Today I play 3 hours with my own G70. It is available in Moscow at 3040 euro. I am first Russian that used to buy this device. Thanks to SZ I know about it more than dealers and not think much before buying

I was more interested in G70’s style section than in sound one (I am not like Roland's sound concept, Yamaha’s sounds better for me) but nevertheless it have several nice sounds that can compete with my psr9000.

In style section it lacks style morphing -- and styles present less diversity to my ear. Moreover, 4 variations very similar one to another at many styles, like at PA1X, only minor change from variation to variation. Cover feature is very useful to change sound -- but this change not very dramatic, not such refreshing as with style morphing. Styles more smooth than at VA-76 (that mean more boring for me: less drive for a play, less human band feeling).

Sound of a style many times better than at VA-76 due to more sample quality.

Makeup Tool -- this is simple pages with reverb, pan, effects, volume, etc. settings for every instrument in style. It is not for live performance, it is about (fast?) tweaking style to prepare it to performance.

G70 has very strange default settings: e.g. too much reverb in every style.

"Pad" assigned to IR sensor: hand swish to elicit finger clap or guitar strum or vocal scat (along chord played) of even DJ effect sounded like LP 33rpm with played song stopped by hand.

Verdict: in style section Roland did one step forward and another step backward.
Tomorrow I will try to load old VA-76 styles to this beast. With Cover feature it should add diversity to the arranger.

Oh.. So, G70 doesn`t have all the old styles?

Today I spent several hours to study sounds and styles. After it I agree with Roel: styles are very simple and less vivid. And G70 have all new styles -- with 4 variations that differ less then 2 variations in VA-76. And if you used Cover that not will change style bass part.

Sounds much better quality (layered samples, better bitrate) than at VA-76 -- but mainly the same. It sound more CD-like, but you should tweak your setup to elicit great sound.

Verdict: original style presets are of bad quality (for me) due to tweak needed. But platform (hardware) is very good. This is for professional musicians: 10 hours of preparing, 1 hour to play. Definitely not for home entertainment after work as in my case. And I still will use my psr9000 for many sounds that are absent at G70.

Then I want to transfer old styles from my VA-76 to G80. I tryed to find original VA-76 styles online, but failed. Now I consider use floppy disk to do the job. I think many users will try do the same. May be somebody already have perform this task and have loadeble style archive that I can download from the Net and load to G70 via USB (not using floppy)?

But shure, it will be much work for tweaking VA-76 styles for G70. I think that somebody here in SZ (not I -- I am too amateur) can do this tweaking once and then share it with other G70 users via Web.

Others, have mentioned a global setting[compression] adjustment ,brings the G70 to life...Have you tried this?

BTW I can send you original VA styles if you need them..

To Fran Carango:
Thanks, compression + reverb + chorus etc. -- this was first that I did with G70 (especial not compression but reverb -- it was like "stadium" settings in presets).

Now it is good with sound at arranger section. It is bad with music of factory preset styles.

Yes, I need factory preset styles of VA, and that on VA-76 original zip-disk (additional factory styles). I like VA-76 styles more than psr9000's due to musical drive/swing/life in it. I wonder why it was several reports that styles at G70 better than at VA76. Sound is better, greater. Arrangement of separate one of variations -- may be better. But then they at Roland a) simply copy this arrangement to all 4 variations with almost no changes (Roel already report about it) b) perform this via Cubase programming, not via live playing (Roel tell this too: that this is programmer-made styles, not musician-played).

There are errors in several styles (never listen this with Yamaha, but listen with G70 and with VA-76. It is OK, there are not too many of errors: mismatching chord voicing with one of secondary acc part).

Thank you in advance for VA-76 styles sended. I wonder: there are many Yamaha's style sets posted on Web but no Roland's.

Ailev,
Congrats with your G70.
For me it's good to hear at least someone agrees with me about the simple styles

You made a perfect statement about the ratio 'preparing' / 'playing'.... I fully agree !

In my (limited) view this is abnormal because most of the players are PLAYERS and no 'programmers' (tweakers).

