The Official Sequential/Oberheim Forum
OTHER DISCUSSIONS => General Synthesis => Other Hardware/Software => Topic started by: Sacred Synthesis on September 10, 2016, 03:37:20 PM
-
Roland System 8 Plug Out for $1500:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PWKstbXg3-g
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gDJr8KlBUNo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn5qq46qdT4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Wqy1UQ7Cqk (Sweetwater)
Hmmm. Yet another 49-note poly synth.
-
The third link (Kosmic Sound, Australia) was my preference, in terms of letting the sound of the unit come through (rather than slathering the output with effects). I'd been considering a System-1m as an aside, specifically for the Plug-Out Promars, etc., but this might be an interesting idea at $1500.
Alternately, the four-voice, four-part analogue JD-Xa (ignoring the digital parts) may soon be cheaper as a consequence....
-
I like the "plug-out" concept. It's definitely innovative and interesting.
I'm not sure about the "Double Super Saw," though. By the time they get to the "Triple Dog Super-duper Saw," they might as well just call it "White Noise 2."
-
Hmmm. Yet another 49-note poly synth.
Yes. What is wrong with these companies? Are they all incapable of bringing something out without the usual fly in the ointment. It's almost laughable. The dumbing down of music is almost complete. If they insist on aiming for the DJ market, just have one key on it and be done with it. :-)
-
Yes, that's what I immediately thought, too - the DJ market. I wonder if there have ever been so many 49-key polyphonic synthesizers available as now? I realize many folks don't mind, since space often seems to be the main concern, but it greatly limits a musician's ability to play entire pieces on a single synthesizer. That lost lost lower octave makes a fullness of sound impossible.
Because of this limitation, I would automatically relegate a four-octave keyboard to a left-hand position in a set up. It could be only a supportive instrument, providing chordal or arpeggiated accompaniment. In other words, it would require other full-sized instruments to compensate. But what if a person doesn't want to have so many instruments?
I do hope DSI hasn't jumped on this bandwagon. Their last three keyboards have been only 49-key or less. It's high time for a full length instrument from them.
-
Not a big fan of the 909 day outcome. Of all the announced synth products, I personally find the VP-03 the most interesting.
I get what's attractive about the plug-out idea. Yet, I do think that Roland is exploiting its past a little too much with all these ACB emulations. I mean, we now have all these baffling double offers like the TR-09 and the TR-8 that already includes the 909 emulation, and then the TB-3 and the TB-03 both of which are supposed to emulate the same instrument, albeit the latter does definitely offer the nicer interface.
The System-8 is now a special case, as it's in the price region of real analog synths like the Prophet '08. While the latter doesn't sound Roland-ish of course, I simply find $1,499 too much. That's at least not the price this instrument would be worth to me, knowing that I'd have to subract the prices for the actual Jupiter-8 and Juno-106 software in all fairness. I would also assume that the System-8 will include the keyboard of the JD-Xa, which simply felt crappy to me.
Apart from the plug-out technology itself, I don't see any innovation here. Neither a redefinition of the past and certainly not of the future (if the future should be more than "same as it ever was"). I wish Roland would rather release a follow-up to the V-Synth, or basically anything beyond the exploitation of their overrated past - yes, TR-808, TR-909, and TB-303, I'm looking at you.
-
I think the problem is there is a big market for the "old stuff", companies are filling the market with these things.
I would love a new Roland synth based on the the V-Synth technology but the original sold badly, most keyboard player just didn't understand it I guess.
Roland will sell loads of those new boxes, strange really as those TRs and TB were crap when they were new, now they seem to be magical!
-
Roland will sell loads of those new boxes, strange really as those TRs and TB were crap when they were new, now they seem to be magical!
They will but judging by all the second hand TR8's, JP8's and similar for sale already on eBay, it looks like it is the instant gratification generation that are buying them and then selling them straight on when they do not write a song for them with little or no input :-)
From what I read of the TR-8, you could only program patterns and not a song into it. Don't know if that's true. Sounds like the 909 at least has the ability to chain patterns into a song.
I think that vocoder looks interesting too.
Roland really missed a trick with that System 8 giving it only 49 keys. The clips sounded OK from what I have heard up to now.
Is it the same Jupiter 8 algorithms used for the Jupiter 8 emulation in the Integra 7?
Hopefully guitar makers won't start churning out every new model with only 5 frets under the BS portability guise :-)
-
Is it the same Jupiter 8 algorithms used for the Jupiter 8 emulation in the Integra 7?
AFAIK the INTEGRA-7 is sample-based; that would not permit cross-modulation or any of the other facilities that the System-8 provides within its voice architecture.
-
Yes, that's what I immediately thought, too - the DJ market. I wonder if there have ever been so many 49-key polyphonic synthesizers available as now? I realize many folks don't mind, since space often seems to be the main concern, but it greatly limits a musician's ability to play entire pieces on a single synthesizer. That lost lost lower octave makes a fullness of sound impossible.
Because of this limitation, I would automatically relegate a four-octave keyboard to a left-hand position in a set up. It could be only a supportive instrument, providing chordal or arpeggiated accompaniment. In other words, it would require other full-sized instruments to compensate. But what if a person doesn't want to have so many instruments?
