Roland System 8 plug Out

[Sacred Synthesis]

Roland System 8 Plug Out for $1500:




(Sweetwater)

Hmmm.  Yet another 49-note poly synth.

[DavidDever]

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....

[chysn]

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."

[vinnyburns1@mac.com]

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. :-)

[Sacred Synthesis]

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.

[Paul Dither]

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.

[BobTheDog]

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!

[vinnyburns1@mac.com]

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 :-)

[DavidDever]

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.

[DavidDever]

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:


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.

[Sacred Synthesis]

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.

[chysn]

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.

[DavidDever]

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.

[BobTheDog]

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.

[Paul Dither]

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.

[DavidDever]

I believe that "leaving your laptop at home" is a valid choice; others might disagree.

[Paul Dither]

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.

[Razmo]

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.

[vinnyburns1@mac.com]

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.



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.

[BobTheDog]

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.