I was a great Roland user, before I discover the Triton, I've bought last year the XP60 and the JV2080 sound module, I've bought the srjv80 expansions boards: 2 orchestral, 1 orchestral II, 2 vocals, 1 techno, 1 asia, 1 world, 1 fx, I was quite satisfied by all these sounds, but since I have the Triton, I watch my xp60 and my jv2080 with a bitter look. The Triton (I never had a Trinity) is wonderfull, so great, so incredible. Anyway, the roland's sounds are not bad, but have a lack of depth in regards of the korg sounds, I still use my Rolands, in complement of the Triton's sounds, they have a good combinations, but I rarely use my Roland alone now, because the Triton's power becames essential for me.

I wish to know your opinions if you are like me Roland/Korg users.

Regards,

Xav

Have you tried running the Roland audio outs through the Triton's effects yet? I know the 1080 has good sounds, and through the Triton's effects it sounds even better. Gives everything a unified soundfield (when you want that sort of thing). What do you think?

I love Roland.

But when it comes to getting down to some real work. I end up diving into my Korg.

You should try out the Trinity. I have one for over 3 years now, and also then bought the Triton which I felt was sadly lacking in features. With the Trinity and all of it's upgrades, it should be all that you would ever need.

With features like
Reading Samples in most formats
Hard Disk Recording
Digital in and out. Also fibre optic
Why not forget about the Triton for a while and try the Trinity out. A real "pro" synth

I will never understand why Korg dicided to leave out half of the features found on the trinity when they were making the Triton.
You would think they would have upgraded on it and not done what they done.

The problem with the Triton is that when you want to do multitimbral sequencing the programs forget thier FX assignments. Sure you can copy insert FX from programs to Combis and S.Play mode but it is a pain. Plus many of the presets use 2-3 insert FX to make them sound great. I'm not ashamed to admit that I use presets and this setup sucks. My JV-2080 allows me to play 3 different presets along with their programed FX on 3 channels. This is how synths should be designed. If you're going to to make FX an integral part of the sound then FX should follow the sound everywhere.

hi i am not agree with people who prefers
triton to trinity;Triton has terrible piano sounds and all presets are more compressed than Trinity;Roland jv2080 is a very versatile synth and good sounds but no pianos
is very usefull for me ; i bought a Triton and i didnt liked so actually is backing to the store

I own a Triton and 2 JV1080's. Korg and Roland sounds are different but they complement each other nicely! As far as I am concerned the JV's score in synthesis power but the ROM waveforms and effects are better in the Triton (and Trinity). However, if I had a choice between going for a Korg or Roland (and could only have 1) I would go the Triton, it sounds better overall but not by that much!

Hey,
Quick question - Does the Triton connect easily with the 2 JV's. I heard the Triton doesn't support sysex data. Is that a big problem for expanding with modules, computer sequencers, etc.?

Thanks, Thomas

I haven't used the 2 JV1080's with the Triton sequencer. Whilst I am not too concerned about the lack of sysex in the sequencer because I do the lazyman's thing and set up a performance in the JV's, I feel Korg should fix this omission up- all serious sequencer support sysex and I would use it if it was available. I use the JV's and Triton set up with Logic.
Regarding the Triton's sequencer, I find it very easy to use and Have actually gone back to using it on some bits that I am working on!!!! It is easy and quick to get idea's down! However there are some things that REALLY IRRITATE ME!
a). Cuelists (whilst a terrific idea) are not well implemented- Korg should look at Emagics Notator sequencer (atari sequencer) and it's patterns mode whereby you can set up a pattern (up to 16 tracks) to start playing from any chosen bar rather than just automatically being assigned to the next empty bar! There is an annoying 'gap' when going from one song to another in a cuelist and we should be able to globally transpose a song (and disable transpose on any chosen tracks) in a cuelist- as you can do with Notator's patterns.
b). Quantizing options are basic- cum on Korg- no swing or groove quantizing???? We are in 1999 not 1984! More options MUST be added here!
c). Proper undo/redo facilities- this is a big pain in the arse which MUST be added. 'Compare' is not the same thing!
d). The ability to actually 'do things!' whilst the sequencer is in record mode. Again this could be easily implemented in a software update.
e). WHilst I haven't utilized this aspect of a sequencer too much- SYSEX control must be added- I would use it if it was there and if every other hardware sequencer has this capability, surely Korg can't be so blind as to not adding this ASAP.

SAMPLING- Why no internal resampling Korg?
Why no timestretching and crossfade looping Korg????
Why can't we use all 64MB at once instead of it being cut up into 4 16MB sections????
What about a more comprehensive disk managing system- not only for samples but for the whole machine!

EDITING- Give us the same filters as in the Trinity!!!!!! I can't understand why Korg skimped here! Technology is supposed to progress not go backwards!!!!!!

Some of you out there may be 'pissed off' at the fact that I am being overly critical in these areas. However, if Korg want to compete with the other manufacturers (most notably AKAI and EMU when it comes to sampling) than the above mentioned limitations must be added- surely it is not impossible. Afterall Kurzweil managed to do it with their K2000/2500 series!

I own a Triton and really like it. As a matter of fact, if Korg work on the above mentioned areas, I might consider selling some of my other MIDI stuff!!!!!!!!! It is easy to use and sounds excellent. Some say that the Triton/Trinity rely heavily on fx for good sounds- I disagree! I sequence everything using dry sounds and I think they sound great 'dry'.

Well at least with many of these shortcomings of the Triton such as resampling, time stretch etc. these are things that can be addressed in future operating system updates, so I wouldn't let that put me off getting a Triton. It's a long time since I owned a Korg (M1 days) but the Triton looks too good to pass up it would seem. But the all the expansion cards look like being necessary to getting the most out of it, rather than options.

I am new to the synth and midi and sequencing world -- so take this with a grain of salt. I own and XP80 and Triton. I agree with EVERYTHING said about the Triton's poor piano sounds. I am into authentic sounds -- and I would have to say that Roland is better. It's a shame that a $2100 keyboard has inferior piano sounds -- but EXPANSION boards apparently will address this. And the person who made the point about OS upgrades --- bravo! That is a good point.

The reality is that neither is the perfect machine -- and each has great features that the other doesn't. IT's ALWAYS win-lose! If sampling and "user friendliness" are super important to you -- the Triton is great. But Roland -- i will stand firm on this -- simply have better sounds and samples. But AGAIN -- expansions and upgrades will close that gap soon!