I do hope DSI hasn't jumped on this bandwagon. Their last three keyboards have been only 49-key or less. It's high time for a full length instrument from them.
I've got a different take on this, from the perspective of someone who prefers proper 76-key actions - I believe that these are not oriented toward the DJ market, but toward the urban player who needs to fit two or three keyboards into the back of an Uber / taxi, or carry one on the train. I get the 49-key thing.
For what it's worth, there exists a historical predecessor in the continuo organ:
(http://www.harpsichord.com/All%20Instrument%20Images/Principale1_a.jpg)
Unlike a pipe or reed organ, a synthesizer is not bound to cost concerns with regard to voice generation on a per-key basis; the manufacturing costs manifest themselves in extra metalwork / keybed / packaging / shipping.
-
You could find much smaller instruments than that organ, from the short virginal down to the tiny clavichord. There's plenty of precedent in the classical world for shorter keyboards and even smaller keys. But these were not the standard instruments used in performances, but were generally used at home as practice instruments and composition tools, or were used by travelling musicians. In addition, music was specifically written for their limited keyboard range. But what does all of this have to do with synthesizers in the year 2016? We need not suffer from any such limitations.
The Roland System 8 lacks originality. It reminds me of the KingKorg. Like a mockingbird, it's meant to imitate others, rather than sing a new song. New instruments emulating old instruments in new ways. No thanks. I'd rather have bona fide re-issues or brand-spanking new designs.
-
Somebody (????) could do well with an open-source plug-out system. There's a little bit of precedent for it in the industry, with Mutable's digital eurorack modules, and the Rebel OWL open-source DSP platform (pedal format and eurorack). I'm sure there are a few others (ADDAC, maybe?).
Point being, become a hardware platform that's basically an alternative to soft synths. Attract developers away from iOS. We might see forms of synthesis that have only been available in computers, and they might be a lot more fun to play.
-
Somebody (????) could do well with an open-source plug-out system. There's a little bit of precedent for it in the industry, with Mutable's digital eurorack modules, and the Rebel OWL open-source DSP platform (pedal format and eurorack). I'm sure there are a few others (ADDAC, maybe?).
Point being, become a hardware platform that's basically an alternative to soft synths. Attract developers away from iOS. We might see forms of synthesis that have only been available in computers, and they might be a lot more fun to play.
I like the OWL - but it's hard to beat (from a developer's perspective) iOS as a platform from a commercial developer's perspective. The softsynth apps fare better than most, and you've got a stable UI / audio subsystem to boot that uses the same development tools as the macOS desktop environment.
The OWL really needs a display, like a small 128 x 96 pixel OLED, and I feel the same way about the Roland AIRA modular units: once you have a few neat things that your program / patch can do, you might want to be able to switch between them.
Of course, what many do not realize is that all of these Roland AIRA / System-* units are effectively the same underneath the hood, using their own proprietary ASIC (which reportedly consists of an FPGA core bound to fixed peripherals); Roland is going wide with this silicon and the corresponding models. An off-the-shelf ARM Cortex-M4 processor (even with its DSP instructions) just can't compete with that horsepower (unless it is limited to performing a much more limited series of tasks, as it might within a single voice of the Korg Minilogue).
So-in order to make this commercially worthwhile, you're back to the notion of some sort of secure, powerful platform–or a better-specified (read: more expensive), open-source yet off-the-shelf FPGA-incorporating solution that raises the bar to entry due to lack of user-friendly development tools.
I bought a Muse Receptor when it first came out, thinking that a music-oriented VST host would make sense - so I do believe that there is some historical precedent for this concept, but no sensible commercial one. As a developer, I would like to have to perform the least amount of work possible to assemble a working functional model for a sound generator / mutator / manipulator.
-
The thing is the FPGA in the Roland gear is most likely running a DSP type processor along with other tasks. The FPGA structure is not being reprogrammed for the different devices it is just running different code on their virtual DSP processor.
You can do a lot with an M4, but now you have quite a few very cheap ARM/FPGA SOCs that would make the core of a great synth.
The problem is they are not the simplest things to develop on, for an open-source/off the shelf type user experience you don't want to be reprogramming the FPGA so you need to come up with some higher level construct like Roland have done.
So the Arm cores are providing more flexible functionality/programability while the FPGA is providing some form of DSP co-processor and the hardware interfacing, unfortunately I think we are a way off people doing this stuff for free.
-
I think the advantages the Roland plug-outs provide is the dedicated MIDI controller that easily adapts to the individual synth emulations and the fact that you can load different instruments into the hardware and have them ready to go.
Other than that, Roland is basically competing against the combination of software developers like u-he and NI, and MIDI controllers. And only with regard to that combination, the price of a System-8 appears rather steep, as you can have a synth like DIVA plus a good MIDI controller for way less than a grand. So you're basically paying $5-800 for being able to plug out, meaning: being able to leave your laptop at home if those Roland emulations are all you need.
-
I believe that "leaving your laptop at home" is a valid choice; others might disagree.
-
I believe that "leaving your laptop at home" is a valid choice; others might disagree.
Definitely.