I owned Technics, Solton and Ketron. All of these machines were 'ready to go' right away.
(the same for Yamaha's)

About the hardware :
Ailev do you think the hardware (buttons, sliders, shuttle-wheel etc.) are very good ?
The potentiometers and wheel all feel a little toyish... I think.

Please keep reporting your findings here.

Roel


[This message has been edited by Roel (edited 01-20-2005).]

To Roel:
yes, I am not programmer, I am player. Other devices (Yamaha and even Roland VA-76) was plug-and-play: quality presets with deep tweaking if you prefer it. If you prefer not to tweak, there is presets that take all featers of device.

Not with Roland. E.g. I can't find aftertouch used in presets. But keyboard is having aftertouch feature: you can appoint it to you discretion.

Moreover: after 2 days with keyboard I not knowing how to save permanent keyboard split position! It seems to me that I should change it separate for every style and OTS, there are no global settings (I understand that for program it may be retained intact).

Hardware is really good: it is not a toy. All device is not a toy at all, namely that is really bad

By the way: there are exist long intros and endings in G70: you should push Intro or Endings button followed variation button. This will not change current variation but elicit intro or ending with different length (1 -- shortest, 4 -- longest).

Brighter sound you can twiak with Mastering Tools Equaliser (set it to Jazz, for example) -- this change sound dramatically.

Worst of all, I can no understanding how to keep my tweaking (there are too many different memories in G70 and too few places with Write/Save button to survive power off). I think that it is my default, but this is 6th my arranger and it is first time I have difficulties with it's tweaking).

But after tweaking there is nice sound, this is not instrument default, this is musical styles/programs pogramming in deficit at G70.

But I think that there are many people that like Reverb Hall:2 at all styles and no aftertouch and even 4 similar variations (this is kind of new fashion -- PA1X have similar variations in one style too).

I will keep efforts to use G70: eventually I'll tweak it for me

Verdict: in style section Roland did one step forward and another step backward.
Tomorrow I will try to load old VA-76 styles to this beast. With Cover feature it should add diversity to the arranger.

[/B][/QUOTE]

Hi,
isn't it funny, Roland included a lot of tools on G-70 to provide the possibility building an
individual Instrument, but some user don't like to work with. Remember: It's called:
'Workstation'. I think there are a lot of Keyboards, people can buy with less money, of cource
without that tools. Some words about the VA styles: I find out, there are a lot of that styles
within the G-70, but all of them have a different name. LIsten to 11 Styles of Bossa/Samba
group named 'Sweet Bossa' to 'Piano Latin' for instance and you will hear the same musical
variations. The two Inro/Endings of the VA Instruments are now Intro/Ending three and four.
Intro one you can use also as a break because it's always one bar drums. During running
Intro/Ending two you can play your own chords to match your song. (Not written down
in the manual) Indeed, the styles sounds much better, making a good basic preparation.
I think, basic rhythm guitar has normaly to play the same within the four Variations of a style.
If you don't like it you can change the style within milliseconds beginning at the next bar.
(Please fix the tempo). I own my G-70 three weeks. And I can tell you: "I like it from day to
day more and more". Regards: Hanspeter

most of us are musicians, or want to be anyway, and not programmers. Like Roel and others stated so well the ratio between "Playing" and "Programming" is utterly absurd. I sat behind my friend's G-70 a couple of times and I got completely fed up with it. I am not saying it has no good sounds or styles, though nothing spectacular even there imo. But like I mentioned on earlier occasions I think ALL the Roland presets and defaults sound absolutely crap. Which means an incredibly amount of programming to be done. My friend, and many others I am sure , are leaning back, confident that others (globally) will make the effort, but in my experience, and I did very extensive programming of "performances/user programs"for both the Roland G800/G1000 and the Korg PA-80, very few get down to really programming in this respect. In other words, most of you will have to do your own, and the G-70 will give you more than ample opportunity, too much in my opinion.
I also agree with someone saying that the sliders and screen are way too small in comparison to the whole keyboard.
I am sure most VA and Roland diehards will be glad to have a follow-up to their now obsolete keyboard, but I am convinced that Roland will lure away very few keyboard players using other brands and in my opinion righly so. I don't like it, that's for sure.


[This message has been edited by john smies (edited 01-16-2005).]

