Synth Site: waldorf: rack attack: User reviews Add review
Average rating: 4.2 out of 5
page 1 of 2:        1  2  >>>
Robert D. a hobbyist user from Austria writes:
Well, this is a quite good drumsynth. As one user above mentioned before it sounds more dynamical compared to the VST version. Whatever. This synth caused me some problems at the beginning - i had a faulty DSP (it was a used, bought on ebay), but after maintainance it worked fine since. Now to the important things: The RackAttack - housed and packed in MicroQ-Chassis you will probably missing some elemets on the frontpanel - the buttons which let you switch to certain types of parameters like on the MQ. But this is not a problem since there are less parameters on the RA. If you can cope with the MQ interface you you will also do it with RA. There is no problem so far, different but not "quirky". Creating a patch will be easy after a few sessions and its well designed for that. The features are plenty: 24 voices, 6 outputs (6x mono, 3x stereo, it depends on your needs), a FX unit with four types simultan, and a little onboard sequencer, 2 OSCs, 2 LFOs, 2 envelopes, FM, a nice filterunit and for a drummachine plenty modulation-options (sure, it is not a machinedrum). The sound itself is like on other waldorf-gear: impressive and with a touch of hardness, but you can also programm some very smooth drums and of course bass-sounds with very very fast envelopes (for a goa-bass in example). Pads are also possible als FX sounds, drones whatever ... it needs a bit programming-skills but it is possible with it´s sound-architecture using it as standalone-synthe. The filters, to my surprise, are sounding more clearer then on the MQ. Filtermodulation can produce some very "analog" sounds ;-) . SOmeone mentioned the word "fat", whatever it means, this is very subjectiv.

Since waldorf doesn´t develope this product anymore (the waldorf-history, insolvency ...), some things are not implemented ready. I am using the OS 1.05 beta which ads some cc-features like volume and FX-level. Other things must be done via SysEx, but this is of no concern.

A great Product overall, lets see what waldorf is up to in the future

Rating: 4 out of 5 posted Thursday-Feb-28-2008 at 18:02
Graham Moore a professional user from USA writes:
Amazing little drum synth. It is great for electro/synth sounds and minimalist idm tones. If your looking for a 808/909 buy one of those or some Jomox gear (which is great). This machine is turned on in my studio probably more than any other. I find it fun and intuitive to program.

Rating: 4 out of 5 posted Sunday-Jan-18-2004 at 17:53
dj Tyler a hobbyist user from USA writes:
I sold my JoMoX airbase 99 to get the rackattack. The emulated analog kicks kicks don't compare to the real thing, but the waldorf does have many more tone options and control. The effects have many parameters to control and are very helpful in creating funky drum tracks. I have spent over 50 hours programming with the rackattack and I belive its the one of the best drum machines on the market. I am still learnig new tone possibilities. The rackattack is complemented by a studio electronics ATC-1 and a fully loaded E-MU MP-7.

Rating: 5 out of 5 posted Friday-Jan-02-2004 at 02:48
tranny a part-time user writes:
I have both software and hardware versions and personally I think the rack sounds a bit more dynamic. It's a bit deeper and warmer. Software version is much more easy to edit ofcourse. And cheaper too.....

You must really like it 's sound to shell out for the rack. Very electro. And a lot of painfull sounds for your ears in the presets. the highs are a bit over the top that way.

but very distictive drummodule. nice basses and synth sounds too.

Rating: 3 out of 5 posted Sunday-Oct-26-2003 at 16:47
zero.zero a professional user from nowhere writes:
go check out the soft version... add a simple loop player (kind of small simple sequencer)... better UI and of course : MORE DYNAMIC SOUNDS !!! Better Better better better than Rack (Soft Version) =)

Rating: 4 out of 5 posted Saturday-Nov-30-2002 at 23:15
page 1 of 2:        1  2  >>>