I have to backpedal a bit. Just watched a video yesterday in wich they stated that you can actually use different engines simultaneously in performance mode so that you can layer and split the System-8 engine and the three additional plug-outs (Jupiter-8, Juno-106, and whatever you load into the third slot) as you like - each with its own sequencer pattern and so on. I also learned that the sequencer does record parameter automation.
-
Roland is just dong what all the other big companies are doing; using old technology in new enhanced versions... it happens all the time, but sometimes it's not so obvious.
With the System-8, they are reusing what's in the new ACB series like the TR-08 and Boutiques... someone mentioned that INTEGRA-7 is sample based... yes it is, but more accurately, that technology (SuperNatural) is a fusion of VariPhrase technology and their behavioral modelling technology... if you look at the V-Synth GT, it had an early incarnation of the Behavioral modelling technology, but they called it AP Synthesises... with the Integra-7 and Jupiter-80 (and the two new synths with built in analog voices as well) it was transformed into SuparNatural synthesis.
We have also seen KORG reuse their Multi Oscillator Synthesis technology on several products... MS2000, Radias, Electribes, Microkorgs etc.
Yamaha is also constantly perfecting their AWM2 synthesis in their newest Motif series, and I guess it's present in the Montage as well.
So.. it's not really uncommon to feel a bit "reused" when you buy stuff from these companies... Dave Smith Instruments does it too... look at the features, and you'll see different iterations of the same technology.
To me the System-8 actualy sounds very good, and I like that it has built in FX of this high quality along with a really good analogish sound to it... but as others here, I think the price is too steep... and also... no rack-version makes it a dealbreaker for me... I have my studio in my bedroom, on 4x4m including a double bed, so I simply cannot afford the space for all those darn keyboards.... so I'll probably pass on this one.
And about the 49 keys? ... I don't really care (I don't need them), but I can live with 49 keys if I have to... it's my absolute minimum, but I've not missed more on my Blofeld Keyboard to be honest.
-
AFAIK the INTEGRA-7 is sample-based; that would not permit cross-modulation or any of the other facilities that the System-8 provides within its voice architecture.
I am sure the supernatural synth engine is modelled.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xa5Tzu6kMpI
I have one but my midi stuff is stripped out for a rewire at the moment. Plus, I would have to get the iPad editor working again to edit the Integra.
I seem to remember there was no Sync on there but PWM and all that was there.
-
The SuperNatural PWM is using samples (wavetables), people much more boring than ourselves have analysed it!
For me it doesn't matter how the sound is produced though, just what it sounds like and the Integra 7 is a box full of goodies.
-
The SuperNatural PWM is using samples (wavetables), people much more boring than ourselves have analysed it!
For me it doesn't matter how the sound is produced though, just what it sounds like and the Integra 7 is a box full of goodies.
Yes, I think the Supernatural piano and brass etc. I am talking only about the synth.
The only part you can edit from the iPad is the synth engine. No other Supernatural instruments.
-
The SuperNatural technology is VariPhrase based, I'm pretty certain of it, because I can clearly hear the "sample", especially when you press the same key over and over, you can hear the "staticness"... VariPhrase can also be compared to wavetables in that the technology stores extra data about every single-cycle of the sample... that's what the VariPhrase encoding does in it's Solo encoding algorithm... you can hear it when you slow the speed down of playback... I bet that SuperNatural is nothing more than specially prepared and encoded samples, that has extra articulate synthesis for the way pitch, time and formants are handled relying on your playing technique... I believe this because the last V-Synth, the GT actually had SuperNatural in it's infancy... it was just called AP Synthesis instead of SuperNatural.
Also if you look at the features of the INTEGRA-7 it hints at it... it's sample based, because otherwise they would not have included all those SRX boards in it, allowing it to play back standard PCM as well... the Supernatural synthesis is so close, that the engine probably lends itself to PCM based playback easily as well.
-
The SuperNatural technology is VariPhrase based, I'm pretty certain of it, because I can clearly hear the "sample", especially when you press the same key over and over, you can hear the "staticness"... VariPhrase can also be compared to wavetables in that the technology stores extra data about every single-cycle of the sample... that's what the VariPhrase encoding does in it's Solo encoding algorithm... you can hear it when you slow the speed down of playback... I bet that SuperNatural is nothing more than specially prepared and encoded samples, that has extra articulate synthesis for the way pitch, time and formants are handled relying on your playing technique... I believe this because the last V-Synth, the GT actually had SuperNatural in it's infancy... it was just called AP Synthesis instead of SuperNatural.
Also if you look at the features of the INTEGRA-7 it hints at it... it's sample based, because otherwise they would not have included all those SRX boards in it, allowing it to play back standard PCM as well... the Supernatural synthesis is so close, that the engine probably lends itself to PCM based playback easily as well.
Ahem, from one of the Roland engineers. 5th post down confirms the VA aspect of the oscillators.
http://forums.rolandclan.com/viewtopic.php?f=44&t=37042
I have an Integra. You can choose the VA oscillators OR PCM samples.
-
Also if you look at the features of the INTEGRA-7 it hints at it... it's sample based, because otherwise they would not have included all those SRX boards in it, allowing it to play back standard PCM as well... the Supernatural synthesis is so close, that the engine probably lends itself to PCM based playback easily as well.