O.K. John,
I understand some arguments against the Roland G-70. So for instance: the small screen and
some of the crappy presets. But I own a Yamaha Tyros too. The screen of it is bigger and
some styles and presets sounded very good to me, in the first time. After a while the same
things became boring and I was very happy to have the opportunity to change most of them.
Now nothing is like it has been two years ago. And, I never got it, didn't I have a good board
(VA 76) to play the Yamaha via midi instead using the incredible keys. Nothing is perfect.
I hope, Roland will read your critics. It will help to make the next software release much better.
Thats my advantage, thank you.
Regards: Hanspeter

Friends,

I am reading these comments with great interest. I am too a wannabe musician and do have some well-paying and very public gigs, but my bills are paid mainly by my day job. My time to play an instrument is very limited, and I am not looking forward to having to spend hours reprogramming the instrument presets before it starts to sound acceptable.

While I did not doubt Roel's lack of satisfaction with the G70, one would expect that in this highly subjective matter reasonable people may disagree. However, now there appears to be a choir of people all reverberating the same opinion. This makes me quite concerned about whether this will be a keyboard for me. I am still planning to evaluate it with my own ears and fingers; however, I will not risk buying one unless the store allows a long-enough return.

I think it is unacceptable of Roland to try to sell a half-baked instrument, covering their arse with the statement that this is a workstation meant to be customized.

Let's hope that Roland is reading these messages and the software upgrade is in the works to fix the issues with the initial configuration and ability to change global settings for the instrument.

Regards,
Alex

Hi Alex,
what I think is, unfortunately European sales manager of Roland would demand an early
delivery because of chrismas business. But it will take much time to prepare presets in a good
way. Now the musical workers had some time to do a good job. Let's hear about the
Namm show and the Frankfurt fair. Regards: Hanspeter

well, it is pluses and minuses with G70 comparing with VA-76 (from my perspective):

PRO

1. sounds -- on par with any other top arrangers, depends of personal taste. Not even comparable in quality with sounds of VA-76 (nevertheless -- the same sound "concept", completely another then e.g. Yamaha).

2. Keys -- better feel, about 2cm longer. Excellent (on par with PA1XPRO, may be even better -- not so sharp side edges of a keys).

3. controls -- there are simpler navigation, less menu browsing, drawbars, more buttons, better touch screen. Not comparable with VA-76.

4. Harmonizer+vocoder -- it is more useful than VaryPhrase engine.

5. Cover function.

6. Lyrics with chords extracted from MIDI files and songs score screens -- this is very, very cool.

7. Simplicity of effects tweaking: attention to mastering good overall mix.

8. USB-link and external memory in contemporary computer format (CompactFlash).

9. Simpler record function and better sequencer.

10. Better connectivity with audio environment (e.g. audio input).

11. D-beam effects as (rather weak) multipad substitute.

12. OTSs better then at VA-76 (when tweaked)

13. Music database is better

CONTRA

1. Too much tweaking before playing. This is threshold. Up to now I do not understand how to retain my tweaks (may be with computer use?) in memory to preserve factory pages layout (it is silly to double all factory presets with my individually tweaked ones!). There no tips and tricks in manual about it. Other arrangers was simply turn on (including VA-76).

2. Style section is bad: now it comparable with other arrangers but not winner, as in VA-76. In VA-76 there was 2 variations with 4 subvariations each -- with difference between this subvariations not less then between G70 variations -- 2x loss. 2 breaks greatly added with style morphing engine: I used one or several bars of Drums, Bass and Accompaniment parts from another styles as breaks and modifiers to style. In G70 we have 6 similar undistinguishable breaks (with added 2 intros) and 4 variations with similar arrangements (e.g. bass and rhythm guitar have same pattern in all 4 variations. It is sufficient for short song, not for long improvisation. Change to another style not applicable here -- it will be namely another style!

3. Styles sounds similar to CD, not similar to live band (as was with VA-76). Yes, now this is the same that we met in other arrangers. But it is "contra" feature for me.

4. In VA-76 it was huge amount of styles and songs in a ZIP-disc. I can't find this at G70. I have difficulties to get this from zip-drive to G70 (I have only one zip-drive at home -- in VA-76).

