the DEP-5 for reverbs
?>>

<<I would, but that's not saying a whole lot. It's still a ringy, grainy
sounding
reverb (to my ears). >>

That would not be an accurate assessment. The DEP 5 used exactly the same
engine for its reverbs as the SRV2000, although the DEP 5 had several more hall
& room size algorithms available.




Scott Fraser

[ScotFraser]

<< > So you'd say the SRV-2000 was better sounding than the DEP-5 for reverbs
?>>

<<I would, but that's not saying a whole lot. It's still a ringy, grainy
sounding
reverb (to my ears). >>

That would not be an accurate assessment. The DEP 5 used exactly the same
engine for its reverbs as the SRV2000, although the DEP 5 had several more hall
& room size algorithms available.




Scott Fraser

[ScotFraser]

<< I see them for like $150.00, thought of
picking one up for nostalgia.
>>

Or less. If you like Roland reverb, it's a good way to get SRV2000 sound for
about $100 less. Plus it gives you EQ on knobs & some chorus algorithms.


Scott Fraser

[ScotFraser]

<< I see them for like $150.00, thought of
picking one up for nostalgia.
>>

Or less. If you like Roland reverb, it's a good way to get SRV2000 sound for
about $100 less. Plus it gives you EQ on knobs & some chorus algorithms.


Scott Fraser

[ScotFraser]

<< I also like it better then a
previous LXP1 I had. >>

Me too. I'd take just about any Roland reverb over any of the LXP series.


Scott Fraser

[ScotFraser]

<< I also like it better then a
previous LXP1 I had. >>

Me too. I'd take just about any Roland reverb over any of the LXP series.


Scott Fraser

[Bryson]

ScotFraser wrote:
> << > So you'd say the SRV-2000 was better sounding than the DEP-5 for reverbs
> ?>>
>
> <<I would, but that's not saying a whole lot. It's still a ringy, grainy
> sounding
> reverb (to my ears). >>
>
> That would not be an accurate assessment. The DEP 5 used exactly the same
> engine for its reverbs as the SRV2000, although the DEP 5 had several more hall
> & room size algorithms available.


I did not know that. Maybe it's the 2000's tweakabilty that allows me to get a
"better" sound out of it.

[Bryson]

ScotFraser wrote:
> << > So you'd say the SRV-2000 was better sounding than the DEP-5 for reverbs
> ?>>
>
> <<I would, but that's not saying a whole lot. It's still a ringy, grainy
> sounding
> reverb (to my ears). >>
>
> That would not be an accurate assessment. The DEP 5 used exactly the same
> engine for its reverbs as the SRV2000, although the DEP 5 had several more hall
> & room size algorithms available.


I did not know that. Maybe it's the 2000's tweakabilty that allows me to get a
"better" sound out of it.

[ScotFraser]

<< I did not know that. Maybe it's the 2000's tweakabilty that allows me to
get a
"better" sound out of it.
>>

The user interface certainly is superior on the SRV2000.


Scott Fraser

[ScotFraser]

<< I did not know that. Maybe it's the 2000's tweakabilty that allows me to
get a
"better" sound out of it.
>>

The user interface certainly is superior on the SRV2000.


Scott Fraser

[Daniel]

Thanks very much to all who responded :) I really appreciate it. Great info!
Would anyone be kind to perhaps post me a short mp3 of some sounds (vocal)
of the DEP-5 in action ? I'd really want to hear what the "character" of the
gear sounds like. Much appreciated. ---Daniel

If you wanna email me a private mp3 then do so to:

Thanks again,

Daniel

[Daniel]

Thanks very much to all who responded :) I really appreciate it. Great info!
Would anyone be kind to perhaps post me a short mp3 of some sounds (vocal)
of the DEP-5 in action ? I'd really want to hear what the "character" of the
gear sounds like. Much appreciated. ---Daniel

If you wanna email me a private mp3 then do so to:

Thanks again,

Daniel

[ScotFraser]

<< Would anyone be kind to perhaps post me a short mp3 of some sounds (vocal)
of the DEP-5 in action ? >>

I suspect the quality of MP3 would render any objective observation of reverb
quality somewhat meaningless.

Scott Fraser

[ScotFraser]

<< Would anyone be kind to perhaps post me a short mp3 of some sounds (vocal)
of the DEP-5 in action ? >>

I suspect the quality of MP3 would render any objective observation of reverb
quality somewhat meaningless.

Scott Fraser