Also, as stated previously, You can only edit the synth part of the Integra from an iPad and not any of the PCM SRX side.
They are two different engines.
Also when you say you can hear they are PCM, are you talking about the synth engine or the piano, brass etc?
-
The SuperNatural technology is VariPhrase based, I'm pretty certain of it, because I can clearly hear the "sample", especially when you press the same key over and over, you can hear the "staticness"... VariPhrase can also be compared to wavetables in that the technology stores extra data about every single-cycle of the sample... that's what the VariPhrase encoding does in it's Solo encoding algorithm... you can hear it when you slow the speed down of playback... I bet that SuperNatural is nothing more than specially prepared and encoded samples, that has extra articulate synthesis for the way pitch, time and formants are handled relying on your playing technique... I believe this because the last V-Synth, the GT actually had SuperNatural in it's infancy... it was just called AP Synthesis instead of SuperNatural.
Also if you look at the features of the INTEGRA-7 it hints at it... it's sample based, because otherwise they would not have included all those SRX boards in it, allowing it to play back standard PCM as well... the Supernatural synthesis is so close, that the engine probably lends itself to PCM based playback easily as well.
Ahem, from one of the Roland engineers. 5th post down confirms the VA aspect of the oscillators.
http://forums.rolandclan.com/viewtopic.php?f=44&t=37042
I have an Integra. You can choose the VA oscillators OR PCM samples.
They are "modelled" using samples not in straight PCM playback but the original waveform is based on samples. Whatever the Roland guy says!
-
The Integra sports TWO different types of SuperNatural engines... Supernatural Synth, and Supernatural Acoustic... the later IS sample based... I can hear this very clearly, but it's definitely a LOT better than normal multisamples... I am not dissing the I7, I LOVE that synth a lot.
When you say "VA" synthesis, it must be in relation to the SuperNatural Synth engine... the raw standard waveforms you can choose actualy sound like VA... I have a feeling that the raw normal subtractive waveforms of analog synths are perheaps modelled... most likely they are the same as in the JP-8000... also V-Synth has this VA synthesis on top of the VariPhrase... but you can also choose a lot of "samples" in the SuperNatural Synth engine... and these are also clearly sample based.. I can hear it easily...
This is why I keep on stating that I7 is sample based... that is what it sound like to me... Roland say it's "Physical Modelling"... I don't believe this... they use Behavioral Modelling to articulate these "VariPhrase" samples... as I believe they are.
System-8 does not seem like a sample based synth... it seems like genuine analog modelling behavior.
-
Also... you can certainly edit the SRX sounds on the I7... you can edit all parameters directly from the front panel. The supernatural Accoustic engine does not have many parameters to tweak about them... but both SuperNatural Synth and PCM tones can be fully edited without an iPad.
-
I'm pretty sure the supernatural synth oscillators are sample based, you can see it yourself use a PCM oscillator and put it through a scope and change the pulse width. You can see the discreet steps as the pulse width changes between the waves in the wavetable, it isn't smooth as it would be if it was modelled.
Also the super wave oscillators loop, definitely sounds sample based to me.
-
Also... you can certainly edit the SRX sounds on the I7... you can edit all parameters directly from the front panel. The supernatural Accoustic engine does not have many parameters to tweak about them... but both SuperNatural Synth and PCM tones can be fully edited without an iPad.
I said on the iPad. Of course you can edit from the front panel. You are telling me about a synth I actually own. haha
-
They are "modelled" using samples not in straight PCM playback but the original waveform is based on samples. Whatever the Roland guy says!
Well, I am more inclined to listen to the Roland engineer to be honest. He said it was modelled.
-
The Integra sports TWO different types of SuperNatural engines... Supernatural Synth, and Supernatural Acoustic... the later IS sample based... I can hear this very clearly, but it's definitely a LOT better than normal multisamples... I am not dissing the I7, I LOVE that synth a lot.
When you say "VA" synthesis, it must be in relation to the SuperNatural Synth engine... the raw standard waveforms you can choose actualy sound like VA... I have a feeling that the raw normal subtractive waveforms of analog synths are perheaps modelled... most likely they are the same as in the JP-8000... also V-Synth has this VA synthesis on top of the VariPhrase... but you can also choose a lot of "samples" in the SuperNatural Synth engine... and these are also clearly sample based.. I can hear it easily...
This is why I keep on stating that I7 is sample based... that is what it sound like to me... Roland say it's "Physical Modelling"... I don't believe this... they use Behavioral Modelling to articulate these "VariPhrase" samples... as I believe they are.
System-8 does not seem like a sample based synth... it seems like genuine analog modelling behavior.
That is exactly what I said. The 'synth' oscillators on the SuperNatural SYNTH engine are modelled but you can also choose PCM in the same section.
-
I'm pretty sure the supernatural synth oscillators are sample based, you can see it yourself use a PCM oscillator and put it through a scope and change the pulse width. You can see the discreet steps as the pulse width changes between the waves in the wavetable, it isn't smooth as it would be if it was modelled.
Also the super wave oscillators loop, definitely sounds sample based to me.
According to the engineer, the synth oscillators are VA. I am not talking about the PCM sounds you can choose as oscillators in the same section. I am talking saw square etc.
