Ok my dilema is,I want to produce House,R&B and a little bit of Hip Hop.I have a XP60 with the Techno and Hip Hop boards,Yamaha RM1X(helluva sequencer by the way)Alesis QS6 and Yammie CS1X boards.I have the chance to get a Triton Pro for 1700 used in great shape.Do I dump the XP60 with exp.boards and add cash to get the Triton and intergrate it in my setup to still do the music I want to do?I know its sorta tit for tat but,the 1700 price is calling my name!

Whats up. Just so you know, half of Eminems debut album was programmed and recored on a Triton.


For more info, check out this link :
http://free.prohosting.com/~triton/cgi-bin/Ultimate.cgi?action=intro

House Junkie- The Triton has a different sound to the Roland. If I had to choose between the Triton and the XP60 I would definetely go TRITON! However, don't get it without the MOSS board as I feel that this synthe is not complete without the awesome synthesis facilities that this board offers. Also budget for the new dance card that should already be out- I've heard good reports about it!

If you can afford it, I would hold on to the XP60 unless you really don't want it anymore. Or after saving up some more 'bickie's also get a JV2080 and stick your techno and hip hop cards into that. As you can see, I like both Korg and Roland sounds. They just compliment each other nicely.

Hello guys, i ve read all the stuff here and i would like to contribute my opinion to what has been said. I am an XP-80 user but not actually a keyboard player myself. I play what you would call "dated" stuff like the blues and good old rock n roll and hard rock (think led zeppelin). Before i bought my XP-80 i was lloking for something to sequence backing tracks on (drums and base) and probably some lead lines (flutes , horns etc). Here is what i did, i took my guitar to the shop and played along with the TRITON to see how it blends with natural sounds. Now here is what i think is the main difference between KORG and ROLAND. ROLAND sounds NATURAL -you can probably call this "dated"- KORG sounds POP -as in the sound is processed and "MASTERED" before you hear it. So for me NATURAL is best for what i do. OVERPROCESSED is UNNATURAL but its what some people require for their music. I Think when ROLAND sounds get the right treatment (mastering, that is after you have recorder the whole piece)they sound absolutelly AWESOME. Before that you just play with NATURAL SOUNDING stuff.

Two things of interest:

Listening to the same tune played back by both ROLAND and KORG synths the UNEXPERIENCED PREFERS ROLAND!!!!.

Listening to the Same drum track on KORG and ROLAND synths the UNEXPERIENCED prefers KORG
while he things the ROLAND version actually comes from a cheap sound card. (That means i have to check the bass 7 drums expansion card which i ve heard has some amazing kits on it)

So... it all comes down to what you prefer for me:

KORG: current, pop sounding well(or maybe over?)processed sounds

ROLAND: natural, ear friendly (yes i ll say that once again) natural sounds.

Interesting observations...It is difficult to "explain" why one prefers Roland or Korg sounds over the other, but the "naturalness of sound" theory may explain part of it! I was initially impressed by Triton's sounds, but after having played/heard them for several hours a day for the past month, I just don't like them as much as I do the Roland sounds, esp. those on the expansion boards. Specifically, the Korg strings sounds whistle too much, almost sound "windy", and are not enjoyable to play. Also, I love the Korg Pan Flute, but the sample on the Triton is noisy and "grungy" (with that same whistling noise), unlike on my M1R, which I had hoped to be able to sell now that I have the Triton. I enjoy writing and recording music and think sampling and "synthesizing" / editing sounds is a blast, but I also enjoy just playing and practicing using the presets and I get no pleasure from playing the Triton (plus I don't really like the keyboard feel/action).

I like the Triton for so many other reasons, especially for ease of use (namely in sampling), but I'm not "$2200 plus tax"-impressed, so I'll (kind of sadly) return it to the store.

Wilkes.....


I had the xp-60 for a month before I returned it and got the triton. I compared both synths also side by side at the store.
To me, the Roland had a much better Church Organ, but that was it. Im talking that monster church pipes patch. The TRITONS sounded pretty weak compared to the ROlands. As for the synth sounds.......the TRITON SOUNDS MUCH, MUCH better. I use my TRITON for Prog-rock, techno, and some alt country, and to me it sounds much more natural than the Roland. My sequences also sound much better.

Lets not forget people....I buy my synths to USE them as synths, I dont buy them to pretend to be an orchestra or something else. I consider them instrumetns of themselves, through sound shaping, ect.
I usually dont bother with drum tracks, flutes, ect.

So when I hear someone say " THe roland sounds better because it imitates real instruments better", I don't care.

I want something that sounds like a synth, not my old 5th grade music class.


Think about that the next time you buy.......

It all comes down to what you like then, if you are a monkey you like bananas, if you a re a cat you like fish. If you like "real" you like Roland, if you like "interesting" you like KORG. At the end of the day if you are a good musician you can write a masterpiece with much less than these monsters. So many people have done it before with much less stuff (in terms of quality and variety of sounds). But the bottom line for me, and thats where my preference for Roland stands is that our ears are much more comfortable with "real" sounds than with "not-so-real". I do not mean that non real sounds are not funny or cool (i love tube distortion, but even this has some naturalness in it, actual electrons flow in the tube depending on the way you play your guitar which gives you what we call "analog" sound.) I would say the difference is like Home made food (that would be the real sound) versus tin food (that would be the not-so-real sound). It's a matter of taste.

Yes, "taste" is the key to this whole issue (the "natural vs. processed" issue was the first attempt to perhaps explain why such timbral taste varies from one to another).

Arvon45: I understand what you are saying and it seems that the Triton fits your composition/synthesis/performance style and desires perfectly. I consider all that you mentioned when I purchase a synth as well. In fact, although I enjoy many genres of music, when well done, my absolute favorite is synth-pop (e.g., Erasure; I don't care for most of the harder, "cooler"/trendier techno stuff [Orbital, etc.]) and I like to write and record such music very much. But, when I want to emulate (for my own performing pleasure) something written/orchestrated for strings, brass, etc., I want those sounds to be as realistic as possible. I think it is fantastic that technology allows me, a keyboardist only, to play such orchestral arrangements when I cannot play a cello or french horn. Oh, and when it comes to synthesis, I'll take what I already have (K2000, FS1R, and Pulse).