* * *

My previous setup was psr9000+VA-76: two very different instruments. Now it is psr9000+G70: two very similar instruments with similar style system, similar sound module, similar harmonizer concept. If it will be not psr9000 but Tyros, differences will be smaller (except loudspeakers and 76 keys). But I need no two clone arrangers! I need variety in arrangers. Cover function is not replacement to style morphing, USB is not replacement to excessive tweaking.

I'll retain G70 for a while. May be I simply not knowing what to do with this beast. May be somebody publish here tips and tricks how to tweak G70 to outperform VA-76 in style variety. May be I have subjective shift in my opinion, and other people changing theirs VA-76 to G70 without regret. At least this is keyboard with best keyborard feel at my home (i do not like weighted keyboards, though I trained to play with uprihgt piano. This change of keyboard type is relief like change typewriter keyboard to computer one).

to ironhill
thanks for you comparing styles from VA-76 and G70. Yes, I already note by myself that this is mostly the same styles that in VA-76 (including ZIP-drive-styles) but reworked. Some of the styles lost their's swing and drive after reworking (or maybe it is another quantization in G70?).

But I rare used "pure styles" in VA-76 -- usually I turn on orchestrator, it was may primary screen while playing. And I was user of 2(original+variation)*4gradation*8morphing variations of a style -- controlled from one convenient screen page. And now take fill-in to add...

All other things I was able to do with psr9000 with more or less success.

All this sounds very depressing. As a current VA76 owner, I find the quality and playability of it's styles to be generally abysmal. If the G-70 is already attracting negative comments in this area when compared with the VA, it must be seriously duff.

Why the heck are there NO representatives from Roland on this site monitoring this discussion? Wow..they can really learn a lesson from Ketron and Yamaha in this regard.

Hi Mike,
didn't you or would you not understand what Ailev say to us: he use 2*4*8 (=64) Variations of
one Style. That's not possible to do it with the G-70. This Instrument is now as simple as the
PSR 9000, Tyros, Pa1X, SD 1 and others. That's the point. And, he can do the style morphing
without preparation ( means programming). He knows which first style matches the second
style, immedietly. Wow!. No other Keyboard than the G-70 holds the basic-rhythm that strong
within the four variations-- said Roel. Sorry, I use only a Tyros in addition to the G-70. That
Instrument is more flexible. Maximal 95 % of it will work the same.
Regards Hanspeter

to Ironhill:
Yes! You absolutely right about my vision of situation. G70 is not bad as arranger -- it simply look the same to me as my psr9000. It lack styles-with-64-cool-variations. That was difference that make difference for me with VA-76.

Now there are very similar devices on the market -- pa1x, sd1, tyros, g70. Few differences in timbres, few differences in styles, few difference in harmonizer. With VA-76 there definitely was difference (even 2 differences -- style morphing and varyphrase).

I'm sad to say that after reading all the bad reviews here, the G70 is a big disappointment. Could Roland of screwed up this bad? I happen to like Roland products and their realistic sounds. Could it be that they released the G70 before it was ready to hit the market to compete with the Pa1x? Not very smart if that's the case. I'm waiting to read the reviews from NAMM.

I would agree that, in principle, the "style morphing" function of the VA range is very good. It works very well and is a desirable feature.

However, I still stand by my original comments as the abilty to mix one boring & poor quality style with another boring & poor quality style is not my idea of heaven.

My frustration with the VA is that it contains a lot a very good ideas under the skin (like the style morphing feature), but the basics are just not right. I find the overall sound of the instrument generally dull, the styles extremely primitive & mechanical, and the lack of physical panel buttons for the various major arranger functions makes it unplayable as a traditional arranger type instrument.

It is important for me to point out that I was aware of all this before I bought my VA. I chose it specifically because of its abilities as a midi-files-for-accompaniments plus good-keyboard-patches-for-live-parts abilities.

A couple of years living with it confirms that it does what I bought it for very well, but has also confirmed it's extremely poor performance when used as a true arranger.

I was simply hoping that Roland had drastically improved this aspect with the G-70. Various other contributors comments don't sound very positive so far.

[This message has been edited by MikeTV (edited 01-20-2005).]