-
They are "modelled" using samples not in straight PCM playback but the original waveform is based on samples. Whatever the Roland guy says!
Well, I am more inclined to listen to the Roland engineer to be honest. He said it was modelled.
Rather than listen to your ears, or use a scope?
Is there any proof he is a Roland engineer?
-
I'm pretty sure the supernatural synth oscillators are sample based, you can see it yourself use a PCM oscillator and put it through a scope and change the pulse width. You can see the discreet steps as the pulse width changes between the waves in the wavetable, it isn't smooth as it would be if it was modelled.
Also the super wave oscillators loop, definitely sounds sample based to me.
According to the engineer, the synth oscillators are VA. I am not talking about the PCM sounds you can choose as oscillators in the same section. I am talking saw square etc.
I wasn't talking about the PCM sounds either, I was talking about SNS PW Square and SNS SuperSaw.
-
Rather than listen to your ears, or use a scope?
Is there any proof he is a Roland engineer?
I believe he was Roland Product manager
-
I'm pretty sure the supernatural synth oscillators are sample based, you can see it yourself use a PCM oscillator and put it through a scope and change the pulse width.
I wasn't talking about the PCM sounds either, I was talking about SNS PW Square and SNS SuperSaw.
You said use a PCM oscillator......
-
Sorry so I did, a typo (more likely brain burp)!
-
These sounds are definitely impressive:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2icjAPaLMhI
-
The sounds are definitely okay. It would be nice if someone could upload a couple of dryer sounds, i.e. without effects here and there.
I couldn't believe my eyes, though, when I read that the keyboard doesn't feature aftertouch.
-
I couldn't believe my eyes, though, when I read that the keyboard doesn't feature aftertouch.
...probably with a nod toward its longevity - the JD-Xa keybed, which it is reportedly similar to, is absolutely dismal for a modern performance instrument. (I'm seriously thinking about scooping a beater up off eBay at some point and desktop-ing the thing; if I'm feeling ambitious, maybe re-house the analogue brain into something else.)
-
Hopefully they will do a module version as well, the system 1m is a great bit of kit, the plugouts sound really good.
I would definitely get an 8m
-
It would be nice if someone could upload a couple of dryer sounds, i.e. without effects here and there.
Apparently, these are the days of synthesizers and factory programs that are drowned in onboard affects. Reverb, delay, and distortion - yes - but also the nearly constant use of stereo chorus, which gives the impression that a synthesizer is much warmer than it really is. But for those who like it this way, I'd say the System 8 will be a winner. On the merely sensational level, its sounds do impress.
Personally, I wouldn't want a synthesizer that needed chorus to make a warm string patch or other pads, so I'm not the slightest bit interested in the System 8. Besides, these "cool" new designs make the instruments look like they belong in a research laboratory, rather than a music room, studio, or stage.
-
Besides, these "cool" new designs make the instruments look like they belong in a research laboratory, rather than a music room, studio, or stage.
Yes, you would not want all those green LED's in your face 8 hours a day, 5 days a week in the studio. :-)
-
I couldn't believe my eyes, though, when I read that the keyboard doesn't feature aftertouch.
...probably with a nod toward its longevity - the JD-Xa keybed, which it is reportedly similar to, is absolutely dismal for a modern performance instrument. (I'm seriously thinking about scooping a beater up off eBay at some point and desktop-ing the thing; if I'm feeling ambitious, maybe re-house the analogue brain into something else.)
True, the JD-Xa keyboard is really, really bad. It makes the Prophet-6 keyboard feel like a $10,000 keyboard and gives the overall impression that the JD-Xa should be exclusively sold at Walmart when it comes to its overall built quality, or rather the use of this cheap glossy front panel.
-
Apparently, these are the days of synthesizers and factory programs that are drowned in onboard affects. Reverb, delay, and distortion - yes - but also the nearly constant use of stereo chorus, which gives the impression that a synthesizer is much warmer than it really is. But for those who like it this way, I'd say the System 8 will be a winner. On the merely sensational level, its sounds do impress.
Which is absolutely okay. Point is that it still makes you curious about how well they pinned down the sound without all of the extras, which I don't even mean in a conservative way, because effects are and have always been an integral part of any electronic sound.
Personally, I wouldn't want a synthesizer that needed chorus to make a warm string patch or other pads, so I'm not the slightest bit interested in the System 8. Besides, these "cool" new designs make the instruments look like they belong in a research laboratory, rather than a music room, studio, or stage.
Well, you don't know how much it actually "needs" a chorus unless you hear it dry. I would assume that only the Juno-106 plug-out is really in need of a chorus to get anywhere, but then I also think that it was one of the most mediocre synths ever - even worse than the Juno-6 or 60, the latter of which I always perceived to be more of a one-trick pony in the poly synth domain than the Minitaur could ever be in the mono synth domain.
I'm all for synths looking like a laboratory though. Isn't that where they originate from?
-
Besides, these "cool" new designs make the instruments look like they belong in a research laboratory, rather than a music room, studio, or stage.
Yes, you would not want all those green LED's in your face 8 hours a day, 5 days a week in the studio. :-)
I have a difficult enough time with the Evolvers. The walls of my music room actually pulsate with the back panel LFO lights. It's a free light show.
-
True, the JD-Xa keyboard is really, really bad. It makes the Prophet-6 keyboard feel like a $10,000 keyboard and gives the overall impression that the JD-Xa should be exclusively sold at Walmart when it comes to its overall built quality, or rather the use of this cheap glossy front panel.
Ah, I didn't know that. Handy information.
-
I'm all for synths looking like a laboratory though. Isn't that where they originate from?
I was obviously expressing only an opinion. I wouldn't want my music room or even a stage to look like a laboratory, any more than I would walk around the house or perform wearing a white smock. I want a musical instrument to look like a piece of modest art, because that's what I'm going to make with it. That's why I like wood end cheeks, which have anything but the laboratory appearance. And lights are useful on an instrument, but I would prefer that they be both practically and tastefully allocated. Again, the Evolver's lights are as much as one can bear, but at least they're of more natural tones of red and blue, rather than the System 8's fluorescent lime green. Something tells me they'd be difficult to endure for long after a large meal.
Summed up, I would like a synthesizer to look just the way Dave Smith's instruments look. All the DSI Prophets look ideal to me.
-
True, the JD-Xa keyboard is really, really bad. It makes the Prophet-6 keyboard feel like a $10,000 keyboard and gives the overall impression that the JD-Xa should be exclusively sold at Walmart when it comes to its overall built quality, or rather the use of this cheap glossy front panel.
Ah, I didn't know that. Handy information.
Someone measured the length of the System-8's keys' depth and it's about 13 cm while the usual depth for full-sized keys is about 14 cm. So I would assume that the System-8 has the same keyboard as the JD-Xa. Nord Leads have also pretty crappy keyboards that feel a bit shorter in depth. Some people are fine with those, but for me personally they're a no-go, especially because of their cheap feel.
-
True, the JD-Xa keyboard is really, really bad. It makes the Prophet-6 keyboard feel like a $10,000 keyboard and gives the overall impression that the JD-Xa should be exclusively sold at Walmart when it comes to its overall built quality, or rather the use of this cheap glossy front panel.
Ah, I didn't know that. Handy information.
Someone measured the length of the System-8's keys' depth and it's about 13 cm while the usual depth for full-sized keys is about 14 cm. So I would assume that the System-8 has the same keyboard as the JD-Xa. Nord Leads have also pretty crappy keyboards that feel a bit shorter in depth. Some people are fine with those, but for me personally they're a no-go, especially because of their cheap feel.
The bigger issue is not the throw at the outer edge of the key, but the behavior at the inside edge of the key.
On an acoustic piano or tracker organ, the fulcrum length is quite long, and the pivot is nearly horizontal to the top of the key, so there is greater vertical deflection at the inside edge; for premium synth-action keys such as the FATAR TP-8S, the pivot lies at an angle to the top of the key, so the key deflects down and slightly forward (Ensoniq got around this effect by rounding the inside edge of the sharps).
Cheaper synth-action keybeds have very little deflection at the inside edge, which forces you to play closer to the outside edge; if the key top length is further shortened (as they've done with the JD-Xa), the fulcrum is quite short, and the response feels spongey.
(By comparison, the V-Synth keybed feels quite nice, so it can be said that Roland is doing this for cost purposes only.)
-
The bigger issue is not the throw at the outer edge of the key, but the behavior at the inside edge of the key.
On an acoustic piano or tracker organ, the fulcrum length is quite long, and the pivot is nearly horizontal to the top of the key, so there is greater vertical deflection at the inside edge; for premium synth-action keys such as the FATAR TP-8S, the pivot lies at an angle to the top of the key, so the key deflects down and slightly forward (Ensoniq got around this effect by rounding the inside edge of the sharps).
Cheaper synth-action keybeds have very little deflection at the inside edge, which forces you to play closer to the outside edge; if the key top length is further shortened (as they've done with the JD-Xa), the fulcrum is quite short, and the response feels spongey.
(By comparison, the V-Synth keybed feels quite nice, so it can be said that Roland is doing this for cost purposes only.)
True about the action. And yes, the shorter size on the outside makes the response even worse. Of course, it's just an outcome of cost cutting, as there are and have been synths out there that provide a much better keyboard action, from the DX-7 to the OB-6.
-
side note about those Green LED's (which Obviously I love all things green so I love the look) .. you can disable them completely. so its a non issue as far as if you don't like em.
It does sound very good. I hope that they port the 4 voice versions of the jupiter and juno to the system 1m . I don't see me buying the system 8 not for lack of quality but more because roland kinda nickel and dimed the users of the system 1 and 1m (I mean really I have to BUY the plug out of the system 1 engine to use it as a vst?) maybe if I see it used on the cheap... but damn it did sound like the real deal. the 1m kinda has some trouble with high rates of FM but definitely fairs better than most digital synths in this regard. i dunno, aside from their eurorack stuff (which is really malekko) I kinda would rather roland stick to digital as opposed to analog... the analog they have done lately hasn't exactly been mind blowing, where as the digital stuff certainly sounds good (that pro mars sounds so damn real)
-
Side note about those Green LED's (which Obviously I love all things green so I love the look) .. you can disable them completely. so its a non issue as far as if you don't like 'em.
That was a smart idea.
-
It does sound very good. I hope that they port the 4 voice versions of the jupiter and juno to the system 1m . I don't see me buying the system 8 not for lack of quality but more because roland kinda nickel and dimed the users of the system 1 and 1m (I mean really I have to BUY the plug out of the system 1 engine to use it as a vst?) maybe if I see it used on the cheap... but damn it did sound like the real deal.
I listened to quite a view demos last week, including the System-8 and the System-1. I have to agree on the sound quality. It sounds really, really nice. I would even be tempted to get a System-1m for the System-100 plug-out alone, but then I learned that the hardware doesn't give access to all the necessary parameters, and that was the end of the story for me, since I belong to the "no mouse, more fun" group.
Nevertheless, the advantage of the hardware obviously lies in not making your computer's CPU freak out. That and having at least in most cases a bunch of dedicated controllers for the plug-outs seems to be it.
I can't really tolerate a hardware poly synth without aftertouch in 2016 though. Especially if it's all digital. That's a huge step back in terms of expression. And like I said before, the JD-Xa keyboard already felt super bad to me, and I don't assume Roland adjusted the quality for the System-8. In that regard I have to say sorry, it just doesn't feel like a proper keyboard that should be on a synth in this price range. After all, the System-8 and System-1 have been built to meet the haptic needs of musicians. If you fail to add a proper keyboard you basically damage the whole package in my opinion. It's like the lack of a MIDI interface and a headphone output when you buy all of the Roland modules in the SYR-E84 Eurorack case: a completely unnecessary move.
i dunno, aside from their eurorack stuff (which is really malekko) I kinda would rather roland stick to digital as opposed to analog... the analog they have done lately hasn't exactly been mind blowing, where as the digital stuff certainly sounds good (that pro mars sounds so damn real)
I think you don't have to worry. But what analogs (the modules aside) are you referring to? The analog elements of the JD-Xa and JD-Xi?
-
I'd like to have the JD-Xa analogue section in a module, perhaps with built-in effects; that would have been far preferable to the Boutique Series hardware (JU-06, JP-08, JX-03). With Guitar Center blowing them out at 20% off, does this mean that they've got something up their sleeves for winter NAMM?
-
I'd like to have the JD-Xa analogue section in a module, perhaps with built-in effects; that would have been far preferable to the Boutique Series hardware (JU-06, JP-08, JX-03). With Guitar Center blowing them out at 20% off, does this mean that they've got something up their sleeves for winter NAMM?
Not sure. The sellers I know told me that it's simply not a particular well-selling product.
-
I'd like to have the JD-Xa analogue section in a module, perhaps with built-in effects; that would have been far preferable to the Boutique Series hardware (JU-06, JP-08, JX-03). With Guitar Center blowing them out at 20% off, does this mean that they've got something up their sleeves for winter NAMM?
Not sure. The sellers I know told me that it's simply not a particular well-selling product.
Yeah, I could give you a few reasons why:
- the JP-08's cross-modulation is no good
- they failed to implement MIDI CCs on initial release
- four voices is just not enough without poly-chain capability
- the USB Audio sample rate is fixed at 44.1 kHz, while the rest of the AIRA Series works at 96 kHz
If you cut enough corners, you might end up with a circle....
-
I'd like to have the JD-Xa analogue section in a module, perhaps with built-in effects; that would have been far preferable to the Boutique Series hardware (JU-06, JP-08, JX-03). With Guitar Center blowing them out at 20% off, does this mean that they've got something up their sleeves for winter NAMM?
Not sure. The sellers I know told me that it's simply not a particular well-selling product.
Yeah, I could give you a few reasons why:
- the JP-08's cross-modulation is no good
- they failed to implement MIDI CCs on initial release
- four voices is just not enough without poly-chain capability
- the USB Audio sample rate is fixed at 44.1 kHz, while the rest of the AIRA Series works at 96 kHz
If you cut enough corners, you might end up with a circle....
Ah, sorry I thought you were talking about the JD-Xa in the first place. Got that wrong. I was referring to the JD-Xa not being a top seller.
-
Any ideas as to the reasons the JD-Xa isn't selling well? It looked like a decent instrument to me, except for the exterior body.
-
Not sure. The sellers I know told me that it's simply not a particular well-selling product.
I think it might have been too strange for most people with the 4 voice analog portion combined with the many voices digital portion. It's a bit of an odd fish really. Shame that they didn't do a synth based on only the analog portion with minimum six (preferably eight) voices instead.
-
Any ideas as to the reasons the JD-Xa isn't selling well? It looked like a decent instrument to me, except for the exterior body.
No idea. I've only heard from a couple of retailers that it sells worse than the Boutique series, which in turn supposedly sells way better than Yamaha's Reface series.
It could be the toy-like appearance, it could be the at times dated sounding presets (which mostly reminded me of 1990s techno stuff), and it could also be that it seems to complicated to some. With regard to the latter there are parts of the synth that aren't so easy to navigate (cf. Nick Batt's review), especially if you want to start from scratch.
In general, and especially with the analog revival in mind, it seems to me that most buyers are especially interested in instant gratification instruments. Sound designer's dream machines are not really for the mass market I suppose. They might get good reviews, but are not necessarily everybody's darling, as not everybody wants to dig deep into a synth's architecture. Look at mono synths for example. I, of course, would expect to see way more Pro 2s out in the wild, but if you look at festival stages or whatever, you still see a majority of either vintage monos, MS-20 Minis, or Moogs. Or think back to the Evolver for example, which to this day would be a super affordable and hard to beat synth in its desktop or MEK incarnations. (I still know plenty of synth heads who have absolutely no idea about the Evolver.)
So I guess it is probably related to a certain degree of conservatism and maybe a lack of courage to try out something different here and there. But these are just my personal assumptions.
-
Thanks for the information about the JD-Xa. I'm always happy to have my interest in an instrument eliminated, due to critical comments about it - seriously. It's one less thing on which to waste my thoughts and money. And thanks also for the complimentary comments about the Evolver. Paul, for a moment my heart was going pitter-patter. :D
-
Thanks for the information about the JD-Xa. I'm always happy to have my interest in an instrument eliminated, due to critical comments about it - seriously. It's one less thing on which to waste my thoughts and money. And thanks also for the complimentary comments about the Evolver. Paul, for a moment my heart was going pitter-patter. :D
Keep in mind, though, that my assertion is based only on a couple of retailers. It might be completely different in other regions. It was also not necessarily my goal to eliminate interest in the JD-XA. I only checked it out once, rather briefly. And my only complains are rather about its outward appearance (glossy look and at times panel design) and its build quality (first and foremost its keyboard), not the engine as such. Conceptually, I certainly find the its hybrid architecture to be more interesting than the synths based on ACB technology, although I can definitely understand the attractivity of the latter with regard to the relationship between software and dedicated controllers, especially for live use.
-
Perhaps Roland should have hired this guy for the JDXa overlay: http://www.synthgraphics.com/Roland_JD-XA_panel.html
-
Thanks for the information about the JD-Xa. I'm always happy to have my interest in an instrument eliminated, due to critical comments about it - seriously. It's one less thing on which to waste my thoughts and money. And thanks also for the complimentary comments about the Evolver. Paul, for a moment my heart was going pitter-patter. :D
Keep in mind, though, that my assertion is based only on a couple of retailers. It might be completely different in other regions. It was also not necessarily my goal to eliminate interest in the JD-XA. I only checked it out once, rather briefly. And my only complains are rather about its outward appearance (glossy look and at times panel design) and its build quality (first and foremost its keyboard), not the engine as such. Conceptually, I certainly find the its hybrid architecture to be more interesting than the synths based on ACB technology, although I can definitely understand the attractivity of the latter with regard to the relationship between software and dedicated controllers, especially for live use.
I'm not giving undue weight to your passing comments and I realize your experience with the instrument is limited. They're just one more nail in the JD-Xa coffin for me. I really shouldn't be considering such odd musical tangents. There are other more worthy instruments to be seriously considered.
-
Hi...i am a new user here. As per my knowledge there's plenty of precedent in the classical world for shorter keyboards and even smaller keys. But these were not the standard instruments used in performances, but were generally used at home as practice instruments and composition tools, or were used by travelling musicians. In addition, music was specifically written for their limited keyboard range.
-
Love the System 8 except for the narrow keys and action. I was planning on using it to replace Prophet 6 on some gigs as mu middle keyboard in a 3-tier set up. But I just went back to Prophet 6 to rehearse for a gig tomorrow and concluded it has such a better action (as well as the benefit of true analog, but the Sys-8 has its own virtues). The keybed on the Sys-8 really is junk.
-
I have been looking around for a synth with a good keyboard and tried a few. The Nord Lead 4 keybed is plastic toy/junk. If the sys8 /JDXa are close to that the it's junk too IMHO. ( I don't know how manufacturers dare to place such garbage keys on synths. The electro 4/73 SW is better, but are more like piano keys. Have an old Roland D-10 and I just love the key-bed , use it as my master keyboard and I found it is very similar to the REV'2 (Same as on the P6/OB6, Fatar/8) I tried the REV2 keys and the keys are just a bit better. DSI keybeds are the way to go IMHO for synths and I would buy it if I just had space and not that D-10 key-bed taking all the space.
About the System 8: It's MIDI implementation is just disgraceful. The D-05 has a very good detailed Sysex identical as the D-50. The Boutiques support Sysex but undocumented. Roland can do it using ACB/DCB but they just refuse it, even on the ACB "top end" System 8 which only has CC and no documented Sysex. Hope Roland will come out with a system 12 with Aftertouch and Sysex like the D-05. also in module form like the System 1/m which looks to me the best ACB value/feature for money to date.
-
I like the idea of having the keyboard stay at home and bringing the sounds onto a dedicated synth. My question is It has the System 8, Jupiter and Juno engines and another blank spot for you to add your own plug in...can you take out the Jupiter and Juno parts and exchange those for other stuff?
-
I like the idea of having the keyboard stay at home and bringing the sounds onto a dedicated synth. My question is It has the System 8, Jupiter and Juno engines and another blank spot for you to add your own plug in...can you take out the Jupiter and Juno parts and exchange those for other stuff?
Just read up on it, looks like you can.